Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Philippines (Ratification: 1953)

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2023, Publication: 111st ILC session (2023)

Written information provided by the Government

The Government has provided the following written information as well as copies of Executive Order No. 23; the organizational structure and tentative identification of focal persons and offices from each of the concerned agencies; and the framework for the evolving draft of the road map.

This report, submitted by the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) on behalf of the Government, pertains to the report of the high­level tripartite mission (HLTM) which visited the Philippines from 23 to 26 January 2023 to inquire into allegations and reports arising from the implementation of the Convention.

The HLTM report substantially reiterates the findings and recommendations in previous reports of the ILO’s supervisory mechanisms, particularly of the Conference Committee, the Committee on Freedom of Association, and the Committee of Experts, as well as the premises on which the ILO Governing Body and the International Labour Conference (ILC) created the HLTM. The issues raised date back from those inquired into during the first high-level ILO mission to the Philippines in 2009, the direct contacts mission in 2017, and the tripartite high-level virtual meeting in 2021.

The HLTM report expresses concerns on the Government’s perceived slow action in carrying out previous ILO recommendations. It appears to put much reliance on the views expressed in a report submitted to the HLTM by a group of unions.

Even prior to the HLTM, the Government took several actions in response to the outstanding issues, in some cases acting jointly with the social partners. These actions are anchored on past ILO reports and missions and have been previously reported to the ILO and its supervisory bodies.

For the record, the Government reiterates some of these major actions: (i) creation of national and regional mechanisms to monitor compliance with Conventions Nos. 87 and 98; (ii) issuance of operational guidelines of tripartite monitoring bodies; (iii} designation of focal persons to facilitate reporting and immediate intervention in cases of violations; (iv) adoption of two guidelines governing the conduct of stakeholders in relation to the exercise of workers’ rights and concerted activities; (v) legislation of laws strengthening alternative dispute resolution and further institutionalizing tripartism; (vi) inclusion of DOLE as an observer in the Inter-Agency Committee created under Administrative Order No. 135 [2012]; and (vii) dialogue with the Supreme Court resulting in the issuance of Administrative Matter No. 21-06-08-SC which stopped the alleged “wholesale” issuance of cross-border search and arrest warrants that led to most of the reported incidents of arrest of trade unionists. After the tripartite high-level virtual exchange in September 2021 and before the HLTM in January 2023, the Government has also: (i) initiated consultations with labour and employer representatives on developing a tripartite time-bound road map and plan of action; (ii) initiated review of the two guidelines governing the conduct of stakeholders relative to the exercise of workers’ rights and concerted activities; and (iii) conducted capacity-building activities for Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies (RTMBs) and partner agencies.

The Government believes that the HLTM report should have given due attention to these actions for a fuller and more objective context in appreciating the efforts toward implementing the recommendations. This would have allowed the HLTM to appreciate more fully the significance of the view expressed by the Government during the debriefing session on 26 January 2023 that resolving and bringing closure to the issues raised requires commitments not only from the Government but from the social partners as well. Be that as it may, the Government nevertheless welcomes the report. Within the framework of the Philippine Constitution and the laws, and as a sovereign and equal member in the community of nations, it has seriously considered all the recommendations with a view to using these as constructive guidance in ensuring the country’s continuing progress to promote freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining as instruments of social justice.

Actions taken on the HLTM recommendations

The HLTM report has six recommendations:

(i) greater coordination and consistency across varying arms of government to better guard against serious threats to freedom of association;

(ii) engagement with the social partners to make genuine progress on the concerns raised by the CEACR and the CAS to prevent future violations of freedom of association, including through the finalization before the June 2023 ILC of a road map on the way forward to address the identified concerns, with agreed timelines;

(iii) establishment of a single presidentially mandated body to comprehensively identify and address all outstanding cases of alleged labour-related extrajudicial killings and abductions with priority emphasis on criminal investigation and prompt prosecution and accountability;

(iv) establishment of a specialized, eminent, independent non-judicial body to review cases referred by the presidential commission with a view to receiving and documenting testimony and making proposals for compensation;

(v) strengthening of the role of NTIPC-MB and incorporation of improvements recommended by the presidential body to identify and ensure rapid and effective protection measures with regard to imminent and/or emerging threats to the life, security or safety of trade unionists;

(vi) full implementation of all previous recommendations.

On strengthening coordination and consistency across various arms of the Government and establishment of a presidentially mandated body

The administration and enforcement of laws and investigation and prosecution of cases in the Philippines, as in every modern government structure, is allocated to various executive agencies with specific legal mandates. Efficient and effective inter-agency coordination among these agencies is indispensable for the structure to function. To ensure such coordination in the country’s presidential system of government, the executive agencies all fall under the control and supervision of the President of the Republic.

Recognizing the mandates of the relevant agencies involved, the Government has acted swiftly and decisively on the recommendation to strengthen inter-agency coordination and to set up a presidentially driven body that will monitor the status of cases arising from the exercise of freedom of association. On 30 April 2023, the President signed Executive Order No. 23 constituting an Inter-Agency Committee (EO 23-IAC), copy of which is Annex A, to strengthen coordination, develop a road map, monitor actions taken, and expedite the investigation, prosecution and resolution of cases involving violations of freedom of association and the right to organize. Its salient features are:

EO 23-IAC is chaired by the Executive Secretary with DOLE as Vice-Chairperson, and the following members: the Departments of Justice (DOJ), Interior and Local Government (DILG), National Defense (DND), Trade and Industry (DTI), National Security Council (NSC) and the Philippine National Police (PNP). The Civil Service Commission (CSC) and the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) may be invited whenever necessary.

EO 23-IAC is tasked to: (i) consolidate and evaluate reports of concerned agencies and submit to the President a comprehensive report on its findings and recommendations; (ii) develop a road map consistent with the HLTM recommendations; and (iii) monitor the progress of implementation of action plans and the close coordination among concerned agencies.

Member agencies are required to submit to EO 23-IAC: (i) an inventory of cases and incidents within their jurisdiction involving trade unionists whose rights to freedom of association, to organize, and to collectively bargain have been allegedly violated; (ii) an inventory of community-based programmes affecting trade unions, employers and workers; (iii) an inventory of cases related to freedom of association involving agency personnel and state agents arising from the exercise of their official functions; (iv) measures being undertaken or proposals to strengthen agency programmes to address outstanding issues and promote and protect freedom of association; and (v) a comprehensive education and capacity-building programme and a communication plan to promote common understanding within and among agencies of the principles, policies, laws, and regulations on freedom of association.

Directly under the Office of the President, all the substantive functions of EO 23- IAC relate to the performance of governmental powers lodged with specific agencies that cannot be shared with or delegated to non­government organizations. Utilizing existing structures, expertise and resources, EO 23-IAC is immediately functional. It convened its first organizational meeting on 22 May 2023 where it was agreed that priority would be given to the inventory and facilitated action on pending cases, and to the adoption of a road map consistent with the recommendations in the HLTM report. It also agreed on its working structure and arrangements, including the setting up of a secretariat and adoption of reporting forms.

With the establishment of EO 23-IAC, the Government now has a functional mechanism to address all the issues raised and carry out the relevant recommendations in the HLTM report.

On development of the tripartite road map

The main aim of the road map is to create or provide an enabling environment for the free and responsible exercise of freedom of association and right to organize. As presently being drafted, the road map is structured along the four areas of action identified at the 2019 Conference, namely:

- prevention of violence in relation to legitimate activities of workers’ and employers’ organizations;

- immediate and effective investigation into allegations of violence against members of workers’ organizations;

- operationalization of monitoring bodies, including the provision of adequate resources;

- ensuring that all workers are able to form and join unions of their own choosing.

Prior to the HLTM, DOLE called three tripartite and two bilateral meetings with the labour and employer sectors at the national level. In February 2023, post-HLTM, DOLE primarily engaged the Leaders’ Forum toward developing the road map. With support from ILO Manila, DOLE also conducted three area-wide consultations in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao involving the Regional Tripartite Industrial Peace Councils (RTIPCs) and the RTMBs. On 20 April 2023, the Leaders’ Forum agreed to create a technical working group (TWG) that will seek to incorporate further specific inputs from the social partners to the evolving road map.

In the meantime, within the framework of Executive Order No. 23, the Government is proceeding to implement activities that will eventually form part of the road map, particularly the following:

- completion of an inventory of cases and agency programmes relating to freedom of association;

- institutionalization of information-sharing arrangements;

- operationalization of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between DOLE, the DTI, and the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA), signed on 30 April 2023, to pave the way for the establishment of tripartite committees in special economic zones;

- completion of the review of the Joint Guidelines between DOLE, DILG, DND, DOJ, and PNP, and the Joint Guidelines between DOLE, PEZA and PNP on terms of engagement between uniformed personnel and workers engaged in trade union activities, such as strikes;

- adoption of implementing mechanics on the requirement of DOLE clearance before DOJ prosecutors can file cases for acts arising from the exercise of trade union rights;

- setting up of regional counterparts of EO 23-IAC;

- provision of paralegal and related training and other assistance for trade unionists and workers, especially on the legal remedies, case build-up, and evidence gathering;

- holding of sharing sessions among civilian and uniformed personnel, at national and regional levels, to promote common understanding on freedom of association;

- incorporation of the road map with the Labor and Employment Plan 2023–2028 which DOLE aims to launch by July 2023.

On other matters arising from the recommendations

On the establishment of a specialized, eminent, independent non-judicial body to review cases, the Government has seriously considered this recommendation. But with the issuance of Executive Order No. 23 and the existence of agencies already mandated to perform the same functions, such a body may simply be a superfluity.

On the establishment of a compensation fund for victims, there is already a board of claims under the DOJ for victims of unjust imprisonment or detention. This was established by Republic Act No. 7309, enacted in 1992. Further, remedies and claims for compensation based on proven human rights violations are already within the purview of the Commission on Human Rights.

Discussion by the Committee

Chairperson – We will now proceed to the second case on our agenda, which is the Philippines on Convention No. 87. I wish to inform the Committee members and delegates that we have more than 17 speakers registered. Therefore, the reduction of time from 5 to 3 minutes will apply to the delegates concerned. I invite the Government representative of the Philippines, to take the floor.

Government representative – Before the Committee is Case No. 3185 on the application and implementation of the Philippines of the Convention. This case involves several reported incidents of alleged acts of harassment, interference, labelling, intimidation, coercion and judicial killings committed against trade unionists, allegedly by reason of, in connection with, or arising from the legitimate exercise of the rights to freedom of association and to organize. The main thrust of the complaint is the alleged inaction, or lack of effective action, by the Philippine Government in investigating these incidents and in prosecuting and bringing to justice the alleged perpetrators.

These reported incidents took place over a period spanning different political administrations. The Conference had previously decided to send three missions to the Philippines: a high-level mission in 2009, a direct contacts mission in 2016 and a high-level tripartite mission (HLTM) in 2019, which eventually took place in Manila in January 2023.

Each of these missions resulted in reports and recommendations aimed at addressing the concerns that were raised. Certain actions were taken by the Philippine Government on these recommendations, all of which have been duly reported to the ILO supervisory bodies, including to the Committee. In this regard, the Philippine Government expresses its appreciation to the ILO for its ongoing technical assistance and guidance on addressing the concerns that were raised.

It appears, however, that these actions have not fully satisfied the expectations of the Committee. The picture being presented, not only to the Committee, but unfairly to the rest of the world, is that the Philippine Government, through its policies and agents has perpetrated a culture of repression, violence and impunity specifically directed at trade unionists. Allegedly there is a prevailing climate of fear in the country that discourages the effective and meaningful exercise of freedom of association and the right to organize.

This year, the Philippines marks its 75th year of membership, in good standing, to the ILO. The Philippine Government deeply regrets that the unfavourable picture of the country’s situation in relation to the implementation of the Convention has led to the inclusion of the Philippines in the agenda of this year’s session of the Committee, with potential repercussions on the country’s standing in the larger international order. Nevertheless, giving full respect to the ILO’s supervisory mechanism and affirming the principle of multilateralism which it embodies, the Philippine Government now comes to the Committee with the conviction that open, reasonable and constructive discussion will lead to full appreciation of the facts and of the real situation of freedom of association and the right to organize in the Philippines.

As mentioned earlier, the reported incidents constituting the case before the Committee took place over a period spanning different political administrations. The present political administration of President of Ferdinand Romualdez Marcos Jr, which assumed office on 30 June 2022, is firmly committed to taking action on these incidents and to bringing justice to all concerned parties. It will continue to build upon and enhance previous actions initiated by the Philippine Government in relation to the ILO’s earlier recommendations, as previously reported, including the following: (i) continuous capacity-building for national and regional tripartite monitoring bodies; (ii) continuing implementation of the two joint guidelines relating to the terms of engagement between uniformed personnel and workers exercising their legitimate collective rights; (iii) continuing implementation of the law institutionalizing and strengthening tripartism; (iv) continuing improvement in operationalizing the Inter-Agency Committee created to address extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances, torture and other grave violations; and (v) effective observance of the Supreme Court’s order to stop the alleged wholesale issuance of cross-border search and arrest warrants that led to most of the reported incidents of arrest of trade unionists in the past.

I will now focus on actions and developments that have taken place since June 2022. When the administration of President Marcos took office on 30 June 2022, the Philippine Government promptly expressed its readiness to accept the HLTM authorized during the 2019 Conference. While awaiting the HLTM, the Philippine Government took the following actions: (i) it resumed consultations with labour and employer representatives on developing a tripartite time-bound road map and plan of action consistent with the recommendations of the 2019 Conference; (ii) it initiated the review, with possible integration, of the two guidelines governing the conduct of stakeholders related to the exercise of the workers’ rights to organize and to other concerted activities, as mentioned earlier; (iii) it conducted capacity-building activities for national and regional tripartite monitoring bodies and agencies with technical assistance from the ILO; (iv) it conducted consultations leading to the development of a Philippine Labor and Employment Plan, which will include protection and promotion of the fundamental principles and rights at work, including freedom of association and the right to organize, as one of the priority outcomes; and (v) it reconstituted the various tripartite bodies, including the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council and the tripartite wage boards, to ensure genuine sectoral representation. From August 2022 to present, 42 worker and 37 employer representatives have been appointed by the President of the Philippines to various tripartite bodies, all of whom have been nominated by their respective sectors. The Philippines also conducted dialogues with labour and employer groups on their priority areas of concern, including but not limited to concerns related to the exercise of freedom of association, security at work, training and retraining, among others.

The HLTM took place in the Philippines from 23 to 26 January 2023. The members of the HLTM can confirm that the government agencies which were invited to participate were represented by their agency heads and top-level senior officials, indicating the level of importance that the Philippine Government gave to the objectives of the HLTM. The HLTM report was received by the Philippine Government on 30 March 2023. It contained six recommendations for the Philippine Government. Within the framework of the Constitution and existing administrative structures, institutions, laws and jurisprudence, the Philippine Government has responded to these recommendations with concrete and specific actions.

On 30 April 2023, President Marcos signed Executive Order No. 23 creating an Inter-Agency Committee to protect and promote the rights of workers to freedom of association and to organize. The order seeks to strengthen coordination among concerned agencies, develop a road map in consultation with the social partners, monitor actions taken and expedite the investigation, prosecution and resolution of cases involving violations of freedom of association and the right to organize. The Inter-Agency Committee is under the office of the President and is chaired by the Executive Secretary with the Secretary of Labour as Vice-Chairperson. It includes other departments of concern, such as the Department of Justice, the Department of Interior and Local Government, the Department of National Defence, the Department of Trade and Industry, the National Security Council and the Philippine National Police. The Civil Service Commission and the Commission on Human Rights may be invited whenever necessary. The Inter-Agency Committee is tasked with consolidating and evaluating reports of concerned agencies and submitting to the President a comprehensive report on its findings and recommendations, including the development of a road map consistent with the HLTM recommendations. Its member agencies are required to submit an inventory of cases and incidents, an inventory of community-based programmes, an inventory of cases related to freedom of association involving agency personnel and state agents, measures being undertaken or proposals to strengthen agency programmes to address outstanding issues and promote freedom of association, and a comprehensive education and capacity-building programme and communication plan to promote common understanding within and among the agencies of the principles, policies, laws and regulations on freedom of association.

The Inter-Agency Committee is now fully functioning. It held its first meeting on 22 May 2023 with the designation of agency focal questions and DOLE as its secretariat. The Inter-Agency Committee aims to have its second meeting this month, at which it hopes to invite and engage the worker and employer sectors for their inputs in moving forward.

The action of the Philippine Government in issuing Executive Order No. 23 fully implements the HLTM’s first recommendation, which is to strengthen coordination between various government agencies on matters relating to the protection and promotion of freedom of association and the right to organize, and also the HLTM’s third recommendation to set up a presidentially driven body that will monitor the status of cases arising from the exercise of freedom of association.

Even more important is that Executive Order No. 23 provides the foundation and enabling mechanism for the Government to carry out three other recommendations of the HLTM, namely, the second recommendation to engage the social partners to make genuine progress on the concerns raised by the Committee of Experts and the Committee, the fifth recommendation to strengthen the role of the national tripartite monitoring councils and to incorporate improvements recommended by the Inter-Agency Committee, and the sixth recommendation to fully implement all previous recommendations.

In relation to the road map, there is currently a tripartite technical working group that is drafting the road map. In his ministerial statement delivered in the plenary session of the Conference on 6 June 2023, the Philippines Secretary of Labor and Employment, Bienvenido Laguesma, emphasized that the Government, as the duty bearer, is predominately responsible for addressing the concerns raised, but that the social partners also have a shared responsibility in helping resolve these concerns, not only in words, but more importantly through their own concrete actions. The challenge now lies in the concrete time-bound actions that each sector is willing to commit and be responsible for as part of the road map.

While the tripartite partners are formulating the road map, the Philippine Government is clear on what it will pursue. In the meeting of the Inter-Agency Committee of 22 May 2023, the latter agreed to pursue the following: (i) to continuously strengthen implementation and to review and amend as necessary the Joint Guidelines on terms of engagement in the event of strikes and other mass actions of workers and their unions; (ii) to emphasize that there is no Government policy of extrajudicial killing, terrorist-tagging or red-tagging; (iii) to effectively operationalize the clearance requirement from DOLE before the Department of Justice prosecutors in file cases arising from trade union related activities, to immediately and effectively operationalize the DOLE-DTI-PEZA Memorandum of Agreement to promote industrial peace in the economic zones; (iv) to set up regional counterparts of the Inter-Agency Committee to conduct paralegal and related training and other assistance for trade unionists and workers, especially on the legal remedies, case build-up and evidence gathering; (v) to conduct sharing sessions among civilian and uniformed personnel at national and regional levels to promote common understanding on freedom of association; and (vi) to incorporate the road map with the Labor and Employment Plan 2023-2028, which DOLE aims to announce by July 2023.

The HLTM has one remaining recommendation, which establishes a specialized, eminent, independent non-judicial body to review cases referred by the Presidential Commission with a view to receiving and documenting testimony and making proposals for compensation. The Philippine Government urges the Committee and the HLTM to rethink this recommendation on the following grounds. First, it will be superfluous with the creation of the Inter-Agency Committee under Executive Order No. 23. Second, there are existing laws and institutions where compensation claims may be filed and determined. The Republic Act No. 7309, established a board of claims under the Department of Justice. The Republic Act No. 9851 defines and penalizes crimes under humanitarian law and provides rules of reparations for victims. Remedies and claims for compensation based on proven human rights violations are also within the purview of the Commission on Human Rights, which is a body created under the Constitution. Third, the setting up of such an independent body has to take into account existing jurisprudence that interprets the Philippine Constitution. The Committee may not be aware that a similar body, albeit for a different purpose, was established in 2010, also through an executive order, but this was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court for being violative of the equal protection clause of the Constitution. And lastly, the concept of an independent body as proposed by the HLTM appears to be lifted from the recommendation of some Philippine trade unions for the establishment of a truth commission. From international experience, truth commissions have been established in countries recovering from widespread and systemic internal conflicts that have severely damaged political and social institutions to the point where these are no longer functioning. The Philippines is currently far from such a situation.

The Government is following a whole-of-government approach that incorporates the values of social dialogue and democratic consultation in continuously enhancing the enabling environment for the promotion and exercise of the workers’ freedom of association and right to organize. The Government gives its assurance to the Committee that it will exert all possible efforts and use all legal mechanisms within the bounds of its Constitution and the laws as well as within the bounds of international laws to see to it that the issues before the Committee are resolved quickly, reasonably and with justice to all. The Government holds this not only as an obligation to being a Member of the ILO, but more importantly as an obligation to all Filipinos.

Employer members – The Employer members would like to thank the Government for its very full statement and the information it has provided.

Just by way of context, the Convention is a fundamental Convention; the Philippines ratified it in 1953. This case has also been submitted previously to the Committee on Freedom of Association on a number of occasions. It has been examined in this Committee six times; the last time was in 2019, which was when the HLTM was first established. It has been the subject of 18 observations by the Committee of Experts since 2000, so this is not a new situation. This is a long-standing case with multiple features. It is also a case involving the Convention which, as we all know, the Employers’ group has expressed concerns about over the years.

On its face, this case is a case of systemic discrimination by the State against workers’ organizations and their members. I say “on its face” advisedly, because on closer examination, it suggests that the case of the Philippines is actually not one story, but two. The first is the specifics of the complaints of the workers and unions, and the second is the Government’s responses, and the context of those responses. I will take each of those stories, if you will, in turn.

Before I turn to these stories, I would like to speak about the recent development since our last examination in 2019.

First, we note that the new Government has been in power since June 2022.

Second, the Government accepted and received a HLTM, as recommended by the Committee in 2019.

This mission took place in January this year, due to a delay caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. We have been informed that the HLTM was extremely fruitful and the mission provided six recommendations in its report, namely:

- greater coordination and consistency across the varying arms of the Government to better guard against serious threats to freedom of association;

- engagement with the social partners to make genuine progress on the concerns raised by the Committee of Experts and the Committee to prevent future violations of freedom of association, including through the finalization before the June 2023 Conference of a road map on the way forward to address the identified concerns, with agreed timeframes;

- establishment of a single presidentially mandated body to comprehensively identify and address all outstanding cases of alleged labour-related issues and abductions with the priority emphasis being on criminal investigation and prompt prosecution and accountability;

- establishment of a specialized, eminent, independent non-judicial body to review cases referred by the presidential commission with a view to receiving and documenting testimony and making proposals for compensation;

- strengthening of the role of the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council-Monitoring Body (NTIPC-MB) and incorporation of improvements recommended by the presidential body in order to identify and ensure rapid and effective protection measures with regard to imminent and/or emerging threats to the life, security or safety of trade unionists;

- full implementation of all previous recommendations.

Since then, we have seen some promising developments in the country. In particular, on 12 May, the Government created a tripartite advisory council between the Department of Trade and Industry and the Philippines Economic Zone Authority to address labour-related issues.

Furthermore, the President has signed an executive order to create an Inter-Agency Committee to examine the violations of freedom of association and to develop a tripartite road map focusing on the four areas identified.

We welcome this progress and the efforts made by the new Government. We also consider that this road map should be regularly reviewed to take into account recommendations from the concerned agencies and inputs from other relevant stakeholders, including the most representative organizations. However, we note that the Inter-Agency Commission itself does not include worker and employer representation. We consider this to be a deficiency, as social partnership and freedom of association are indicative of the need to have a fully cooperative dialogue between these groups, and the establishment of a commission that is purely government agencies stops short of that ideal. We would urge, in that respect, that full participation be granted to the workers’ and employers’ organizations of the Philippines in that process.

For many years, the Committee has received complaints of violations of trade union rights and worse, including the alleged killing of trade union leaders, arrests and false criminal charges filed against trade union leaders and physical assaults of striking workers. There are far too many to detail, due to the history, to discuss here today.

Once again, observations concern serious allegations of human rights violations, including:

- the killings and attempted assassination of trade union officials;

- violent suppression of strikes and other collective actions by the police and the armed forces;

- harassment of unionists and prevention of people from joining trade unions in export processing zones.

Let me be clear: the Employer members in no way denigrate the seriousness of the issues brought to the attention of the Committee. However, it is important to note that these are not just issues of freedom of association, which is the subject of this case. They also include issues of human rights. By definition, they are also issues of law and order.

Cases such as these cannot go unchallenged, but we have to be careful that we challenge them here in the context of freedom of association. We have no jurisdiction in this Committee in the matters of law and order in particular, nor arguably human rights, although there are inevitable overlaps.

Many of the details of this case are unfortunately the same as we have heard in the past. The murders referred to occurred in 2016 and have been discussed before, so we need to examine not just the details, but also whether the situation is getting better or worse, and which parts are better or worse. This year, it seems that there are just as many issues, but also that the Government is even further behind in dealing with them. We urge the Government to step up and strengthen its efforts. Despite what we have heard about the progress that they are trying to make, what we want to see is progress that we can “see”.

We regret to note the new allegations of violence and intimidation against workers and their representatives in two particular incidents. While the investigations into the alleged acts against union members and officials are serious issues in their own right, so is the context in which the Government must investigate these allegations. This makes the Philippines’ Human Security Act perhaps the heart of the second story. This Act reflects the Government’s commitment to preserving the security of its citizens against a long-standing background of political and civil instability, including armed insurrection. It is this background that the Employers believe has not been given sufficient weight in the consideration of this case, both now and in the past.

This is important because the Inter-Agency Committee’s operational guidelines define extrajudicial killings so as to include cases where the victim was a member of or was affiliated with a labour organization, or was apparently mistaken or identified to be so, and the victim was targeted and killed because of the actual or perceived membership.

Not every human rights violation is a breach of labour rights. This is especially true if the person against whom the violation was committed was committing an unlawful or criminal act at the time. It is therefore vital to the consideration of cases that it be made clear that the law was being transgressed and how, and whether that law conforms to international standards. This is not always clear, and any lack of clarity can only inhibit a fair consideration of the case. In the context of freedom of association, it is important to distinguish between cases where union members were specific targets because of their union membership or activities or simply became victims, alongside other citizens, of more generally directed violence. We have a mandate in the first respect, but not the second.

Unions have expressed concerns that the Human Security Act can be misused. For its part, the Government has stated that this Act cannot be used against the exercise of trade union rights, and that guidelines exist to ensure that the armed forces and the police may only intervene in trade union activities if expressly requested to do so by the authorities.

In terms of monitoring and investigation, the Employers welcomed the establishment of the Inter-Agency Committee. The trouble is that, while initially active, it seems to have fallen into disuse. We hope that the Government’s assurances have been reactivated and that they are realized. We urge the Government to address these issues as soon as possible.

As previously indicated, the Government has engaged with ILO Manila in a Technical Cooperation Programme. With respect, we uphold and support that. We request the Government to provide an update on the status of this work.

With respect to the Labor Code changes, we note the Government’s proposals. They are welcome, but once again, they need to be fully implemented, and the Employers urge the Government to do just that.

I want to conclude with the observation that the report of the HLTM essentially confirmed the reality of everything we have discussed in the past. It reinforces the need to, as we say in New Zealand, to “get a move on”. We accept that the Government is relatively new, but it is now June 2023 and the honeymoon is over.

So, in conclusion, what we want to see from the Employers’ perspective is the Government of the Philippines doing the following:

- implement all of the recommendations of the HLTM report;

- amend the Labor Code to bring it into full conformity with the Convention, including with respect to the right of all workers and employers without distinction to form and operate organizations of their own choosing;

- ensure that workers are not penalized for exercising lawful rights, provide information on any developments on the outstanding issues before the next meeting of the Committee of Experts, which means providing that information by 1 September this year; and

- ensure that the Inter-Agency Committee is established in such a way that it involves full participation by the social partners.

Worker members – Over the last 15 years, the Philippines has been under regular supervision of the Committee, and its failure to comply with the Convention has already been mentioned by the Employer members. Indeed, in January this year, a long-delayed HLTM to the Philippines, requested by the Committee in 2019, took place to follow up on reports of extremely serious violations of freedom of association and civil liberties in the country, including threats and harassment, surveillance, arbitrary arrests and detention and extrajudicial killings of union members for their legitimate union activity. The mission met government, labour and employer representatives and made six recommendations, including calling on the Government to finally comply with the previous recommendations of the Committee.

Among the recommendations was the finalization before this Conference of a time-bound road map on the way forward to address the identified concerns. I understand that such a road map is now being finalized, which is a positive step, but we are concerned that in line with previous practice, the Government will not fully implement the recommendations, as was the case with respect to the 2019 conclusions of the Committee. Our concerns of continued violations are well-founded. Indeed, not long after the mission concluded, so this year, Alex Dolorosa, a paralegal officer of the BPO Industry Employees Network (BIEN) in Bacolod City was murdered. Mr Dolorosa joins a long list of trade unionists who have been murdered.

I will now briefly touch upon the major issues for the Workers’ group, which will be developed in greater detail by my Worker colleagues later on. Since the last discussion on the Philippines in the Committee in 2019, our Philippines trade union colleagues have documented 16 killings of trade unionists, 2 cases of enforced disappearances, 68 cases of arrests and detention, 90 cases of forced disaffiliation, state interference with the right to self-organization through threats, harassment and intimidation, 58 cases of red-tagging or terrorist-tagging, 127 cases of intimidation, threats, harassment of union leaders and members, and 19 cases of other anti-union activities. These numbers are shocking and underscore a prevailing culture of anti-unionism in the country. Few cases are investigated and even fewer result in any one being held responsible for these crimes. The so-called red-tagging continues. This is when state actors make baseless accusations and stigmatize specifically the unions and union activists as members of so-called communist, terrorist organizations. This accusation is enough to be detained and questioned by the military and police. Red-tagging serves to discourage workers from supporting legitimate unions or to encourage them to withdraw from one out of fear. It also creates a potent weapon by employers to rid their workplaces of trade unions they do not like. Red-tagging is also done by high-level government officials with disastrous consequences. This cannot continue. Mechanisms put in place to address these serious violations, such as the NTIPC-MB and the Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies (RTMBs), have also failed. The NTIPC-MB is supposed to have oversight on the RTMBs’ profiling and monitoring work, and the Bureau of Labour Relations is tasked with monitoring the freedom of association of trade union rights violation cases; but without independent funding, or without human resource allocations, the lack of full-time sectoral representatives and regional technical staff devoted to monitoring and promotion work and the lack of fully funded programmes on promotion of human rights and trade union rights have hampered the RTMBs’ monitoring work. The NTIPC-MB has stopped meeting on a regular basis since 2016. The Inter-Agency Committee on extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture and other grave violations of the right to life, liberty and security of persons created under Administrative Order No. 35 was supposed to address the grave human rights violations, including labour-related killings. However, unions have little understanding of its workings and despite its resources, few cases have progressed or have been resolved, and the 9 resolved cases out of 65 extrajudicial killings were all prior to its establishment. An ILO-commissioned review of the mechanisms found that the characterization of cases was among the major obstacles in the prosecution of cases.

On May Day 2023, Executive Order No. 23 was enacted in an apparent effort to address one of the recommendations of the HLTM to establish a presidentially mandated body to address violations of the Convention. However, it fell short in several fundamental aspects. The Inter-Agency Committee does not include representation from social partners, and they were not consulted in its drafting. Trade unions had a legitimate expectation that they would be consulted, and indeed had also called for such consultation and had submitted proposals well in advance. The Executive Order also fails to connect the Committee’s work or output with that of a specialized, eminent, independent, non-judicial body or to provide dedicated funding. We fully agree with the Committee of Experts and echo the expectation that the Government takes measures to ensure that all allegations of killings, red-tagging, harassment and other serious forms of violence against trade unionists previously reported and so on are properly investigated and lead to concrete results so as to establish the facts, including any links between the violence and trade union activities, determine culpability, punish the perpetrators and continue to prevent and combat impunity.

In addition to acts of violence in a climate of impunity, we must highlight that the freedom to organize, protected by the Convention, is also undermined by a variety of insecure employment arrangements which undermine stability and empower employers to easily dismiss workers for their union activity.

Finally, I note that the Committee of Experts has raised a number of legislative issues over the years. While previous governments have introduced legislation, no amendments have been enacted to address these long-standing concerns. Also, in Belgium, we have a saying “that the Government must move on” just like in New Zealand. The Worker members expect the Government to take concrete measures to revise the Labor Code to finally bring it into conformity with the Convention.

Employer member, Philippines – Let me just state that in our legislature, we have about 20 per cent of congressmen who represent specific concerns. These are called Party List congressmen. Out of the 20 per cent, there are about 24 who are identified with, or sympathetic to, the labour sector. We therefore implore those congressmen to speed up the judicial process to the best of their ability. In fact, they have a mandate to do so. We believe that tripartism and bipartism at the national, sectoral and enterprise levels is robust. Dialogue mechanisms to engage with social partners exist in practice. Stable industrial relations are operational and, more importantly, the new Government has veered away from the policy of the previous administration that was blamed for the occurrence of the essentially drug-related extrajudicial killings, from which some of the complaints on the exercise of freedom of association have been linked. We are here today to express our satisfaction over efforts toward the protection and promotion of freedom of association in our country. The Government of the Philippines, through DOLE, is cognizant of the challenges faced by labour and is actively working towards addressing issues to the best of its ability.

On the part of employers, the Employers’ Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP), has been taking concrete steps since 2018 to institutionalize the establishment of a buffer-type dialogue mechanism, called the Leaders Forum, where the country’s largest business employers’ organizations and labour federations are represented, so that any matter affecting social and industrial relations may be addressed. We reiterate our commitment to the joint statement issued by the Leaders Forum during the visit of the HLTM on the Convention in the Philippines, early this year. This addresses two main issues: respect of workers’ rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining; and to continue the investigation, prosecution and disposition of all true labour-related cases affecting freedom of association and collective bargaining without delay.

In the interests of justice, the employers and their affiliated organizations and sectors do not condone any attempt to undermine the exercise of freedom of association and collective bargaining. The Government has taken decisive actions since the official report of the HLTM, was received on 30 March 2023. The tripartite bodies have been established within economic zones, providing a platform for meaningful dialogue and collaboration between the Government, employers and workers. In the commission that was recently established, however, we at least hope that the labour and employer sectors would be invited as observers, at the very least. Furthermore, in this field, the Government has recognized the importance of strengthening investigations by empowering labour organizations through paralegal training, as mentioned by the good undersecretary. This capacity-building initiative will undoubtedly enhance the ability of labour organizations to effectively advocate for the rights and interests of workers. The Government should be given an opportunity to complete the process of consultation with the social partners. Along this line, the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council (NTIPC) and other tripartite bodies have been reconstituted towards genuine representation with sectoral members directly nominated by the social partners. This collaborative approach allows all stakeholders to collectively address the observations made by the HLTM.

All these recent actions taken by the Government demonstrate its willingness to work towards creating an environment that enables workers to freely associate and collectively bargain. Such an environment is essential for the protection of workers’ rights and the advancement of their interests. We, in the employers’ sector, will remain vigilant in ensuring respect among our constituents in the business sector of these fundamental rights of workers based on ILO Conventions, the Philippine Constitution and, more importantly and more recently, our national laws and regulations related to the Labor Code.

In conclusion, I wholeheartedly support the Philippines’ efforts to protect and promote freedom of association. The Government’s proactive approach, exemplified by the creation of tripartite bodies, the strengthening of the investigations and the ongoing consultation process, deserves recognition and your encouragement and active support.

Let us acknowledge the progress made thus far and provide the necessary space and support for the Government and social partners to collaboratively address the recommendations of the HLTM, the formulation of a tripartite roadmap on freedom of association, which is a work in progress admittedly, and the Labor and Employment Programme for the period 2023–2028. These are steps in the right direction. Together, we can achieve a brighter future for the workers of the Philippines, built on the principles of freedom, fairness and justice, which are essential to business, viability and sustainability.

Worker member, Philippines – Within the Workers’ group of the Philippines, our stand is unified on the issue at hand with that of all Philippine trade unions, including the affiliates of the ITUC in the Philippines: the Federation of Free Workers (FFW), the Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU), the Sentro ng mga Nagkakaisa at Progresibong Manggagawa (SENTRO), and Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (TUCP). Our country is under examination for compliance with the Convention. The Philippines received a HTML in January 2023. The ILO mission had submitted recommendations, and our good undersecretary acknowledged receipt of that on 30 March 2023. We note the action undertaken by the Government to address freedom of association violations. We are willing to engage in the constructive discussion as suggested by the good undersecretary. With all due respect, however, the Government, it seems, is “cherry-picking” among the recent recommendations. The Government has yet to adopt a joint implementation road map with the social partners, which falls short of compliance with the recommendations. We do not have a joint implementation report before the Committee at this 111th Session of the Conference.

We note the recent issuance of Executive Order No. 23, intended to reinforce and protect freedom of association and the right of workers to organize by constituting an Executive Department Inter-Agency Committee to coordinate and expedite investigations and prosecutions of violations related to the Convention. On its face, Executive Order No. 23 would seemingly respond to the HLTM’s recommendation to establish a presidentially mandated body to address violations related to the Convention. A closer reading, however, reveals that it falls short in several fundamental aspects.

The Inter-Agency Committee does not include representation from trade unions and even from employers’ organizations. Neither workers’ nor employers’ organizations were consulted in the drafting. It is silent on any intent to relate the Inter-Agency Committee’s work with that of the specialized, eminent, independent non-judicial body to be established for reviewing cases that the Inter-Agency Committee refers to that body, for testimonial documentation and potential compensation. We disagree with the inaugural undersecretary that the creation of these bodies is unconstitutional because a number of bodies created by the President in the Philippines have been found unconstitutional, like the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission and the Philippines Employees Labour Union Commission, among others.

It falls silent or does not specifically provide a mechanism or road map for resolving with finality all outstanding 68 documented cases of labour-related extra-judicial killings that have since been submitted to authorities that were included in the report. It does not specifically provide the Inter-Agency Committee and its secretariat with a dedicated operating budget. It is dependent on the budget of DOLE, effectively setting it up for potential failure. Existing compensation scheme under the law that the Government mentioned is severely inadequate, with those being wrongly incarcerated getting only PHP1,000 pesos a month, which is equivalent to US$19. When those killed can get no more than PHP10,000 pesos, or US$181, is that the value of life? Now, we look at the realities on the ground: a number of us have experienced our union organizing work being equated with criminal activity, insurgency or terrorism. On the eve of the visit of the HLTM, the Department of Justice threw out a case filed against 17 police officers involved in the killing of labour leader Mr Manuel Asuncion. The Department of Justice said Asuncion’s wife failed to directly identify the killers and the police operation was legitimate. Asuncion was killed in his office at the Workers’ Assistance Centre during a police operation in Cavite.

In the same month, the abduction of union organizers Armand Dayoha and Dyan Gumanao in Cebu was captured on video. Dayoha is an organizer for the Alliance of Health Workers (AHW), while Gumanao is a coordinator for the Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT). The two survived their harrowing experience and are now given the runaround in their quest to bring the culprits to justice.

Criminalizing union activities in practice is contrary to the Convention. Regarding the 68 reported killings, we disagree with the employers from the Philippines. There is no drug-related case in those reported killings. The killings of trade union organizers, along with approximately 400 cases of trade union rights violations since President Rodrigo Duterte assumed office in 2016 were submitted to the ILO mission.

This pattern of violence continues into the first year of the Marcos administration, with the recent murder of union organizer Alex Dolorosa marking the 69th case. Of the 69 cases that have occurred since 2016, nobody has been prosecuted or penalized by the court.

Despite the Philippine Government’s portrayal of a human rights and union-friendly nation which upholds freedom of association and tripartism, the realities we experience contradict this narrative. Abductions, murders and an intimidating police presence during union events, among others, during the first year of the Marcos administration illustrate a persistent culture of impunity that puts every labour organization at risk. As a result, the persistent violence has reduced union density to about 7 per cent of the workforce, and fewer are covered by collective bargaining agreements. The widespread layoffs and termination of regular employment across numerous companies are resulting in a significant reduction in union membership. This phenomenon, which is particularly evident in organizations or companies like the De Los Santos Medical Centres, Wyeth-Nestle and Duty-Free Philippines, affects hundreds of regular employees because of their union membership.

The public sector unions are not spared. An essential issue in the public sector is the forced disaffiliation of members due to ongoing pressure from their public employers. A significant example is the non-uniformed personnel union affiliated with the Public Services Labor Independent Confederation (PSLINK) in the bargaining unit of the Philippine National Police, which weakens the union and infringes on the rights of our members. In order to further demonstrate the scale of freedom of association violations, let us consider the following examples: the surveillance of a SENTRO leader in Davao from February to May 2023; the public red-tagging of the ACT by the Secretary of the Department of Education; the red-tagging of migrant workers abroad; the harassment of a female trade union secretary of the FFW by charging her with criminal offence after she won her illegal dismissal case and was reinstated back to work in a garments factory in Clark Ecozones; and most recently, in the middle of a certification campaign against a union created in a multinational company, the red-tagging of a leader of the Associated Labour Unions (ALU). The new Defence Chief has said that there was nothing wrong with red-tagging, but being red-tagged makes you a target for murder, abduction or a serious threat to your life and your family. Nothing wrong indeed!

We reiterate again the urgency for the Government to consult social partners to: (i) revise Executive Order No. 23, as it is not compliant with the ILO recommendation to include workers’ and employers’ representatives; (ii) form an independent, non-judicial body to document testimonies, review cases and propose compensation measures for affected parties; (iii) strengthen the National Tripartite Monitoring Council establishing tripartite validation teams that will act on reported killings of trade unionists and other blatant freedom of association violations with dispatch; and (iv) adopt the Presidential Executive Order outlining joint guidelines on the conduct of state security forces, thereby ensuring proper observance of trade union rights. These are among the recommendations of the trade unions. Lastly, we are willing to cooperate with the Government and the Employers’ group to improve freedom of association and the situation regarding the killings and impunity, as organizing a union is not a crime. We insist that the time for action is now.

Government member, Sweden – I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States. The candidate countries – Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia, Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries Iceland and Norway, members of the European Economic Area, align themselves with this statement. We actively promote the universal ratification of ILO fundamental Conventions. We call on all countries to protect, promote and respect all human rights, including labour rights. We attach great importance to freedom of association and the right to organize. The Philippines is an important partner, including in support of multilateralism and the international rules-based order. Within the framework of the Generalized Scheme of Preferences Plus, and the Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation with the EU, the Philippines committed to ratifying and effectively implementing international conventions on human rights, labour rights included. The case discussed today is a long-standing and serious case. At its 29th Session, the Committee noted with concern the many allegations of murders of trade unionists and anti-union violence, as well as the lack of investigation in relation to these allegations. The Conference Committee also called on the Government to accept a HLTM mission before the 2020 Conference, and to elaborate, in consultation with the representative workers’ and employers’ organizations, a report on progress to the Committee of Experts by 29 September. An exchange in September 2021 with the ILO, the Government and the social partners was held virtually due to the COVID-19 pandemic. One of the recommendations of this exchange was that the Government should adopt a time-bound plan of action in consultation with the social partners and with support from the ITUC and the International Organisation of Employers (IOE). This addressed the four areas of concern.

We welcome the fact that the Philippines received the HLTM in January 2023. The mission made a number of recommendations, and while it observed some progress, it remains largely insufficient in view of the very serious nature of the issues. We very much regret that the Government did not make available a joint implementation report by the tripartite partners to the ILO prior to the 2023 Committee in order to show tangible actions towards implementing these recommendations. We wish to underline that tripartite actions are crucial for progress. We nevertheless welcome the joint statement of the Leaders Forum, which could serve as a strong and positive foundation to pursue discussions on the tripartite road map.

Under the new administration, we see an improvement in the human rights area. We hope that this trend will continue. The dialogue with the EU is open, even on the most sensitive issues. However, areas of concern remain, including the allegation of serious violence and intimidation against trade unionists. Serious violations against workers and their representatives regarding civil liberties and freedom of association where authorities, in some cases, are preventing the lawful activities of trade unions. We are also worried about the pending cases of alleged killings of trade union leaders and members, where despite the efforts by the Government, no apparent progress has been made. We want to highlight the need for investigations into the killings of trade unionists to shed full light on the facts and circumstances in which such actions occurred. We wish to determine responsibility, punish the perpetrators and prevent the repetition of similar events in order to combat impunity.

We are concerned about the practice of red-tagging of trade union representatives and members, and allegations of links to terrorist organizations by security forces to create a climate of fear so that workers are impeded from exercising their rights. We welcome the intentions of the Government to combat impunity and secure the application of the Convention. However, we regret that very little policy or legislative action has been taken effectively to address the significant and long-standing concerns of the Committee of Experts and the Committee. We note with concern the lack of progress regarding the adoption of several legislative proposals to bring national legislation into conformity with the commitments and assurances made in recent years to do so. The absence of effective action to address areas of concern due to the lack of resources and incoordination in different areas, such as the effective functioning of monitoring mechanisms and Administrative Order No. 35, is of particular concern; this, despite the EU-funded ILO technical assistance since 2016, in view of the institutional strengthening of the tripartite partners.

While we welcome the President’s Executive Order to create an Inter-Agency Committee to examine the violation of freedom of association and develop a road map, we regret that the Executive Order falls short of the HLTM recommendation, and that it appears that it was not consulted with the social partners. On the economic zones, we understand that the programmes of the Joint Industrial Peace and Concerned Office and the Alliance for Industrial Peace and Program Office have been put on hold, and we welcome that. We have, however, urged the Government to secure the trade unions’ rights by continuing to promote comprehensive training activities on freedom of association and collective bargaining, and revising guidelines on the conduct of stakeholders relating to the exercise of trade union rights. We furthermore stress our comments from previous years to urge the Government to adopt legislative amendments to pursue the revision of the Labor Code without additional delay. We agree with the HLTM report that the serious and pressing concerns could only be addressed by genuine social dialogue. We encourage the Government to constructively engage social partners in order to finalize a tripartite road map with clear deliverables and timelines, and to incorporate it in the Labor and Employment Plan 2023–2028, as indicated by the Government. We hope that the effective implementation of the road map will be reflected in a joint employment report. We encourage the Government to continue to collaborate with the ILO on this issue.

Government member, Brunei Darussalam, speaking on behalf of the members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The ASEAN acknowledges the numerous endeavours and initiatives undertaken by the Philippines to adhere to the Convention. We welcome the continuing efforts and concrete measures taken by the Government since July of last year to address the issues raised in a proactive and comprehensive manner.

The Government of the Philippines has demonstrated its responsiveness to the concerns raised by various stakeholders, including the labour sector, by taking significant steps towards implementing the recommendations put forth by the HLTM in January 2023. We recognize the notable progress made thus far in compliance with these recommendations. The issuance of Executive Order No. 23 creating the Inter-Agency Committee to protect freedom of association is a clear indicator of the seriousness of the Government to fulfil its obligations.

We firmly believe in the importance of giving the Government an opportunity to complete the process of consultation in collaboration with the social partners. This inclusive approach ensures that all relevant stakeholders, including the worker, employer and government representatives, collectively address the observations highlighted by the HLTM. By engaging in a comprehensive and collaborative dialogue, the Government can build trust and work towards mutually beneficial solutions that advance the interests of all stakeholders.

We encourage the Government to continue its efforts to uphold the principles of freedom of association and ensure that the voices of workers and their representatives are heard and respected. It is a non-negotiable fact that we need to protect trade union rights. It is vital to understand that instances pertaining to acts solely of a criminal nature should be entrusted to appropriate law enforcement agencies and judicial systems. The classification of such cases should be determined through a thorough evaluation of alleged actions, taking into account both the rights of the individuals and the need for societal order and security. This approach guarantees that only matters genuinely linked to the exercise of freedom of association and the right to organize are brought under the scrutiny of the Committee.

ASEAN acknowledges that the Philippines, just like the other ASEAN states, should continue to benefit from the technical assistance of the ILO. In this regard, we express our unwavering support for the continuous technical assistance provided to the Philippines in order to resolve to these long-standing issues.

In conclusion, we reiterate our strong support for the Philippines’ commitment to protecting and promoting freedom of association. We believe in the Government’s dedication to addressing labour-related challenges and its sincere efforts to comply with the recommendations of the HLTM. We urge all stakeholders to engage in a constructive dialogue, embracing the principles of inclusivity, cooperation and respect, to collectively address the observations made and ensure the effective protection of the rights of workers.

Employer member, Thailand – The Employers’ Confederation of Thailand is making this statement on behalf of the ASEAN Confederation of Employers. It associates itself with the position of ECOP in respect of the case of the Philippines in the Committee. This is in line with its thrust to promote stable, harmonious and productive industrial relations, and generation of employment in pursuit of national development across all the countries it represents. It recognizes that ECOP’s commitment to social development through tripartism and bipartism in resolving issues and challenges in industrial and labour relations is cognizant of ECOP’s passion in promoting freedom of association and collective bargaining in the Philippines. The underlying principle behind ECOP’s advocacies and services is founded on respect for workers’ rights and protection of welfare. It hopes that the governments, employers and workers in the Philippines will continue working together to address the recommendations of the HLTM.

Worker member, Guatemala – I am speaking on behalf of the workers of Guatemala and the National Union of Workers (UNT) of Mexico.

The violation of civil liberties and trade union rights in the Philippines is long-standing. Since 2006, Philippine trade unions have alleged murders and serious threats. The most recent fatal incidents involved Mr Alex Dolorosa, Mr Marlon Ornido and his wife Ms Fe Ornido, with no progress having been made in the investigation, bringing the total number of murdered trade unionists to 69. Such unfortunate events also occur in my country, Guatemala.

A climate of violence that results in the murder and disappearance of union leaders and acts of aggression against workers’ organizations is a serious obstacle to the exercise of trade union rights. Such acts require severe measures from the authorities.

The Committee on Freedom of Association has called on the Philippine Government to ensure that killings of trade unionists are investigated and has observed with regret that “despite continued monitoring and investigation reported by the Government, no substantial progress appears to have been achieved in bringing the perpetrators to justice or clarifying the circumstances of these incidents”.

The existing climate of pressure, fear and extreme physical violence undermines the ability of workers to exercise their rights under the Convention. Although the Convention was ratified by the Philippines 70 years ago, the Government has struggled to comply with it.

Various actions to overcome these serious obstacles to the exercise of trade union freedoms have been taken, including high-level missions, a direct contacts mission, as well as a high-level virtual tripartite meeting. In January of this year, an HLTM visited the country to investigate trade union allegations and government reports on the application of the Convention.

The report of the tripartite mission expressed concern over the perceived slow implementation by the Philippine Government of the recommendations made by the ILO, and reiterated the conclusions and recommendations contained in previous reports of the supervisory bodies on the application of standards.

Furthermore, the Government of the Philippines reported the creation of national and regional mechanisms regarding compliance with the Convention and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), as well as other actions. However, in every case, there is evidence of dilatory behaviour, and it persists in simulating advances to maintain that progress has been made that only appear in the official discourse.

The assassination of trade unionists calls for judicial investigations that must be conducted independently to fully clarify, as quickly as possible, the facts and circumstances surrounding these assassinations, determine responsibilities, punish the perpetrators and prevent their repetition.

The Committee should urge the Government to take the necessary actions and put an end to the practices that violate freedom of association, which have been taking place in the Philippines for years.

Government member, United States of America – We thank the Government of the Philippines for providing additional information to the Committee in response to the report of the HLTM which visited the Philippines in January this year.

The Government reports on various measures it has taken to address long-standing concerns expressed by ILO supervisory bodies regarding its implementation of the Convention and actions it is now taking in response to recommendations in this report. We welcome these measures as initial, partial steps. We, however, remain concerned about the Government’s response to continued alleged violations of workers’ civil liberties and right to freedom of association.

To that end, the United States urges the Philippine Government to immediately accept the report of the tripartite mission in full and implement all its recommendations, including establishing a presidentially mandated body to address all cases of alleged labour-related extrajudicial killings and abductions, as well as implementing rapid and effective protection measures to address imminent and/or emerging threats to the life, security, or safety of trade unionists.

The Committee of Experts noted with concern new allegations of violence and intimidation against workers and their representatives and observed with regret that no substantial progress appeared to have been achieved in bringing the perpetrators to justice.

The United States remains focused on the April murder of Alex Dolorosa, a trade union leader and LGBTQI+ activist with BIEN, an organization that helps call centre workers exercise their rights and organize to improve their job conditions. We welcome the Philippine Government’s condemnation of his murder and its commitment to thoroughly investigate and to hold the perpetrators accountable.

We note the HLTM’s call for any suspicion of criminal acts and/or suspected illegal links to the communist insurgency to be brought before appropriate judicial bodies with assurances of due process and respect for the presumption of innocence.

We reaffirm the importance of the HLTM’s recommendation of engagement with the social partners to make genuine progress on the concerns raised by the Committee of Experts and the Committee to prevent future violations of freedom of association. The United States emphasizes that democratic and independent trade unions are essential to healthy, inclusive democracies and thriving economies.

The United States remains committed to engaging with the Government to advance workers’ rights in the Philippines.

Employer member, United States of America– We note that in June 2019, the Committee requested a HLTM to the country, which was completed in early in 2023. This Mission, along with an intervening virtual exchange, reflects steps that presaged a plan of action to detail – relevant here – how the Philippines can effectively implement the Convention.

In this spirit, we view this case as forward-looking and, by extension, aspirational. It is an opportunity to revisit the essence of the Convention, and the full concept of freedom of association under international law. We note that freedom of association is one of the most fundamental principles of international labour law. Article 2 of the Convention provides that “[w]orkers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, shall have the right to establish and, subject only to the rules of the organisation concerned, to join organisations of their own choosing without previous authorisation”. The language here is critical, as the Convention applies in equal parts to “workers” and “employers” – “without distinction” – to associate and, by extension, not associate or disassociate, consistent with their own wishes. We recall that workers and employers, and their informed wishes, are at the very heart of the Convention, and that governments are obliged to create legislation and to foster practices that help workers and employers to make free and informed choices about their working lives.

Governments must not enable or authorize, and this cannot be understated, any conduct that interferes with these rights. That would include, of course, at least some of the examples of the legitimate concerns referenced by the Committee in this case. In this case, we recall that determining the underlying facts and context of alleged events and concerns is of the utmost importance and express our sincere hope that the Government take steps, along with the ILO and social partners, to conduct all necessary and appropriate inquiries most thoroughly. We should not craft policy, nor prejudge whether actions are consistent with the Convention, until meaningful inquiries have been completed. If obstacles exist or if they arise, the Government, along with the social partners, should nonetheless patiently persist.

We also recall that governments should not take any position or provide any measure of favouritism towards any particular group and recall that this is also a fundamental concept within international labour law.

Governments are meant, at the most fundamental level, to be unbiased and a facilitative partner to enable workers and employers to make free and informed choices about their working lives. We wish for the Philippine Government, as it moves forward through its plan of action, to keep these maxims well in mind.

Worker member, Norway – Trade unions in the Nordic countries, France, Germany, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, and Spain, and the Confederation of Christian Trade Unions of Belgium (ACV/CSC), deplore the interference of the Philippine police and armed forces in the workplace. We have not seen positive signs that the Philippines’ national security agents have withdrawn from industrial relations.

On 2 June, the police entered the workplace of a container company in Meycauyan, Bulacan, on the day when DOLE Region 3 was conducting the certification of the trade union election. Workers were made to cast their vote under the presence of the military.

Until today, the Philippine’s police and the armed forces in Governor Generoso of Davaos continue to smear and label the trade union, which was created a year ago to provide labour rights education and organize workers in a plantation company. The armed officers call the trade union “a communist and terrorist organization connected to the communist party and ISIS.” The company has been notorious for wage exploitation, discrimination and unfair dismissals.

These are just two examples of military interference reported in the past months since the HLTM conducted a visit to the Philippines. It is just the tip of the iceberg of the militarization of industrial relations. For a decade, it has been justified under the banner of the National Task Force to End Local Communist Conflicts.

The same national security agencies form the majority in the Inter-Agency Committee under the Presidential Office. The Inter-Agency Committee was announced to lead the protection of freedom of association and the right to organize workers. Trade unions have not been informed about the formation of this Inter-Agency Committee.

We cannot be convinced that the same agencies which have been actively red-tagging, profiling and intimidating trade unionists and alleging infiltrations of the workplace by communism could assume independence and protect the right to freedom of association. It cannot be an adequate response to implement the recommendations of the HLTM to end the culture of impunity.

Organizing trade unions is not a direct threat to national security. The Government must engage with trade unions and social partners to adopt a joint implementation road map of the HLTM’s recommendations.

Worker member, the United States of America – The Worker delegates from Australia, Japan, Republic of Korea and the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) align themselves with this statement. Once again, this body is discussing the case of the Philippines’ non-compliance with the Convention.

We welcome the findings of the January 2023 HLTM, which found that very little was done by the Government to implement the recommendations of the Committee and the Committee of Experts from 2009, 2017 and 2019 regarding the extrajudicial killings of trade unionists and other violations of freedom of association in the country. Unfortunately, despite the attention from the HLTM, threats, attacks, and even murder of trade union activists continue in the Philippines.

We are saddened and outraged by the cruel and violent murder of Alex Dolorosa, a union organizer and a paralegal with BIEN who worked tirelessly to improve the working conditions in the call centre industry. Unfortunately, his murder only reinforces the reason that the Philippines is repeatedly ranked as one of the world’s deadliest countries for trade unionists. Alex’s tragic murder follows years of being surveilled and “red-tagged” by the Government of the Philippines. It has become common in the Philippines for the military and the Government to target unions, union leaders and workers attempting to organize with red-tagging – falsely labelling union activists and organizers as communist insurgents and enemies of the State, resulting in aggressive surveillance, imprisonment, and even murder.

We strongly regret that Government has not sent, before the Committee, a joint implementation report, by tripartite partners to carry out the recommendations of the HLTM.

We urge the Government of Philippines to consult with social partners without further delay to:

- Revise Executive Order No. 23 and include workers’ and employers’ representatives’ perspectives.

- Establish an independent, non-judicial body to document testimonies, review cases, and propose compensation measures for affected parties.

- Adopt a time-bound road map in consultation with social partners to fully realize all the recommendations of the HLTM.

Once again, we are demanding that President Marcos and his administration take immediate action in full consultation with the social partners to end the practice of red-tagging and the broader culture of impunity for cases of threats and violence against trade unionists in the Philippines.

Government member, Islamic Republic of Iran – My delegation supports the commendable efforts made by the Government of the Philippines to address the recommendations put forth by the HLTM, which they received in January of this year. We must acknowledge the concrete outcomes already achieved by the Philippine Government. True to the spirit of tripartism, extensive consultations were conducted for the realization of a tripartite workable plan that is realistic and achievable.

In recognition of the complexity of the issues at hand, the Philippine Government should be given a fair opportunity to complete the process of consultation with the social partners.

We understand that for cases to be resolved, acknowledging achievements is of the utmost importance. Thus, we recognize the need to support the strengthening of the RTMBs, with technical assistance from the ILO, as may be necessary.

In conclusion, we acknowledge the efforts made by the Philippine Government and understand that time is need to complete their plan of action towards resolving issues related to freedom of association.

Worker member, Indonesia – I am speaking on behalf of Indonesian workers. My statement is supported by the workers of Malaysia, Singapore and Cambodia, and Education International (EI). We stand in solidarity with workers and the teachers in the Philippines. Teachers should not be labelled as insurgents or subjected to violence and discrimination because they are members of trade unions. This is still happening in the Philippines. In March, Vice President Sara Duterte, who also serves as the Secretary of Education, publicly labelled the ACT as a communist terrorist organization due its support for a transport workers’ strike. At that time, the ACT was advocating for increased government investment in the construction of 50,000 additional classrooms and the hiring of more teachers. National security agents under the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict target and interfere in schools where teachers are unionized and affiliated with the ACT. The national security agents organize so-called peace and order forums in these schools with the aim of identifying the unionized teachers and members of the ACT.

In regions where the ACT’s regional unions are accredited, the Department of Education uses “postpone and delay” tactics to block a collective agreement from being reached. In region 11, for instance, the Regional Director of the Department of Education has made it clear that negotiation on a collective agreement could resume if the union shares the full list of its members.

In region 5, where trade unions managed to reach a collective agreement after a two-year delay, union members’ pictures were displayed in front of schools and they were falsely associated with the New People’s Army. In the province of Camarines Sur, the police even visited schools and pressured teachers to remove their signatures endorsing the collective agreement.

Teachers in the Philippines cannot freely choose the unions with which they wish to associate to defend their occupational interests. Instead, they are forced by national security agents to disaffiliate and withdraw from the collective agreement their union has negotiated. This is unacceptable and it must be stopped. We urge the Government to engage with social partners to develop a joint implementation road map of the HLTM’s report under the oversight of a presidential commission with trade union participation.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Morocco – First of all, I would like to thank the Government of the Philippines for the information and clarifications provided. We also welcome the efforts made to address the challenges and respond to the various observations of the Committee of Experts, which we would like to commend on its efforts to implement international labour standards and monitor implementation.

We also welcome the tripartite road map to implement the 2019 conclusions of the Committee and to achieve full compliance with the Convention through the HLTM.

We have taken note of the Philippine Government’s responses to the various observations. We also welcome all the measures that have been taken in response to the Committee’s recommendations, including the tripartite road map to promote freedom of association, civil liberties and the revision of the guidelines on trade union action.

We also strongly commend the Government of the Philippines for its consultation with the social partners to promote tripartite social dialogue to find solutions to fundamental rights at work in an inclusive manner for workers in economic zones.

Lastly, we would like to recommend that the Government continue its efforts to find the right national solutions for the implementation of international labour standards and conclude the national vision on comprehensive reform as soon as possible, taking into account the observations of the Committee of Experts.

Government member, China – China thanks the representative of the Philippines for the information provided. We carefully read the report of the Committee of Experts as well as the updated information submitted by the Philippine Government. The Government of the Philippines is working closely with the ILO to submit information on time, actively promote tripartite dialogue and show a constructive dialogue. China appreciates that effort. We note that the Government, working towards the promotion and protection of freedom of association, places importance on the concerns of stakeholders and tries to work for sustainable solutions to labour issues. The Government is taking effective measures to implement the recommendations of the HLTM which took place in January this year, establish national and regional monitoring mechanisms on the Convention and Convention No. 98, issue guidelines for the tripartite monitoring bodies, and resolve issues through legislative frameworks. We think this should be valued by the Committee. We think that only through extensive collaboration and dialogue can we help the Government to better improve its capacity to implement the Convention and promote trust. We encourage the Philippine Government to continue to implement the recommendations of the HLTM and avail itself of the technical assistance of the ILO, and further resolve disputes and solve problems. We hope the stakeholders can reach consensus and make constructive decisions in a pragmatic and cooperative spirit to jointly protect workers’ rights.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Saudi Arabia – My delegation has taken note of the Committee’s report and we welcome the efforts that have been undertaken by the Philippines to strengthen its legislation, bring it into line with international labour standards and guarantee labour rights. We also welcome the actions of the country to enter into dialogue with stakeholders. There is no doubt that all dialogue requires a constructive approach with the country concerned in order to build its capacities. That is why we reaffirm the importance of continuing the efforts of the Philippines to strengthen the provisions relating to the Convention and the protection of rights and to pursue dialogue.

Observer, Building and Wood Workers International (BWI) – This statement is also supported by the IndustriALL Global Union. I would like to state today the tremendous difficulties for workers in the Philippines to exercise their rights to self-organization and collective bargaining and, in particular, how labour-only contractualization undermines the right to association and collective bargaining.

Philippine labour law has an explicit requirement for an employer-employee relationship before workers can organize unions. Section 243 of the Philippine Labor Code limits its coverage to persons employed in commercial, industrial and agricultural enterprises and in religious, charitable, medical or educational institutions, whether operating for profit or not.

In addition, there are several institutional causes of the systemic violations of freedom of association. Apart from trade union repression, one of the biggest barriers to the exercise of freedom of association is the precariousness of work. This prevents the vast majority of workers from accessing their constitutional rights to organize, bargain collectively and strike. Compounding the problem is the fact that there is no official data on the number of contractual workers in the private sector. Estimates would range anywhere from 6.7 million to as many as 20 million contractual workers.

Philippine labour law explicitly provides that all workers have the right to join unions after working for one day. But if you are a contractual worker or employee, you will not dare exercise this right for fear of having your contract rescinded or no longer renewed. This is why there are millions of workers who have been working for several years at the same company but are not yet considered regular employees and therefore not able to join unions. However, the biggest culprit is the Government itself. It is the biggest employer of non-regular workers. As of June 2022, there were 642,000 non-permanent government workers out of 2.5 million.

In 2019, despite the passage in both Houses of Congress of a Security of Tenure Bill that would have addressed contractualization, former President Duterte vetoed this legislation. This problem on contractualization must stop. We call on the Philippine Government to earnestly address the issue of contractualization and the precarity of work. We urge President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to certify as urgent the passage of the Security of Tenure Bill, which would finally plug the loopholes in the Labor Code that permit these problems.

Observer, Public Services International (PSI) – I am speaking on behalf of PSI and the nine organizations in the Philippines affiliated with us. PSI echoes the very serious concerns raised by the HLTM, the ILO supervisory mechanisms, and others relating to the extrajudicial killings of trade unionists, as well as a failure to bring any cases to justice or to provide any other remedies to victims and their families.

The Government continues to deny that the police and military are engaged in the practice of “red-tagging”, despite the findings of the HLTM and of the National Commission on Human Rights. The latter has found that “red-tagging” has been normalized and continues with impunity. The experience of PSI-affiliated organizations is that this sustained climate of intimidation and fear makes it impossible for workers in general to enjoy the rights afforded under the Convention. Workers are fearful of joining unions and becoming delegates speaking in support of other unions. Employers are emboldened to attack unions and can easily dissuade workers from joining unions by insinuating that they are linked to communism. This is particularly clear in the public service, where workers risk their careers if they are “red-tagged”. In addition, as previously noted by the Committee, the Government has made many commitments to adopt and amend industrial laws to improve compliance with labour standards. Yet, the proposed bills have failed to be transposed into law. This is, for instance, the case of the Public Sector Labor Relations Bill, which aims to address labour rights in the delivery of public services and was tabled for a second time, having languished under the previous administration. This bill addresses several omissions that impact public sector workers under the existing laws, such as the formation of a public sector labour relations board, freedom of association, collective bargaining, dispute resolution and the right to strike. Without these amendments, many Philippine workers continue to be denied their fundamental labour rights.

Therefore, we urge the Government of the Philippines to consult with social partners to revise Executive Order No. 23 and include the workers’ and employers’ representatives, establish an independent non-judicial body to commend testimonies, review cases and propose compensation measures for affected parties, adopt a time-bound road map in consultation with social partners, fully realize all the recommendations of the HLTM, and make sure that the Public Sector Labor Relations Bill is adopted without further delay.

Government representative – First of all, I thank all the speakers from the Government, Employers’ and the Workers’ groups for their comments on the updates that were given by the Philippines – not only today, but also on the updates that were submitted to the supervisory bodies of the ILO in the previous months.

There are five points that I would like to talk about in response to the various issues raised. The first is on Executive Order No. 23. The second is the road map. The third is the distinction, or the need to properly categorize, where there is a violation or where a criminal act is related to the exercise of the right to self-organization. The fourth is the strengthening of the monitoring bodies. The fifth is the legislative measures that were put forward by the various speakers. I think that these five areas summarize the various substantial comments of the various speakers.

If I may go back to Executive Order No. 23, the main concerns that we have heard from the labour sector are that: (i) there was a lack of consultation prior to the issuance of Executive Order No. 23; and (ii) there is lack of sectoral representation, particularly of the employer and the labour sectors, in the Committee.

With respect to the first observation, let me put on record that right after the HLTM was completed, we had already convened the leaders of the forum, as mentioned earlier by the Employers’ and Workers’ groups from the Philippines, to discuss the possible ways to move forward. One of the inputs of the labour sector was a draft presidential directive or seeking to implement the recommendation of the HLTM of a presidentially driven body. We note that the recommendation does not provide for the inclusion of sectoral representatives. The nature of that body is that it is a combination of prosecutorial, enforcement and investigative authorities, which are purely governmental functions. We would be very happy to see a model from anywhere in which prosecutorial bodies or investigative authorities have sectoral representation and we would be thus guided if such a model exists.

With respect to the lack of consultation, it is not necessarily the case that all consultations have to be held face to face. We, DOLE, met with the Leaders Forum. We were in touch with the Leaders Forum right after the HLTM was concluded, as I have mentioned earlier, and asked for directions to move forward. As I have said earlier, the labour sector – and I must acknowledge this – submitted a draft presidential directive to set up a presidential commission. That draft was taken into account in the drafting of what became Executive Order No. 23. As a matter of fact, the Executive Order, if we compare it to the draft submitted by the labour sector, is much more detailed and contains specific functions and areas of action that the original draft by the labour sector did not contain.

This is one of the circumstances that has to be taken into account in appreciating the context under which the Executive Order was issued. As I said, we are open to looking for ways to improve the Inter-Agency Committee, especially with the guidance of the international community if there is indeed such a committee anywhere that is mandated to undertake investigative and prosecutorial activities that includes sectoral representation. In relation to the Inter-Agency Committee, as I have mentioned earlier, it is setting a second meeting with the idea of inviting the sectoral representatives to a dialogue in order to receive more input on, among others, ways to improve prosecution and ways to move forward with the formulation of a time-bound tripartite road map.

With respect to the tripartite road map that the Conference and the Committee have recommended that the Philippines formulate, we take note of the recommendation of the two sectors, and also the government sector, about the formulation of a joint implementation plan, but first, we need to have the road map. As I said earlier, there is a technical working group composed of tripartite representatives that is formulating the road map even as we speak. The difficulty that has been confronted by the tripartite working group is the matter of identifying what are the time-bound commitments that each sector might include in the road map. The other challenge would be the scope. On one hand, it would be good to have a very broad scope for the road map, but on the other hand, it might also be equally good to have a focused scope so that the tripartite road map can be better monitored and can be more efficiently implemented. These are matters that the technical working group will have to thrash out.

Insofar as the NTIPC is concerned, the draft road map will have to be submitted to that Council for approval or for adoption. In this regard, I would like to request the patience of the Committee, particularly in giving the tripartite sectors more time to come up with a really specific and doable road map that is agreeable to everybody. Incidentally, it was actually the labour sector who asked for an extension to look at the detailed inputs to the road map, which we feel is a very reasonable request. Even so, we realize the importance of having a road map as soon as possible. We feel that there is no need to have another mechanism to monitor the joint implementation of this road map because right now we have the NTIP, which is already specifically mandated to do that.

Now the third item is the distinction between criminal acts that are to be processed through the regular courts and criminal acts that are directly related or arise from the exercise of the right to self-organization and freedom of association. This point has been made clear by several of the speakers. Let it be clear that the Philippine Government does not condone any criminal act one way or the other. No criminal act can be condoned and must be acted upon immediately, at the soonest possible time. The point that we wish to stress, however, is that there must be a clear distinction between criminal acts that involve directly, or that arise out of, the exercise of freedom of association and the right to self-organization and what we call regular or ordinary crimes. A case in point, as it was mentioned earlier, is the case of Alex Dolorosa. It has been spread over the media that Alex Dolorosa was a trade union organizer, but that is only a description of what he did when he was still alive. It appears that the current investigation of the police into the killing has nothing to do with trade union organizing. According to police reports, a suspect has been identified and evidence has been gathered pointing to the motive of the killing, something that is not related to trade union organizing but to robbery. While we commiserate and sympathize with the family of Alex Dolorosa, we would also like to state that his case should not be used unless there is clear and convincing evidence that the killing was trade union related. His case should not be used in the Committee or elsewhere as an example that in the Philippines there is impunity against trade union organizers. Indeed, he may have been one when he was alive, but according to the investigation thus far, it would appear that this killing was not union related. We would be happy to provide updates on this as we go along but with the caveat that, again, as the previous speakers have recalled, we ought to be careful not to immediately associate the killings with trade union organizing. The important point is the strengthening of regional tripartite mechanisms which is ongoing, and as I mentioned earlier, there is a good opportunity for the Philippines and for the tripartite partners to be involved in this because, in DOLE, we are actually allocating a programme called the Workers’ Organization and Development Program (WODP), which is funded to be used for the purpose of supporting the strengthening of these mechanisms, with of course the continuing assistance of the ILO.

Lastly, with respect to legislative measures, we are aware that there are legislative measures that have been filed and refiled in previous congresses and these legislative measures have not progressed. DOLE and the Executive Branch defer to the wisdom of Congress on the adoption of legislative measures, but, having said that, they will always insist that any mandatory legislation ought to conform with international labour standards that the Philippines has ratified. We are aware that one of the proposals pending in Congress with a view to facilitating the growth of unions is to have an amendment that will allow, or that will authorize, a union to be formed without regard to any minimum membership. That is one of the proposals in Congress. You can evaluate that proposal for yourselves: a union without any minimum membership requirement.

Second, there is also a bill that proposes abolishing all forms of short-term employment. We are not aware of any country in the world that does not have short-term employment, even in the most advanced economies. Therefore, we ought to be realistic about what to expect with the bills that are being filed. Also, with regard to the limitation on the right to organize, as mentioned earlier, there is no limitation on the provision in the Labor Code: workers, without distinction whatsoever, whether they are working for a non-profit religious charitable institution or not, are all allowed to organize. This is not an exclusionary provision in the Labor Code; it is an inclusionary provision. Let it be clear that there is no such limitation.

With respect to the public sector, the Philippines has just ratified the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151), and we are aware that there have been many suggestions or many proposals to legislate and put into law and practice the principles under that Convention. We do have an existing Executive Order that regulates the right of public sector workers to join associations. We recognize the fact, insofar as economic terms and conditions of employment are concerned, that there is a limitation on the right to negotiate or to bargain, but then again, the legislative framework needs to be amended in order for the rapid expansion of the rights of public sector unions to organize, and we will be willing to participate in the debates in Congress in relation to the proposed measures.

Worker members – I thank the Government for the information provided and everyone who has contributed to the discussion today. What remains clear is that there remain serious and systemic violations of the right to freedom of association in the Philippines. We need to draw to the Government’s attention that the HLTM is tripartite, and that a mission into any country, by the way, involves extensive tripartite consultations and takes recommendations from social partners, regarding how best to address the concerns raised. Extremely serious violations of freedom of association have been highlighted today. We must recall that labour rights are human rights, and the Committee is within its mandate to supervise violations of these labour-related murders and violence. It is up to a court to decide if there is any relation or not. The Government is clearly responsible. Whether it has directly perpetrated these violations through state security forces, or because it has created an environment of impunity by its failure to prevent violence against trade unions or to investigate and prosecute those ultimately responsible when it occurs. In addition to this, we must also reiterate the serious impacts of the proliferation of insecure forms of employment, which are being used without limitation, despite their clear disabling impact on the exercise of the rights protected by the Convention. To this we add, of course, several aspects of the Labor Code, which have been identified by the Committee of Experts for years as needing reform in order to comply with the Convention, without any action. Indeed, it is this inaction in the face of repeated supervisions, which is why we are here today. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, the HLTM has issued six recommendations, which include the incorporation of all previous recommendations from supervisory bodies, including the recommendations of this Committee in 2019. The HLTM report also recommends that a joint implementation report by the tripartite partners should be made available to the ILO prior to the 2023 sitting of the Committee. This has not been done. We fully expect the Government to comply with these recommendations and to do so in full consultation with the social partners. We take note of the proposed road map and urge the Government to finalize this road map, in consultation with social partners and with the support of the ILO, so that it fully addresses the HLTM’s recommendations and also sets specific deadlines for its implementation. This is the only way forward.

In closing, we must concur with the conclusion of the HLTM that while some progress may be observed in recent years, this remains largely insufficient in view of the very serious issues which have been raised with and by the ILO supervisory bodies over an extended period. We urge the Government to waste no more time and to finalize and fully implement the road map on priority areas of action, and in accordance with agreed time frames, and we would urge the Government to accept the technical assistance of the Office with the implementation of legal and institutional reforms necessary to give full effect to the road map on time. This is, in our view, the surest way to avoid the case returning to the Committee.

Employer members – I will make just two points. Regarding the HLTM’s recommendation for the establishment of a single presidentially mandated body, having spoken to members of the mission, I can say that there was no expectation, either express or implied, that this was going to be a Government-only body. There was simply a request, or a recommendation, for a presidentially mandated body and, to that end, I would echo the views expressed by many on ensuring that there is tripartite participation in that process because it is that process which will effectively be the oversight of all other aspects of progress.

With that, I am just turning to the basic conclusions. The things we want to see from the Government are, as the workers have said, early and quick progress on all the recommendations from the tripartite mission, amending the Labor Code to bring it into full conformity with the Convention, ensuring that workers are not penalized for exercising their lawful rights to associate and to form organizations, providing the information requested on any developments on the outstanding issues before the next session of the Committee of Experts, and, lastly, ensuring that the Inter-Agency Committee is in fact tripartite in nature so that full and open dialogue can occur on all these issues.

Chairperson – I want to thank the Government of the Philippines, the delegation here, once again for participating in the work of this Committee and for sharing this information.

Conclusions by the Committee

The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the Government and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted the long-standing nature and the prior discussion of this case in the Committee, most recently in 2019.

The Committee noted with deep concern the numerous allegations of murders of trade unionists and anti-union violence, allegations of serious and systemic violations of the right to freedom of association as well as of lack of investigation in relation to these allegations.

The Committee noted the concerns raised by the social partners regarding the failure of the Government to submit a joint implementation report with them as recommended by the high-level tripartite mission that took place on 23–26 January 2023.

The Committee noted that the Government has taken some steps to implement the recommendations set out in the report of the high-level tripartite mission but regretted that many recommendations remain unaddressed.

Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government, in consultation with the social partners, to:

- put an immediate end to any act of violence and intimidation against union members for the legitimate exercise of their rights under the Convention as well as violations of freedom of association, in line with the recommendations of the ILO high-level tripartite mission;

- immediately and effectively undertake investigations into the allegations of violence in relation to members of workers’ organizations with a view to establishing the facts, determining culpability and punishing the perpetrators;

- operationalize the monitoring bodies, including by providing adequate resources, and provide regular information on these mechanisms and on progress on the cases assigned to them; and

- ensure that all workers without distinction are able to form and join organizations of their choosing in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention.

The Committee urges the Government to take decisive and effective measures to promote a climate of non-violence, as well as constructive social dialogue and labour relations at all levels in the country.

The Committee requests the Government to finalize, with ILO technical assistance and in consultation with the social partners, the roadmap on effectively addressing all outstanding issues and transmit a report on progress made to the Committee of Experts by 1 September 2023.

Government representative – The Philippine Government expresses its appreciation for this opportunity to make a statement on the proposed conclusions of this Committee in relation to the case of the Philippines arising from the application and implementation of the Convention.

The Government draws attention to the statement in the conclusion noting that the Government has taken some steps to implement the recommendations set out in the report of the high-level tripartite mission (HLTM) but that regrettably many of the recommendations remain unaddressed.

To put into context the actions taken by the Government, the HLTM came to the Philippines on 23–26 January 2023. Its final report and recommendations were made available to the Philippine Government on 30 March 2023. Within this short period of time the Government was able to set up an Inter-Agency Committee composed of the major agencies of the Government that are directly involved in the investigation, prosecution and resolution of the cases that have been reported to this Committee, with the view of promoting and protecting the principles under Convention No. 87. The Inter-Agency Committee, as the Government stated in its opening statement, is a necessary enabling mechanism to ensure that the cases in question are finally resolved.

The Government expresses deep concern that the formulation of the proposed conclusion tends to devalue, rather than encourage, the Inter-Agency Committee to do its work. Nevertheless, the Government, through the Inter-Agency Committee and the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council, assures this Committee of its continued commitment to bringing a just resolution enclosure to all pertinent issues raised. The proposed conclusions also note the concerns raised by the social partners regarding the failure of the Government to submit a joint implementation report with them, as recommended by the HLTM. To call this a failure on the part of the Government is false and has no factual basis. The Government has earlier stated its commitment to formulating a tripartite road map to resolve the issues raised. The road map will necessarily contain a joint implementation strategy of an action plan consistent with the recommendations of the HLTM. The Tripartite Working Group agreed upon by the tripartite partnership themselves is currently completing the road map. Recognizing the inherent challenges in working out the details of the road map, the social partners in the Philippines, some of whom are in this Committee, have themselves requested more time to provide input. The Government finds this request reasonable. Allowing more time for tripartite consensus on such critical matters can never be characterized as a failure. On these specific cases, particularly allegations of murder, violence and so on, the Government reiterates that it does not condone any murder or violence committed against any person. We reiterate the need to ensure proper categorization of these cases so that only cases that arise out of or have causal connection with trade union activity should be placed under the scrutiny of the Committee.

The Government gives assurance that it remains committed to promoting respect for international labour standards and will continue to work with the ILO in this regard.

Lastly, on behalf of the Philippine Government and the social partners of the Philippines, as well as on my personal behalf, let me take this opportunity to thank you, for the discipline, leadership and statesmanship that you have shown in ensuring the full conclusion of these proceedings. As we conclude this session let me wish all the distinguished delegates continuing inspiration in leading their sectors in the individual and collective pursuit of advancing social justice. May you all have safe travels back home.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2019, Publication: 108th ILC session (2019)



Written information provided by the Government

Civil liberties and trade union rights

1. Ongoing investigation by the Commission on Human Rights of a case of alleged harassment of several union officials and the Confederation for Unity, Recognition and Advancement of Government Employees (COURAGE) union activists

In a report dated 19 March 2019, the Commission on Human Rights – National Capital Region (CHR-NCR) stated that three (3) cases involving COURAGE have been resolved while the rest are still pending investigation. The three (3) cases resolved by the CHR-NCR contain the same disposition upon finding that the rights of the complainants to life, privacy, security and organization, have been violated. However, resolved cases are similar in the sense that the real identity of the persons behind the harassment could not be established for lack of direct evidence. Having no conclusive evidence linking the suspects to state forces, the CHR-NCR ruled that the cases be closed without prejudice to their reopening when new evidence surfaces.

2. Assassination of two trade union leaders in 2016, one of whom was gunned down in front of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) in Quezon City

Edilberto Miralles, 65 years old, National President of Kaisahan ng mga Drivers sa R&E Union of Filipino Workers (KADRE-UFW), a local union of R&E Transport, was shot dead by unidentified motorcycle riding criminals on 23 September 2016 in front of the NLRC Building in Quezon City. The PNP Anti-Cyber Crime Group released the result of video enhancement of the forensic digital examination conducted on the submitted CCTV footage that captured the crime scene. However, it appears that the suspects could not be clearly identified for the reason that they were wearing a face mask, ball cap and helmet, respectively.

On 12 April 2019, the Investigator-on-Case PSSg Jerome Dollente proceeded to the place of incident for ocular investigation, but as per report, there is none who could give any relevant information about the incident. Nevertheless, the Philippine National Police – Directorate for Investigation and Detective Management (PNP-DIDM) directed the National Capital Region Police Office to conduct a case review for the possible identification of suspects, and to proceed with continuous conduct of investigation to locate witnesses and identify the suspects.

During the Regional Tripartite Monitoring Body – National Capital Region (RTMB­NCR) on 9 May 2019, the PNP representative reported that the investigation is still ongoing and they have focused first on the technical aspect of the investigation (i.e. ballistic examination). It was also reported that the result of the ballistic and crossmatching examination on the recovered evidence, one (1) piece fired cartridge case of caliber 45 is not yet available.

Orlando Abangan, 35 years old, former organizer of Partido ng Manggagawa, was killed on 17 September 2016 at Sitio Lawis, Brgy. Maghaway, Talisay City, Cebu. In a report submitted by the PNP-DIDM on 3 April 2019, it was stated that Police Regional Office No. 7 was directed by the PNP headquarters to conduct a case review for possible filing of case, to convince the parents of minor witnesses and victim’s relatives to testify, and to conduct background investigation or profiling of alleged suspect Julian Bonghanoy, Jr. Concurrently, the case was docketed in the Commission of Human Rights – Region VII (CHR-VII) as CHR-VII-2016-0784 (CEB) for Violation of the Right to Life. In its resolution, CHR-VII stated that in the conduct of investigation, it was found that the killing of Orlando Abangan is not related to his being a labour leader as the same is anchored on a personal grudge. It was discovered that the victim got the ire of Julian Bonghanoy, Jr., a private individual, when the former kept wearing a face mask and passing by the spot check of the latter in September 2016.

There is insufficient evidence on record to conclude that the death of Orlando Abangan constitutes an extrajudicial killing (EJK) pursuant to the criteria provided under A.O. 35. There is likewise no evidence that the killing is drug-related. Hence, CHR-VII ruled that his killing falls outside the jurisdiction of the CHR, as it is an ordinary crime falling under the criminal investigation of the police. Verily, CHR-VII recommends that the investigation of the case be finally closed and terminated at the level of the CHR, and that assistance is extended to the law enforcement in the identification and prosecution of the killers of Orlando Abangan.

Out of the 70 cases inventoried and monitored by the National Tripartite lndustrial Peace Council – Monitoring Body through its regional structures, 50 transpired under the nine-year Arroyo Administration, while 18 cases transpired under the Aquino Administration. The two (2) new cases of extrajudicial killings involving Edilberto Miralles and Orlando Abangan were recorded under the present administration.

(Chart not included)

The considerable decline in reported cases of EJK is attributed to the valuable efforts toward strengthening partnership between and among social partners. Social partnership and collaborative efforts have come a long way since the high-level mission in 2009. The Government, in cooperation with our social partners, remains steadfast in its commitment to promote and protect the workers’ constitutionally guaranteed and fundamental rights and welfare, and all its efforts are consistently geared towards strengthened and improved application of core labour standards.

3. ITUC’s concern that the recently declared war by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) against so-called “reds” is reminiscent of earlier years when union and labour organizers were harassed, arrested, jailed, abducted and murdered after being tagged as “reds” by the military

In our previous reply to the International Centre for Trade Union Rights (ICTUR), it was emphasized that in a DOLE (Department of Labor and Employment) Regional Tripartite Monitoring Body (RTMB) meeting on 12 March 2018, the information gathered from the representatives of the Armed Forces of the Philippines – Human Rights Office (AFP-HRO) revealed that the activities conducted in Compostela Valley, Mindanao were actually barangay visitations under the Community Support Program (CSP) of the AFP. The CSP is a community­oriented and issue-oriented operational concept employed in conflict-affected areas and conflict-prone areas. It is a multi-stakeholder, community-based, and people-oriented peace and development effort aimed to establish, develop and protect conflict-resilient communities.

The visitations under the CSP were conducted by the AFP as third-party facilitators together with barangay officials and other government agencies, to determine the gaps in the barangay’s needs (i.e. health and education services). Furthermore, the AFP-HRO clarified that union members were not being discriminated or singled-out during these activities since all residents were included in the visitations.

Moreover, the DOLE, in multiple communications, has called on the AFP and PNP to ensure the observance of the Guidelines on the Conduct of the DOLE, DILG, DND, DOJ, AFP and PNP Relative to the Exercise of Workers’ Rights and Activities, which was developed and signed by the representatives and principals of the concerned government agencies, along with labour and employers’ representatives. This was done to ensure that operations on the ground are conducted in accordance with the Guidelines.

Issued on 7 May 2012, the Guidelines aim to ensure the effective exercise of trade union rights and the prevention of violations of workers’ rights, in a climate free from violence, pressure, fear and duress of any kind from any organization, and to resolve the issues of violence and impunity ensuing from the intervention of security and peacekeeping forces, particularly of the military, police, local chief executives and company security personnel during the exercise of workers’ rights.

The Guidelines specifically state that labour disputes shall be under the primary and sole jurisdiction of DOLE and/or its appropriate agencies. Members of the AFP, PNP and other law enforcement agencies, including Barangay Tanod/BPSO and company security personnel/security guards shall not intervene in labour disputes.

The Guidelines also provided that the AFP may intervene only in the following cases:

(a) expressly requested in writing either through mail, email, fax or any similar means by the DOLE, through its regional offices; or

(b) a criminal act has been committed, is being committed, or is about to be committed through overt acts in accordance with Rule 113 of the Revised Criminal Procedures whether or not it arises out of the labour dispute; or

(c) in cases of actual violence arising out of a labour dispute.

Under the Guidelines, “Actual Violence refers to an ongoing and intentional use of physical force or power, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death or destruction of or damage of property”.

The Guidelines further provide that AFP units/personnel must not engage in labelling/tagging/red-baiting personalities/organizations unless these are based on accurate, verified, validated and confirmed reports and/or documentary evidence.

Consequently, the AFP-HRO issued directives and guidelines to all military units under the 10th Infantry Division (10ID) relative to the Labor Code and rights of workers. The 10ID likewise distributed to its ranks the Guidelines to serve as guide to AFP personnel during engagements with labour unions.

As part of the commitment of the AFP and PNP in integrating the Labor Code and the Guidelines to their education programme, two (2) activities were already conducted in coordination with DOLE Regional Office XI and DOLE Compostela Valley Field Office, to wit:

(a) Lecture/orientation on Labor Code, labour unions’ rights and other relevant topics concerning employment at the headquarters of the 10ID, Brgy. Tuboran, Mawab, Compostela Valley Province on 1 February 2019, with 97 participants from AFP and PNP PRO 11 and 12.

(b) Lecture/orientation on freedom of association and trade unionism at Datu Dalunto Hall, headquarters of 10ID, Brgy. Tuboran, Mawab, Compostela Valley Province on 7 May 2019, with participants from PNP PRO 11 and 12, Deputy Commanders of Infantry Brigades, CSP Officers, Commanders and S3 of 10CMOBn, Division TRIAD Staff and ADC, 10ID.

4. Progress made by the Tripartite Validating Teams, the NTIPC-MB and other relevant bodies in ensuring the collection of the necessary information to bring the pending cases of violence to the courts and the outcome in this regard

Albeit the approval on the funding and the designation of labour and employers’ representatives who will compose the said Tripartite Validating Teams, this initiative has yet to sail in view of the risks involved, particularly with the team members’ security during operations. The designated sectoral representatives reconsidered the gravity of the functions and the dangers attending the conduct of field interviews, investigation, and first-hand data gathering.

Nevertheless, with the issuance of the previously mentioned Administrative Order No. 32, series of 2018, on the RTMB Operational Guidelines, the creation of Tripartite Validating Teams has been further institutionalized and strengthened. Security concerns of members were likewise addressed through the provision that the Tripartite Validating Team may request security assistance from the PNP and the AFP if so warranted.

Furthermore, the Government strictly reiterates that the cases are progressing under regular criminal procedures with the constant efforts of the tripartite partners. The availability of reports relies heavily on police investigations and regular court proceedings, the progress of which may be affected by lack of material witnesses. The Government, in cooperation with its social partners, continues to monitor and fast­track all cases, in line with upholding the constitutional rights to speedy trial and due process. These extensive efforts are evidenced by all the previous reports and replies by the Government to ail requests forwarded by both international and domestic bodies/organizations.

5. Reforms towards providing sufficient witness protection and building the capacity of prosecutors, enforcers and other relevant actors, especially in the conduct of forensic investigations

Part of the DOLE–ILO–EU GSP+ Project are activities and initiatives that aim to enhance the knowledge and capacities of concerned state actors, including the police, military, and local chief executives, as well as the social partners on the principles and application of ILO Conventions Nos 87 and 98.

On 14–16 November 2018, a Multisectoral Trainers’ Training on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining was held at Quest Hotel in Clark, Pampanga. The said activity, which was attended by 32 representatives from different government agencies (i.e. Philippine Economic Zone Authority, Department of Interior and Local Government, Department of National Defense, Department of Justice, Armed Forces of the Philippines, Philippine National Police, and Commission on Human Rights) and from the labour and management sectors, aimed to inculcate among the various stakeholders and social partners common understanding and interpretation on international labour standards, specifically on the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining, as well as on the roles, functions and mechanisms that need to be observed relative to the exercise of workers’ rights and activities (i.e. Joint DOLE-PNP-PEZA Guidelines in the Conduct of PNP Personnel, Economic Zone Police and Security Guards, Company Security Guards and Similar Personnel During Labor Disputes; and the Guidelines on the Conduct of the DOLE, DILG, DND, DOJ, AFP and PNP Relative to the Exercise of Workers’ Rights and Activities).

The capacitated social partners and stakeholders may now be tapped as resource persons and advocates of freedom of association (FOA) and collective bargaining (CB), delivering lectures and/or learning sessions particularly on existing Guidelines governing the engagement of various social partners and stakeholders during labour disputes vis-à-vis the principles of FOA and CB, as it may be applied in their respective organizations.

Parallel with this undertaking is the development of sector-specific tools: (a) a “Workers Training Manual on Freedom of Association” which is intended to enhance capacities of workers’ representatives to participate in existing monitoring mechanisms on violations on workers’ civil liberties and trade union rights to organize; and (b) a “Diagnostics of Compliance with Labor Standards: A Checklist for Smal1Enterprises” which is an employers’ tool for diagnosing the level of compliance to labour standards among small enterprises and for providing concrete remedies to address compliance issues.

On the other hand, the DILG, together with the Local Government Academy, is now working with the ILO Country Office and the DOLE to explore the possible incorporation of international labour standards, particularly freedom of association and collective bargaining, and the Guidelines in the regular orientations and/or trainings of local chief executives. The Commission on Human Rights (CHR), with the help of a consultant engaged by the ILO Country Office, is also in the process of formulating and finalizing its own FOA training module.

Apart from these agency and sector-specific tools and modules, an FOA e-learning module is now being finalized as part of the DOLE’s Labor and Employment Education Services (LEES). Building upon existing documents and materials from previous FOA and CB initiatives, the e-learning module includes topics on:

- international labour standards and labour rights;

- international labour standards;

- ILO principles on freedom of association and collective bargaining;

- the Philippine context: right to self-organization;

- tripartite monitoring bodies on the application of international labour standards and other related investigative and monitoring mechanisms;

- Guidelines relative to the exercise of workers’ rights, particularly the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining.

The Guidelines governing the conduct that must be observed during the exercise of workers’ rights and activities are also being reviewed for amendments and/or updating.

6. Progress on the cases of Rolando Pango, Florencio “Bong” Romano and Victoriano Embang

On the case of Rolando Pango, the Philippine National Police – Directorate for Investigation and Detective Management (PNP-DIDM) finds that the incident is related to agrarian issue/dispute. There are no existing trade union campaigns, rallies, pickets or demonstrations at the time of the incident. Nevertheless, the PNP-DIDM directed Police Regional Office No. 6 to conduct case review for the possible refiling of the case.

On the case of Florencio “Bong” Romano, a follow-up team went to the house of Benny Dimailig in Brgy. Lodlod, Lipa City to conduct interview, but failed to gather information on the incident. The PNP-DIDM directed the Police Regional Office No. 4A to conduct case review for the possible identification of the suspects and refiling of the case, and to exert more efforts in the investigation to locate the witnesses. A035 IAC is yet to deliberate on the Romano case considering that the committee has not yet reconvened. The release of the family’s claims with SSS have already been facilitated through the RTMB in Region 4-A.

As to the case of Victoriano Embang, based on the foregoing investigation and with the cooperation of some witnesses and result of examinations on the evidence recovered, a case of murder was filed against the suspects Ramoncito lsona alias “Ramon” and Ryan Yana alias “Ryan” docketed under CC No. 4480 with no bail recommended. Moreover, a warrant of arrest has already been issued. The Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) was directed to create a tracker team for the manhunt operation against the at-large suspects and for the coordination with BID for the watch list/wanted list of the suspects.

As was stated in previous reports, the Government herein reiterates that all of the aforesaid cases are currently being handled and investigated through the regular process of criminal investigation and prosecution. Hence, the availability of reports relies heavily on police investigations and regular court proceedings, the progress of which may be affected by a number of circumstances, such as the lack of material witnesses.

The burden of proof required to support conviction in a criminal case is proof beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, criminal prosecutions rely heavily upon proving beyond reasonable doubt the existence of the elements of the crime charged. Evidence must be established to support criminal prosecution and conviction, as required by the constitutional precept on due process of law.

7. Progress of the legislative agenda

The Government, in coordination with its social partners, has been consistent in its efforts to address emerging labour, economic and social concerns affecting workers’ rights and exercise thereof, amidst the emerging forms of evolving employment relationships brought by globalization and trade liberalization. Significantly, the Government’s initiatives to promote freedom of association and collective bargaining are anchored on the thrust towards securing employment and addressing various issues and concerns brought about by the increasing forms of non-standard work arrangements and the huge diversity of workers whose jobs are outside the standard employment relationship.

Standard employment relationship is described as: (a) full-time work; (b) under a contract of employment for unlimited duration; (c) with a single employer; and (d) protected against unjustified dismissal. This leads to a precarious work formula incorporating any or all of the following elements: (a) work of no guaranteed/specified/regular hours; (b) fixed, limited duration of contract; (c) multiple or disguised employers; and (d) no protection against dismissal. Precarious work does not involve stability and security in the workplace.

Hence, numerous reforms were pursued based on a clear understanding that “secured employment is the best enabling environment for freedom of association”.

The following initiatives and reforms are products of tripartite efforts – labour, management, and government – and are geared towards the attainment and sustainment of decent work and industrial peace based on the principles of inclusive growth and social justice.

(a) Security of Tenure Bill. The Security of Tenure Bill has been approved by the House of Representatives on 29 January 2018 and has been transmitted to and received by the Senate on 31 January 2018. The President of the Philippines certified the bill as urgent on 21 September 2018, and is now nearing passage after it has passed Third Reading in the Senate on 22 May 2019. The Bill is now set for a bicameral conference between the House and the Senate. lt could be noted that the provisions of the Bill are in harmony with the thrust of the Executive Order No. 51, and that it is among the Legislative-Executive Development Advisory Council (LEDAC) priority measures as its passage is expected to have a positive impact to the exercise of workers’ rights particularly of freedom of association and collective bargaining.

(b) Executive Order No. 51, series of 2018. The President signed on 1 May 2018 the Executive Order No. 51, series of 2018, implementing article 106 of the Labor Code of the Philippines, as amended, to Protect the Right to Security of Tenure of Ali Workers based on Social Justice in the 1987 Philippine Constitution. EO 51 expressly declares that contracting or subcontracting, when undertaken to circumvent the workers’ right to security of tenure, self-organization and collective bargaining, and peaceful concerted activities pursuant to the 1987 Philippine Constitution, is strictly prohibited.

The EO further states that the Secretary of Labor and Employment may, by appropriate issuances, in consultation with the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council under article 290(c) of the Labor Code, as amended, declare activities which may be contracted out.

(c) DOLE Department Order No. 174, series of 2017. DOLE issued on 16 March 2017 Department Order No. 174, series of 2017, which is the new implementing rules and regulations of the Labor Code provisions governing contracting or subcontracting in the Philippines. It was published last 18 March 2017, and took effect on 3 April 2017.

DO 174-17 is a product of comprehensive and inclusive area-wide consultations involving all sectors (i.e. formal, informal, public, migrant, women and youth). There had been five (5) focus group discussions, three (3) area-wide labour summits, and 17 sectoral meetings. Also, this had been discussed by the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council which convened on 7 March 2017.

The continuous engagements and intensive consultations with the concerned sectors that are being conducted facilitate the formulation of responsive policies and measures that will ensure full respect of labour standards and the fundamental principles and rights at work, in view of the prevalence of short-term or fixed-term work arrangements which have posed challenges undermining the workers’ right to security of tenure. As the Government now sets the place for genuine reforms on flexibility and job security, it simultaneously fosters a climate conducive to the unhampered exercise of workers’ rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining.

Updates on proposed legislative measures aimed to ensure that any individual residing in the territory of a State, whether or not they have a residence or a working permit, benefit from the trade union rights provided by the Convention

House Bill No. 4448, “An Act Allowing Aliens to Exercise their Right to Self-Organization and Withdrawing Regulation of Foreign Assistance to Trade Unions, amending for the purpose Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines” was filed before the 17th Congress on 16 November 2016. This bill: (a) extends the right to self-organization to aliens in the Philippines; and (b) withdraws the prohibition of foreign trade union organizations to engage in trade union activities and the regulation of foreign assistance to Philippine trade unions.

House Bill No. 1354, “An Act Allowing Foreign Individuals or Organizations to Engage in Trade Union Activities and to Provide Assistance to Labor Organizations or Groups of Workers, amending for the purpose articles 269 and 270 of Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines” was filed on 11 July 2016. This bill proposes to amend the Labor Code by: (a) allowing foreign individuals and foreign organizations to engage in trade union activities in the Philippines; and (b) allowing the extension of foreign assistance to labour organizations and workers’ groups.

With the closing of the 17th Congress, these bills are expected to be refiled in the 18th Congress.

Measures taken to ensure that all workers, without distinction whatsoever, are able to form and join the organizations of their own choosing

House Bill No. 8767, “An Act Strengthening the Constitutional Rights of Government Employees to Self-Organization, Collective Negotiation and Peaceful Concerted Activities and Use of Voluntary Modes of Dispute Settlement” was filed on 11 December 2018. It was with the Committee on Civil Service and Professional Regulation since 12 December 2018. This proposed measure is intended to address the gaps in public sector labour relations particularly on the protection of the right to organize, facilities to be afforded to public sector employees’ organizations, procedures for determining the terms and conditions of employment, civil and political rights, and settlement of disputes arising or in connection with the determination of terms and conditions of employment. This provides that ail public sector employees, including those under different forms of public service work arrangements such as job order, contract of service, on memorandum of understanding, or casual, are eligible to join or assist an employees’ organization in the organizational unit.

House Bill Nos 4553 and 5477, “An Act Establishing a Civil Service Code of the Philippines and For Other Purposes” are pending with the House Committee on Civil Service and Professional Regulation. On the other hand, Senate Bill No. 641, “An Act Establishing the Philippine Civil Service Reform Code and For Other Purposes” is pending with the Senate Committee on Civil Service, Government Reorganization and Professional Regulation. These Bills seek to codify all laws and relevant issuances governing the civil service into a single, comprehensive statute, and to address relevant concerns which include among others government employees’ rights to self-organization and security of tenure.

With the closing of the 17th Congress, these Bills are expected to be refiled in the 18th Congress.

Updates on the proposed legislative measures aimed to reduce the minimum membership requirements or to lower excessively high requirements for registration

House Bill No. 1355, “An Act Reducing the Minimum Membership Requirement for Registration of Unions or Federations and Streamlining the Process of Registration, amending for this purpose Articles 234, 235, 236 and 237 of Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines” was filed on 11 July 2016. This bill seeks to modify the restrictions imposed on the process of union formation by introducing amendments to the Labor Code, as follows: (a) lower the minimum membership requirement from 20 per cent to 10 per cent; (b) reduce the number of affiliated local chapters required for purposes of registration as a federation from ten (10) to five (5); and, (c) develop a system of online union registration of unions.

House Bill No. 4446, “An Act Establishing an Efficient System to Strengthen Workers’ Right to Self-Organization and Collective Bargaining, amending for the purpose Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines” was filed on 16 November 2016. This Bill aims to: (a) remove the requirements for the registration of local chapters, upholding the principle that the registration of unions is only ministerial on the part of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE); (b) promote “employee free choice” by making it easier for workers to join and/or establish unions through “majority signup”; (c) strengthen enforcement through an injunctive relief provision which levels the playing field with management by giving employees equal access to such measure, and imposition of fine and criminal liability of employer charged with unfair labour practice; and (d) prevent management intervention and refusal to bargain through “first contract mediation and arbitration”.

Senate Bill No. 1169, “An Act Further Strengthening Workers’ Right to Self-Organization by amending for this purpose Articles 240[234](C), 242[235], 243[236], 244[237] and 285 [270] of Presidential Decree No. 442, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines, as amended” was filed on 22 September 2016. This bill aims to ease the minimum membership requirements for registration of independent unions from 20 per cent to 5 per cent, and for federations from 10 to 5 duly recognized bargaining agent/local chapters. lt also seeks to institutionalize online registration, decentralization or registration process to DOLE Provincial or Field Offices and the one-day process cycle time. Moreover, the Bill aims to remove the “prior authority” requirement on foreign assistance to local trade union activities.

With the closing of the 17th Congress, these Bills are expected to be refiled in the l8th Congress.

Updates on proposed legislative measures aimed to ensure that government intervention leading to compulsory arbitration is limited to essential service in the strict sense of the term

House Bill No. 175, 711 and 1908, “An Act Rationalizing Government Interventions in Labor Disputes by Adopting the Essential Services Criteria in the Exercise of the Assumption or Certification Power of the Secretary of Labor and Employment, and Decriminalizing Violations Thereof, Amending for this purpose Articles 263, 264 and 272 of Presidential Decree 442, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines, as amended and For Other Purposes” were filed on 30 June 2016. As the title suggests, these bills seek to rationalize government interventions in labour disputes by adopting the Essential Services Criteria in the exercise of the assumption or certification power of the Secretary of Labor and Employment, providing conditions in its exercise, and to decriminalize violations thereof. The counterpart of these bills in the Senate is Senate Bill No. 1221, “An Act Rationalizing Government Interventions in Labor Disputes by Adopting the Essential Services Criteria in the Exercise of the Assumption or Certification Power of the Secretary of Labor and Employment, and Decriminalizing Violations Thereof, amending for this purpose Articles 278[263], 279[264] and 287[272] of Presidential Decree 442, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines, as amended and For Other Purposes” which was filed on 25 October 2016.

House Bill No. 4447, “An Act Strengthening the Workers’ Right to Strike, Amending for the purpose Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines” was filed on 16 November 2016. This Bill seeks to modify the penalty for violation of orders, prohibitions or injunctions issued by the Secretary of Labor and direct participation in illegal strike, from dismissal or imprisonment, to disciplinary measure of payment of fine.

With the closing of the 17th Congress, these Bills are expected to be refiled in the 18th Congress.

Updates on proposed legislative measures aimed to ensure that no penal sanctions are imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike, even if non­compliant with bargaining or notice requirements

This concern is likewise addressed by the afore-cited proposed measures namely, House Bill Nos 175, 711, 1908 and 4447. With the closing of the 17th Congress, these bills are expected to be refiled in the 18th Congress.

Updates on proposed legislative amendments removing the need for government permission for foreign assistance to trade unions

House Bill No. 4448, “An Act Allowing Aliens to Exercise their Right to Self­Organization and Withdrawing Regulation of Foreign Assistance to Trade Unions, amending for the purpose Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines” was filed on 16 November 2016. This bill: (a) extends the right to self-organization to aliens in the Philippines; and (b) withdraws the prohibition of foreign trade union organizations to engage in trade union activities and the regulation of foreign assistance to Philippine trade unions.

House Bill No. 1354, “An Act Allowing Foreign lndividuals or Organizations to Engage in Trade Union Activities and to Provide Assistance to Labor Organizations or Groups of Workers, amending for the purpose articles 269 and 270 of Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines” was filed on 11 July 2016. This Bill proposes to amend the Labor Code by: (a) allowing foreign individuals and foreign organizations to engage in trade union activities in the Philippines; and (b) allowing the extension of foreign assistance to labour organizations and workers’ groups.

With the closing of the 17th Congress, these Bills are expected to be refiled in the 18th Congress.

8. Review and updating of the operational guidelines of the investigating and monitoring bodies in order to further strengthen and improve their operationalization as well as coordination and interplay

Previously reported was the Development Cooperation Project of the DOLE, the ILO and the EU Generalized System of Preferences Plus (EU GSP+) that aims to improve the capacity of labour, employers and the Government towards better implementation and application of the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining. One of the Project’s concrete outputs is the review of the existing mechanisms in addressing cases of violations on workers’ civil liberties and trade union rights. The study reviews the operational guidelines and process structures of the three investigative, prosecutorial, and/or monitoring mechanisms addressing cases of violations on freedom of association principles in the Philippines – the DOLE-led NTIPC­Monitoring Body and Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies (RTMB); the DOJ-led A035 Inter-Agency Committee; and the CHR-led National Monitoring Mechanisms.

After reviewing existing policies and guidelines, and gathering insights and views from key people (i.e. members of public and private sector unions, focal persons from concerned agencies/organizations, etc.), gaps and issues in the operationalization of these mechanisms have been identified, as well as problem areas encountered by investigative agencies such as the Philippine National Police (PNP), Commission on Human Rights (CHR), and to some extent, the Armed Forces of the Philippines – Human Rights Office (AFP-HRO). Recommendations were then enumerated to help address the gaps or blockades in obtaining substantial progress specific to labour­related cases of extrajudicial killings or violations of ILO Conventions Nos 87 and 98, taking note of the findings and recommendations raised by the ILO direct contacts mission to the Philippines back in 2017. These recommendations shall be taken up by concerned agencies/organizations for consideration and possible implementation.

Discussion by the Committee

Government representative – This invitation is a great opportunity to report to the Committee on what our country had done in the recent past, what we have been doing in the present, and what we intend to do in the near future to further advance the freedom of association in the Philippines.

In pursuance of the recommendations of the 2017 direct contacts mission, the Philippine Government and its social partners adopted the National Action Plan on the Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining with the support from the ILO Manila and European Union Generalized Scheme of Preference (GSP+). We are of the belief that the most appropriate enabling environment for the free and full exercise of the freedom of association is a secured employment in safe and healthy working conditions in all places of work free from violence and harassment. The 2019 Philippine Workers’ and Trade Union Report on the Sustainable Development Goals even notes that the rampant contractualization and informalization of formal work is one of the causes of union decline. This scheme impairs the workers’ inherent rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining. Job insecurity compounded by the low labour standard compliance, unsafe working conditions and inadequate social protection is a creeping grave threat to the freedom of association.

Given this consideration, the Philippine Government has intensified its inspection since 2016. Inspection already covers matters involving unions and collective bargaining agreements and more importantly issue on security of tenure. From 2016–18, we have inspected more than 180,000 establishments covering more than 12 million workers and resulting to the regularization of more than 400,000 workers. This intensified inspection has created a wider democratic space for freedom of association. This has never been done before. The Philippine Government have an additional 136 labour inspectors as of December 2018, and another 500 more labour inspectors this year. All inspectors were trained and capacitated with the assistance of ILO Manila and support from the United States Department of Labor. In the spirit of social dialogue and tripartite engagement, the Philippine Government has enlisted trade unions’ and employers’ representatives as deputized labour inspectors. They can now join labour inspectors in the conduct of inspection of establishments. As of January 2019, we have 241 deputized social partners.

Last year, our President promulgated Executive Order No. 51, which sets the underlying policy of the present Government in dealing with the issue of job security which to our mind is an indispensable component of the freedom of association. To ensure full and free exercise of this right however and given the inherent limitation on the executive power in a working democracy, this policy has to be pursued through legislation. Speaking of legislation, let me first share with the Committee major legislative reforms in labour and employment. Recently, the Philippine Government enacted the Expanded Maternity Law, the Telecommuting Act, the Social Security Reform Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Standards, the Universal Health Law and the Magna Carta of the Poor. These measures which will further enable more workers in the formal and informal sectors to exercise their freedom of association, are all in accord with the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals.

As this representation earlier stated, the most appropriate enabling environment for the free and full exercise of the freedom of association in our country is a secured employment in safe and healthy working conditions in all places of work free from violence and harassment. The proposed Security of Tenure Act has now passed the Philippine Congress. It is now awaiting endorsement to the President for his appropriate action. Job insecurity, low labour standard compliance, unsafe working conditions and inadequate social protection are the common proximate causes of labour disputes in the Philippines which disputes led sometimes unfortunately to reported cases of violence and harassment. On this note, let me assure the Committee that the institutionalized National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council–Monitoring Body (NTIPC-MB) continues to effectively function with the issuance of Administrative Order No. 32 defining the functional relationship of the NTIPC-MB and the Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies. There are 16 Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies across the country ready to be mobilized anytime and anywhere when needed. The Tripartite Validating Team whose volunteer members are assured of security assistance and funding may be engaged, if warranted. Mobilizing the concerned Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies at the regional level brings about immediate response and concrete appropriate function. Most recently, the concerned Regional Tripartite Monitoring Body in coordination with the concerned Philippine National Police has been immediately mobilized to investigate and monitor one reported case in Southern Luzon.

It is worthy to note that in view of the strengthened partnership between social partners and the functioning monitoring mechanism, we observe a marked decline in reported cases of killings. There were 50 reported cases from January 2001 to June 2010, 16 cases from July 2010 to June 2016 and three cases from July 2016 to December 2018. As we have previously indicated, of the 66 cases from 2001 to June 2016, 11 were considered Administrative Order 35 (AO35) cases. With specific reference to the observation in the report, the case of Miralles in 2016 is being investigated. The forensic digital examination conducted by the Philippine National Police (PNP) Anti-Cyber Crime Group on the submitted CCTV footage did not yield positive results. Investigator-on-Case could not also find any relevant information, thus the Philippine National Police – Directorate for Investigation and Detective Management (PNP-DIDM) continues to conduct case review for the possible identification of suspects. Now focusing on the technical aspect of the investigation, ballistic and cross-matching examination on the recovered evidence has been undertaken. Also referred in the report, the case of Abangan in 2016 has been investigated not only by the PNP but also independently of the Commission on Human Rights. The PNP continues to profile the alleged suspect, and to convince the parents of minor witnesses and victim’s relatives to testify. In a separate resolution, the Commission on Human Rights, an independent body, found that the incident is a private concern. Serious efforts to build a good case against the perpetrator continue. These two particular cases mentioned in the report are being continuously monitored by the Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies of the National Capital Region and Region VII. The cases of Embang in 2012, Pango in 2014 and Romano in 2015 are subject to further investigation. Like other previous cases, however, the lack or insufficiency of evidence hinders the successful investigation and prosecution. The new, yet fewer, reported cases are very unfortunate and by all parameters are condemnable in the strongest possible terms. These cases and all others were timely acted upon by the appropriate agencies to appropriate investigation, case build-up, prosecution and trial. These are now being closely monitored by the concerned Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies in the regions including the AO35 Inter-Agency Committee which will soon reconvene after the strategic planning conducted last March of 2019 regarding the inclusion of the Department through this representation in the Inter-Agency Committee and the provision of adequate assistance and protection to witnesses under the Witness Protection Program.

Consistent with the tripartite-agreed National Action Plan (2017–22), the Philippine Government has continuously conducted capacity-building trainings of social partners, prosecutors, enforcers and relevant actors, especially in criminal investigations last November of 2018 in Pampanga, 15 January 2019 in Cebu, 25 January 2019 in Davao and 4 February 2019 in Manila. We are now finalizing the “Training Manual on Freedom of Association” for workers, the “Diagnostics of Compliance with Labor Standards” for employers, the Freedom of Association (FOA) Training Module for the Commission on Human Rights and the FOA e-Learning Module on International Standards and Labour Rights for everyone. We already had exploratory meeting and workshop on 17 December 2018 and 7 March 2019, respectively, with the concerned Department, particularly, the Local Government Academy for the incorporation of international labour standards, specifically, freedom of association, and the Guidelines in the regular orientations and training of local chief executives, and another meeting in January and August 2018 with PNP and Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) on the inclusion of the same subjects in their curriculum and trainings.

At this point, and again with reference to the Report, we wish to clarify that the activities conducted by the Armed Forces of the Philippines-Human Rights Office in Mindanao, were actually barangay visitations under the Community Support Program of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. It is a community-oriented and issue-oriented operational concept employed in conflict affected areas. This was not meant to decimate trade unions. AFP has re-affirmed its commitment to the Guidelines. It even issued directives to all military units to respect the rights of workers. It likewise redistributed the Guidelines to personnel to guide them in their engagements. Recently, lectures and orientations on Freedom of Association and Trade Unionism, were held on 1 February 2019 and 7 May 2019 attended by AFP and PNP personnel.

Our work is not yet done. In the spirit of social dialogue, I call on our social partners, given our national conditions and circumstances, to work and continue to work on and further pursue significant reforms at the national level for the realization of our social contract as embodied in the National Action Plan. This representation so requests, and with the usual support of our social partners, to be given the sufficient reasonable opportunity to complete and accomplish the activities and programmes in the National Action Plan within the tripartite-agreed specific time-bound deadlines. While it is true that trade unions and employers’ groups are not part of Government, we are all partners in governance.

To conclude, the Philippine Government continues to affirm its strong and unwavering commitment to obtain substantial progress in compliance with the Convention, in law and practice, and to ensure a better enabling environment for the free and full exercise of the Freedom of Association in the Philippines. Maraming Salamat, Ginoong Tagapangulo.

Worker members – We recall that in 2016, the Committee examined the Government’s application of the Convention. This resulted in a direct contact mission in 2017 with urgent recommendations regarding civil liberties, trade union rights and the promotion of a climate conducive to freedom of association. However, since then the protection of civil liberties and rights have further deteriorated and the Government has still not made any progress in amending its national legislation after it has repeatedly announced to the supervisory bodies its efforts.

The rising number of extrajudicial killings is simply shocking. The Committee of Experts noted with regret that there remain numerous cases of trade union murders and other acts of violence for which the perpetrators have yet to be identified and punished. Moreover, the Committee of Experts note with deep concern the new and grave allegations of the assassination of two trade union leaders. Indeed, just two weeks ago, Leonides Dennis Sequeña, a veteran trade union organizer was assassinated while meeting a group of workers. He was shot by a gunman who arrived riding on a motorcycle. Before his assassination, Mr Sequeña had been working on several petitions for certification elections in three companies inside the Cavite Export Processing Zone (EPZ) in Rosario. The politically charged atmosphere created by the military’s war on the so-called “reds” is a recipe for violence and reminiscent of the years when unionists were targeted, harassed, arrested, jailed, abducted and murdered after being tagged falsely as “reds”.

We call on the Government, as well as the military, to refrain from using language that may stigmatize trade unionists or condone any retaliatory acts against them for the views they defend. We also note with deep concern the military’s intervention in industrial disputes. We recall that between 26 May and 2 June 2017 armed soldiers threatened striking workers of a tropical fruit company and broke up a picket. These military interventions in trade union affairs occur with approval of the Government which on several occasions threatened striking workers with military and police action. As the Committee and other parts of the supervisory system have repeatedly highlighted, a climate of violence and murder of trade union leaders constitutes a serious obstacle to the exercise of trade union rights and a grave violation of the principles of freedom of association. The Government’s consistent failure to protect workers and their leaders from such acts creates an atmosphere of impunity that reinforces the climate of fear and uncertainty and harms the exercise of trade union rights.

The extrajudicial killings and the violence perpetrated against workers is now at the level of a humanitarian crisis. Yet, the Government continues to refrain from putting effective monitoring mechanisms into place to address this impunity and ensure accountability. We note that the Inter-Agency Committee (IAC) on extra-legal killings, enforced disappearances, torture and other grave violations of the right of life, liberty and security of persons (AO35) has yet to reconvene due to pending staff changes in the Department of Justice. We note that the NTIPC-MB is a non-judicial or investigative body monitoring matters of industrial peace. It is alarming that the NTIPC submitted 65 cases of extrajudicial killings affecting trade unionists but only 11 were verified by the IAC. The cases of Florencio “Bong” Romano, discussed by the Committee in 2016, and of Victoriano Embang, murdered in 2014, are still under police investigation. The IAC must be given resources to investigate and prosecute all complaints of extrajudicial killings of trade unionists. The NTIPC must also be resourced to monitor the climate of justice and security for trade unionists. We call on the Government to provide all necessary resources for the speedy and effective investigation of the serious allegations of killings of trade union leaders and guarantee the security of witnesses.

We deeply regret that over many years, various aspects of the legislation of Philippines that are non-compliant with the Convention remain intact and are applied in practice. There appears to be an absence of good faith by the Government to work expeditiously to adopt the necessary measures that would bring its legislation into compliance with the Convention. For a number of years now, the Government has been referring to several bills that are still pending. For example, sections 284 and 287(b) of the Labor Code restrict foreigners from joining unions contrary to Article 2 of the Convention. The Government has pointed to House Bills No. 1354 and No. 4488 that allegedly, when passed, will permit foreign individuals to engage in trade union activities including self-organization. As noted by the Committee of Experts, these bills are still pending in spite of various sessions of the House of Representatives where they could have been adopted.

Numerous categories of workers are excluded from the right to form or join trade unions. They include workers in managerial positions or with access to confidential information; firefighters; prison guards and other public sector workers; temporary or outsourced workers; and workers without an employment contract. These exclusions stand in clear contradiction with Article 2, which affords the right to freedom of association to all workers without distinction. The Government has referred to House Bills Nos 4533 and 5477 and Senate Bill No. 641, which it claims will address these violations. However, it must also take necessary steps in good faith to ensure that these bills are finally passed into law with the full involvement of the social partners.

Moreover, there are aspects of the legislation that restrict the right to establish trade unions without previous authorization. Under section 240(c) of the Labor Code, independent unions must meet a membership threshold of 20 per cent in order to organize. The Committee of Experts have repeatedly made it clear that the minimum membership requirement was excessive and therefore constituted an obstacle to freely form workers’ organizations. The Government is pointing again at pending Bills that aim to reduce minimum threshold without providing a credible explanation concerning the delay in the adoption of the amendments that are necessary.

Furthermore, we are deeply concerned that Article 3 protections of non-interference and protection against interventions that impair the exercise of these freedoms are continuously undermined. Under section 278(g) the Government has the power to unilaterally intervene in labour disputes affecting essential services and to order compulsory arbitration. We note the Government’s issuance of Order No. 40-H-13 to align the list of industries of national interest with the Convention’s essential services. However, the Government retains an expansive instead of strict and limited definition of essential services contemplated by the Convention. The designation of essential services must correspond to those services whose interruption would directly endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The House of Representatives have been going through four bills to address these concerns under Bill Nos 175, 711, 1908 and 4447 and Senate Bill No. 1221. We stress the need for the Government to take urgent steps to ensure that a definition of essential services compliant with the Convention is adopted in consultation with social partners. In this context, it is also deeply troubling that sections 279 and 287 of the Labor Code impose penal sanctions against workers for participating in or carrying out a peaceful strike. This is undoubtedly a breach of Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention. And regrettably, the House Bills Nos 175, 711, 1908 and 4447, which aim to address this issue, are still pending in the House of Representatives. We regret that these Bills have been pending for several years now. The Government must take immediate and time-bound steps to ensure that no penal sanctions are imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike irrespective of the agreed procedure. Equally, we note that the requirement of section 285 of the Labor Code, for prior approval from the Secretary of Labour before trade unions can receive foreign assistance, violates Article 3 of the Convention. The Government has introduced House Bill No. 1354 and No. 4448 to withdraw the prohibition and regulate other aspects of foreign assistance to Philippine trade unions. Again, this has been pending for a while in the House of Representatives.

Finally, the Government has not given full effect to Article 5 of the Convention. Section 244 of the Labor Code sets an excessively high threshold of organizing ten union locals or chapters duly recognized as collective bargaining agents in order to register a federation or national union. Again, the Government has indicated that House Bill No. 1355, which reduces the minimum membership requirement, is pending, along with Senate Bill No. 1169. We are also deeply concerned about excessive use of short-term contracts and its negative impact on freedom of association. Legislative processes have been pending for too long without any concrete steps undertaken. We reiterate that supervisory bodies have noted the vital importance of social dialogue and tripartite consultation on matters of labour-related legislation and policy. We call on the Government to pursue full, frank and meaningful consultations on these Bills. It is our expectation that all necessary steps to ensure the amendments are adopted will be taken without further delay.

Employer members – We thank the Government for its comments, and also to the workers, because there was a lot of useful detail in the comments that have just been made. As we know, the Convention is a fundamental Convention ratified by the Philippines in 1953. The Philippines has ratified 37 Conventions, including all eight fundamental Conventions, and that is noteworthy because it means that they take the principles of these fundamentals seriously, or should do. This case has been examined by the Committee before, in 2007, 2009 and 2016, and there have been 15 observations from the Committee of Experts since 1995, including seven in the last ten years and that is again noteworthy. Countries that are commented on frequently, have issues that need to be dealt with more importantly. It is a long standing case, as we heard from the workers, it has got multiple features, and it is also a case involving the Convention, over which as we all know, from interminable comments, that there are issues, the employers have issues with. Just to recap, the employers disagree with the views of the Committee of Experts concerning the right to strike under the Convention and we hold the view that there are no ILO standards on strikes, and therefore, that the scope and conditions of the exercise of the right to strike should be regulated at the national level. So, insofar as the right of workers in the Philippines to take strike action is concerned, we would simply reflect that it is for the Government to regulate this matter.

On its face, this case is a case of systemic discrimination by the state against workers’ organizations and their members. I say on its face advisedly, as closer examination of the issues suggests that the case of the Philippines is actually not one story but two. The first is the specifics of the complaints of workers and unions, and the second is the Government’s responses, and the context of those responses. So, looking at each of those stories in turn.

In relation to the complaints of the unions and workers – over many years the Committee has received complaints of violations of trade union rights and worse, including the alleged killing of trade union leaders, arrests, and false criminal charges filed against trade union leaders, and physical assaults on striking workers. There are too many to detail here in the time available. Once again, the observations concern serious allegations of human rights violations, including: the killings and attempted assassination of trade union officials; the violent suppression of strikes and other collective actions by the police and the armed forces and; the harassment of unionists and prevention of people from joining trade unions in EPZs. Let me be clear, the employers in no way denigrate the seriousness of the issues brought to the attention of the Committee. However, it is important to note that these are not just issues of freedom of association, which is the subject of this case. They also include issues of human rights and by definition there are also cases of law and order. Cases such as these cannot go unchallenged, but, we have to be careful that we challenge them here in the context of freedom of association. We have no jurisdiction in the matters of law and order in particular, nor arguably human rights, although there are inevitable overlaps. Much of the detail of this year’s case is the same as last time it was discussed. The murders referred to in 2016 have been discussed before. So, we need to examine not just the details, but also whether the situation is getting better or worse and which bits are better or worse. This year it seems there are just as many, if not more issues, but also that the Government has a long way to go in dealing with them.

In relation to the Government’s response – the second story relates to the Government’s responses to the various allegations leveled against it. Over several years, its response has been multifaceted and on its face comprehensive. Regrettably however, it dates back several years and little seems to have changed in the interim. To recap, the Government for several years now, has provided information about its work on reforming its labour laws in conformity with the Convention. Two critically important elements of this activity have been what was called: (i) The National Monitoring Mechanism, which has a mandate to monitor the nation’s progress on the resolution of human rights violations, prioritizing, in the short term, cases of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and torture, and to provide legal and other services. We do acknowledge that several convictions for unlawful killings have resulted as a result of this, but there are many, many, unsolved issues, some of which have yet to even be investigated. (ii) The IAC on Extra-Legal Killings, Enforced Disappearances, Torture and Other Grave Violations of the Right to Life, Liberty and Security of Persons, which was created in November 2012 and also charged with the investigation of cases of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture and other grave human rights violations perpetrated by the state and non-state forces and to prioritize unsolved cases, and to create special investigation teams. We welcomed it at the time it was set up, but we note with regret, that it appears to have fallen to abeyance since this case was last discussed. This is a serious concern and the employers urge the Government to promptly resume the previous activities and address the growing back log of cases. We also echo the call of the Committee of Experts for the Government to report on progress made in ensuring the collection and processing of information that will bring cases of violence to the courts, and to report on the outcome of those cases. It is not sufficient, we believe, to have as we heard from the Government, 16 regional tripartite bodies that can be called upon when needed to investigate issues – when needed, is now and they should be active now.

While investigations into the allegations of acts against union members and officials are serious issues in their own right, so too is the context in which the Government must investigate these allegations. This makes the Philippines’ Human Security Act perhaps the heart of the second story. This Act reflects the Government’s commitment to preserve the security of its citizens against a long-standing background of political and civil instability, including armed insurrection. It is this background that the employers believe has not been given sufficient weight in the consideration of this case, both now and in the past. This is important because the IAC operational guidelines define extrajudicial killings so as to include cases where the victim was a member of, or was affiliated with, a labour organization, or was apparently mistaken or identified to be so, and the victim was targeted and hurt or killed because of the actual or perceived membership. Not every human rights violation is a breach of labour rights, this is especially true if this person against whom the violation was committed, was in fact committing an unlawful or criminal act at the time. It is therefore, vital to consideration of cases that it be made clear, what law was being transgressed and whether that law conforms to international standards. This is not always clear and any lack of clarity can only inhibit a fair consideration of the case. In the context of freedom of association, it is important to distinguish between cases where union members were specific targets because of their union membership or activities, or simply became victims, alongside other victims and other citizens, of more generally directed violence. We have a mandate in the first respect but we do not in the second. Unions have expressed concerns that the Human Security Act can be misused to suppress legitimate trade union activities. For its part, the Government has stated that this Act cannot be used against the exercise of trade union rights, especially legitimate trade union activities, and that guidelines exist to ensure that the armed forces and the police may only intervene in trade union activities if expressly requested to do so by the authorities. The evidence that we see in front of us, and that we heard is that, that may be more words than real. In terms of monitoring and investigation, employers welcomed the establishment of the National Monitoring Mechanism and the IAC, at the time. The trouble is that, while initially active, they seem to have fallen into disuse. We do understand that there has been a change of regime, and a number of activities have been interrupted in recent times. However while that is a fact, it is not an excuse. We urge the Government to “get back on track” as soon as possible.

The Government has previously indicated that it has engaged in cooperation with the ILO Manila, a technical cooperation programme on training and capacity building of all relevant stakeholders on international labour standards, including freedom of association and collective bargaining. We request that the Government provide an update on the status of this work and any results that have been achieved.

With respect to the Labor Code, we note government proposals to make changes to ensure greater consistency with international labour standards, particularly with the Convention and that a tripartite labour code review team was a partner in the drafting process. However, once again, this is a change that has been in train for a long time, it is a welcome change, but once again, it does need to be finished.

With respect to Article 2 of the Convention, which is the Right of workers to establish and join organizations. We note that Bill 5886, while allowing non-citizens to participate in trade union activities, only assigns the right to aliens with a valid working permit. Nor does it deal with concerns over the exclusion of trade union rights for certain public servants, the likes of firefighters, prison guards, and the like, public sector employees in policymaking positions or with access to confidential information.

We welcome the news that the Philippines has ratified the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151). However this is still a step short of reality. It is the domestic laws that will give effect to these Conventions that now need to be expedited and we again urge the Government to act quickly to bring these laws to fruition.

The Employers recall that, while it is possible under the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), which deals with the right to bargain collectively to exclude certain public servants from collective bargaining, this is not a matter contemplated by the Convention, which deals with the right to organize. Accordingly, the employers hope that the proposed legislative amendments and any other relevant legislative measures will be in accordance with the above-mentioned principles, to ensure that all workers, including those excluded from collective bargaining have the right to organize. Employers request the Government to provide information on all developments in this regard.

With respect to Article 3 of the Convention, concerning the right of organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate programs without interference, we note the Government’s indication that the proposed changes will harmonize the list of industries, essential industries, indispensable to the national interest. As in previous years, we welcome this initiative to limit the Government’s intervention leading to compulsory arbitration. However, once again we want to see the legislation enacted, we have heard about it for too long, we need to see it done. We also once again, welcome news that the thresholds to establish unions will be lowered so that the exercise of freedom of association in terms of establishing organizations is as free as possible. In relation to the Committee of Experts’ remarks about the principle according to which no penal sanctions should be imposed against workers for having carried out peaceful strikes we do have concerns. Given how my previous remarks about the Convention, given that there is no consensus about the existence of a right to strike, the Committee of Experts’ remarks can only be construed as a reference to the extent to which national law provides for penalties to be imposed in instances of unlawful strikes. We can only hope that the Government will adopt a balanced and fair approach to these matters.

In conclusion, the things that we need to see, or the one thing we need to see, is action. We would like to see the rejuvenation of the work of the IAC and what was the, National Monitoring Mechanism. We would like to see the amendments to the Labor Code brought into full conformity with the Convention, including permitting all workers and employers without distinction to form and operate organizations of their choosing. We want to Government to ensure that workers are not penalized exercising lawful rights under national law and we want to see an update as soon as possible on the status of the technical cooperation project established with the ILO, we hope that all of these matters will be expedited as soon as possible.

Employer member, Philippines – The Employer members are in full accord with the report of the Government representative in the significant improvements with respect to the application in law and practice of freedom of association under the Convention. They also support the 2017 National Action Plan on the Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining and its concomitant action points in respect of civil rights and trade union rights. In the legislative issues, in response to the recommendations and comments from the ILO supervisory bodies, there are indeed several remarkable and consequential reforms on labour and employment as heretofore narrated before by our Government representative. The Employer members wish to add a landmark but albeit, controversial law, that gave more flesh and meaning to the right of workers to organize and conduct collective bargaining, rights guaranteed under our Constitution and our law. We said it is controversial as there are provisions that raised serious concerns by business. This law relaxes and lessens the once too strict and complex prerequisites for union recognition. It hastens local enterprise union organizing by simply letting a federation or national union issue a charter certificate as its local chapter. While the issuance of a chapter certificate gives the local chapter legal personality only for purposes of filing a petition for certification election, there are features in the law that raise hackles from the business community, among which are the following: (i) In a petition for certification election, the employer is considered merely as a by stander. The employer’s role in such proceedings shall be limited to being notified or informed of the petition and to submit the list of employees during the pre-election conference. It creates a sad spectacle of the Government and the union talking about the future of the company while its social partner, the employer, is being left out from the conference; (ii) the rank and file union and the supervisors’ union operating within the same establishment may join the same federation or national union. This gave rise to concerns from employers on the issue of conflict of interest. Would this not affect the objectivity of the supervisor when he or she is being called to investigate an erring rank and file employee? In the event of a strike of one, would the other maintain its independence and not sympathize with the other?

Be that as it may, the Employer members accept this law as a stark reality. Dura lex, sed lex. The law may be hard, but it is the law. As responsible social partners, subscribing to the Convention and Convention No. 98, the employers will respect and obey the law. Employer members welcomed the visits of the high-level mission of 2007, the Direct Contact of 2017 regarding complaints on alleged violations of the Convention and Convention No. 98. With due deference, however, the Employers are concerned that most of these complaints have proven to be untrue after a true investigation. While we condemned in the strongest terms the shooting of a union organizer on the second day of this month while meeting with a group of UN members, which we hope that the culprits will be put behind bars soon, it is worthwhile noting that of the 71 reported extrajudicial killings and attempted murders, 27, or 38 per cent, from 2001 up until present year, are classified as suspected to be labour related. Of these 27, only two are pending in court, another two happened due to personal grudges such as traffic altercation, etc. The remaining 23 were dismissed, or under investigation still, or shelved due to lack of direct evidence. Against this background, the Employer members humbly and respectfully suggest to the Committee of Experts to exercise some due diligence in assiduously verifying and validating any complaint of alleged violation of the Convention and Convention No. 98 to determine if there is indeed a probable cause to entertain such complaint. In closing, the Employer members assure the Committee of their continued support and cooperation in the performance of its functions.

Government member, Romania – I am speaking on behalf of the European Union and its Member States. The Candidate Countries Montenegro and Albania and the EFTA country Norway, Member of the European Economic Area, align themselves with this statement. We are committed to the promotion of universal ratification and implementation of the eight fundamental Conventions as part of our Strategic Framework on Human Rights. We call on all countries to protect, promote and respect all human and labour rights and we attach great importance to freedom of association and the right to organize. Compliance with the Convention and Convention No. 98 is essential in this respect.

We wish to recall the commitments made by the Philippines within the framework of the GSP+ Agreement and the Framework Agreement on partnership and cooperation with the EU and its Member States, in particular commitment to ratify and effectively implement international Conventions on human and labour rights. In support of this, the EU is implementing a joint project with the Philippines on strengthening the capacity of public administrations to apply the eight fundamental ILO Conventions with a specific focus on freedom of association and collective bargaining.

Despite some progresses in overall promotion of the social and labour rights agenda and the commitments by the authorities to address the issues of concern, we deeply regret that this case is again on the list of the Committee, after its discussion in 2016. We thank the Government for good engagement and the detailed information additionally provided. However, we note with serious concern that after several years, numerous cases of violations of freedom of association remain unresolved, including trade-union murders, anti-union violence and police violence during peaceful strike action. We are also concerned by the lack of proper investigations and prosecutions of serious cases. We reiterate that impunity cannot and should not be tolerated in any society. We welcome the steps taken in recent years to establish monitoring bodies and institutions, including the IAC entrusted with the duty to investigate extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and torture, the NTIPC-MB and the Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies. However, we regret that the IAC is yet to reconvene. We note that provisions have been made to set up Tripartite Validating Teams to support the work of the regional monitoring bodies. We call on the Government to take prompt measures to reiterate the proper functioning of the IAC and we expect the established bodies to appropriately investigate all cases, punish the perpetrators and prevent the repetition of similar events. Recognizing the seriousness of the allegations and the complexity of the cases, we are cooperating with the Government in the area of witness protection and capacity-building of prosecutors, enforcers and other relevant actors. We also urge the Government to take further steps to strengthen the functioning of the national and regional tripartite bodies.

We join the Committee of Experts in welcoming the ratification of Convention No. 151 in 2017 by the Philippines. However we would like to raise our concerns over the persisting legislative aspects of the case which the ILO supervisory bodies have been raising for years. We note with concern the lack of progress in the adoption of several legislative proposals to bring national legislation into conformity with Convention No. 87, despite repeated commitments and assurances to do so in recent years. We urge the authorities in the Philippines to adopt the legislative amendments, in particular concerning: granting trade union rights to all workers and categories of workers in the country; reducing the excessively high minimum requirements for forming trade unions; lowering the excessively high requirement for registration of trade union federations; limiting government intervention in labour disputes; ensuring that no penal sanctions are imposed against the worker for having carried out a peaceful strike; removing the need for government permission for foreign assistance to trade unions; and reducing the excessively high requirement for local unions in order to register at the federal or national level.

Lastly, tripartite consultations and meaningful and effective social dialogue are essential elements of the application of fundamental principles and rights at work, particularly the fundamental ILO Convention. Therefore, we strongly encourage the Philippines to step up its efforts to strengthen cooperation with the workers and employers to ensure the effective implementation of the Convention and respect for freedom of association. In conclusion, we would like to reiterate our strong commitment to continue our intensive cooperation with the Government of the Philippines, in its effort to address challenges and secure the respect of human and labour rights in the country.

Government member, Thailand – Thailand delivers this statement on behalf of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). ASEAN recognizes that as a signatory to the Convention way back in 1953, the Philippines, with the collaborative efforts of its social partners, have shown substantial progressive improvements in terms of the application in law and practice, the principles of the Freedom of Association since the High Level Mission in 2009, and the direct contacts mission in 2017 after its examination before the Committee during the 105th International Labour Conference in 2016.

ASEAN notes the information and report on the progress so far realized, taking into account the national circumstances, in the observance of the freedom of association in the Philippines through the National Action Plan on the Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining (2017–22), adopted in 2017 by the Philippine tripartite partners with the support of the ILO Country Office in Manila and the European Union Generalized Scheme of Preference (GSP+). To fully implement the National Action Plan in 2022, ASEAN expects the tripartite partners in the Philippines to continue the laudable works they had started. The Philippines, together with its social partners, shall be given the opportunity to complete and accomplish the activities and programmes embodied in the National Action Plan within the tripartite-agreed timelines. ASEAN, therefore, urges the Philippines to remain committed to its obligations under the Convention, and to continue its healthy and constructive engagement with all social partners.

Finally, ASEAN calls on the ILO and its supervisory bodies to provide the needed technical assistance and guidance to resolve pending issues and ensure a better enabling environment for the effective implementation of the Convention in the Philippines.

Observer, Federation of Free Workers (FFW) – I am speaking on behalf of the Federation of Free Workers and Nagkaisa Labor Coalition of the Philippines. Philippines is signatory to the Convention as early as 1953. As we can recall, in 2016, the Committee of Experts designated the Philippines on the Convention as a double-footnoted case. The choice was in our view an appropriate reaction to the ongoing violence against trade unionists and the lack of prosecutions for extrajudicial killings, despite the establishment of various national mechanisms to monitor and investigate these crimes. Of course, anti-union violence was not only our concern in 2016. The avoidance of unions through non-regular employment schemes, the defects in existing laws and the failure of the Government to enforce even these defective laws have led to a climate in which freedom of association is very difficult, if not nearly impossible to exercise.

Since the Duterte Administration came to power, 43 trade unionists have been assassinated. The first murdered trade union leader was Orlando Abangan, a SENTRO organizer based in Cebu. He was gunned down in September 2016. The most recent is Dennis Sequeña, a veteran trade union organizer, who was gunned down in Tanza, Cavite on 2 June 2019, in the middle of conducting a basic orientation on trade unionism with EPZ workers. The local police have not even formally filed a case. During the prior government of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, 68 trade unionists were murdered. The Government is simply not serious about holding anyone responsible for these murders. However troubling, the violence is not only our concern in the Philippines, while the workers in the Philippines led by the Nagkaisa Labor Coalition succeeded in convincing the Government of the Republic of the Philippines to ratify Convention No. 151, the first ever in the whole of Asia two years ago, until the present, however, there is still no enabling law passed to implement the spirit and intent of the said Convention. This situation keeps the more than 628,000 job orders and contract of service employees who are working and performing core functions and frontline services in local government units, national government agencies, state colleges and universities, including government owned and controlled corporations, remained outside the scope of collective bargaining in the public sector and were consequently deprived of the benefits therefrom. Government should walk the talk.

The Committee of Experts again notes several other legislative matters, including obstacles to registration, among others and that in fact recently there were a lot of labour and employment legislative reforms that have been enacted including the Occupational Safety and Health, Telecommuting Act, Social Security Reform Act, providing for an unemployment benefit among others, Expanded Maternity Leave Law. However, these measures are far from realizing the right of the workers to fully enjoy their freedom of association.

Government member, Brazil –Brazil thanks the Government of the Philippines for the detailed information provided to the Committee. Brazil reiterates its unease with a wide range of aspects of the supervisory system. This Committee is far from conforming to best practices in the multilateral system. A strong, effective and legitimate ILO, adapted to the contemporary challenges is of interest to all – governments, workers and employers. Looking forward to a future with prosperity, decent work and more jobs, the ILO should increase cooperation and international partnerships, while reviewing its standards supervisory system towards transparency, objectivity, impartiality and true tripartism.

We take good note of the information provided by the Government as to its commitment to ensuring freedom of association and the rights of workers as a whole. In this regard, we highlight the report on the improvements in the observance of freedom of association in the Philippines through the adoption in 2017 of the National Action Plan on the Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining 2017–22 by the Philippine tripartite partners with the support of the ILO Country Office-Manila and the European Union. For the consequent implementation of the National Action Plan, we encourage the tripartite partners of the Philippines to continue the efforts they have started. We trust that through social dialogue and tripartism, the Philippines can foster an enabling environment for freedom of association including collective bargaining. Finally, we call on the ILO and its supervisory bodies to provide, if requested by the Government, technical assistance to resolve pending issues and further advance freedom of association in the Philippines.

Worker member, Philippines – On behalf of the Nagkaisa Labour Coalition, let me add to what the worker member from the Philippines has said. Moreover, the situation for workers in EPZs remains just as bad as ever. Union organizers are banned from entering EPZs. Management harass workers as soon as there is word of union organizing, and workers suspected of being involved are arbitrarily transferred to isolate them or are fired. When tribunals order reinstatement, employers routinely ignore these orders with impunity. In some cases, management will work with the PNP to arrest union leaders on trumped up criminal charges just days before the certification elections. These fake charges include arson, drug trafficking and murder. Even if the union wins certification election, factory management will sometimes nevertheless recognize a management-dominated union and bargaining with them. Some have even shut down and shifted its production to a sister company operating in the same EPZ. Of course, workers and union have no effective recourse when their rights are violated.

We are very troubled that despite the regular observations and the recommendations and conclusions of the high-level mission, the situation is worsening. We see no other option but to call for a high level tripartite mission, in the hope that this will help to move some of these issues closer to resolution. This would include, but is not limited to, the Government conducting competent investigations into anti-union violence and prosecuting and punishing those responsible. The High-Level Monitoring Body must also be strengthened by providing it with the resources and capacity to validate reports of trade union killings and coordinate with the IAC on extrajudicial killings. Those in the armed forces who stigmatize trade unionists must be punished appropriately. The Government must also finally resolve the legislative issues we have been raising for many years to ensure that all workers are able to exercise freely, their right to associate. Further, the Government should amend the Special Economic Zone Act of 1995 to include labour standards compliance as a requirement for a company’s continued access to all the incentives provided by the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA). Tripartite councils should be convened regularly by PEZA, in all the EPZs, to review grievances and recommend remedies. Government and employers must also publicly express their commitment to respect freedom of association and collective bargaining in EPZs.

Thus, the workers of the Philippines hope that their demands herein made will be heard, and be implemented soonest. We want to highlight, that the Security of Tenure Bill, recently passed in Congress, will not end contractualization nor fixed-term employment. This is not the promise of President Rodrigo Roa Duterte. In furtherance herewith, the ILO and its supervisory bodies are hereby requested to provide the needed technical assistance to ensure an enabling environment for the workers’ enjoyment of their freedom of association. If workers back home are not regular, they cannot fully enjoy their rights to freedom of association.

Government member, India – We welcome the delegation of the Government of the Philippines and thank them for providing the latest comprehensive update on this issue. We welcome the commitment of the Government of the Philippines to fulfil its international labour obligations including those related to the Convention both in law and practice. We take positive note of the significant improvements made in the observance of the freedom of association in the Philippines within two years since the adoption of the national action plan on the freedom of association and collective bargaining 2017–22 by the Philippines tripartite partners with the support of the ILO. We encourage the tripartite partners of the Philippines to cooperate and collaborate with each other in the true spirit of social partnership to create the necessary enabling conditions for the full implementation of the national action plan by 2022.

We appreciate the steps being taken by the Government of the Philippines, in cooperation with its social dialogue partners, which are resulting in a considerable decline in the reported cases of harassment and killings, helping bring the pending cases of violence to the courts and for monitoring and fast-tracking the process in line with the constitutionally guaranteed right to speedy trial and due process, providing sufficient witness protection and for the building of capacities of prosecutors, enforcers and other relevant actors. Further, the consistent efforts of the Government of the Philippines to address emerging labour issues and its various initiatives to promote freedom of association and collective bargaining, anchored in the understanding that secured employment is the best enabling environment for freedom of association, as part of its progressive legislative agenda are noteworthy. In fulfilling its labour related obligations, we urge ILO and its constituents to fully support the Government of the Philippines and provide any technical assistance that it may seek in this regard. Lastly, we take this opportunity to wish the Government of the Philippines all success in its endeavours.

Observer, International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) – I stand with our courageous workers in the Philippines and indeed I thank the Employers and the Governments who have urged the Philippines to act in line with the recommendations of the direct contacts mission and the Committee on Freedom of Association.

Today I will launch the ITUC’s Global Rights Index and sadly, one of the ten worst countries in the world for workers remains the Philippines. It was there 2017, 2018, 2019 for violence and murder, brutal repression of public protests and repressive laws. You have heard that ten trade unionists were assassinated among other extrajudicial killings just last year and two already this year. I can tell you first hand, the culture of fear is palpable in the country as the culture of impunity grows. You have heard that the IAC is not functioning, with an inconceivable record of just one case proceeding to conviction. And indeed, when you have national and regional tripartite industrial peace councils that lack investigative and prosecution authorities this is not working.

With the interference of the army and the police into industrial relations, military presence in workplaces, strikes, door to door searches of union leaders, abduction, harassment of villagers to quit the union, manufacturing charges against union leaders that I have heard myself, this is not a country that respects fundamental rights for workers and even for employers. The wave of new strike action, the sit-down strikes, the deadlocked negotiations, the mass layoffs in 2018 is a response from us to oppression and the failure of the President’s claim of regularization of illegal and oppressive contractualization. The current security of tenure bill will not fix the problem of exploitative short-term contracts; it is not what the President promised which was the end to insecure and dehumanizing work arrangements that go with this practice.

I have walked the supply chains and I want Governments and Employers to understand the dehumanizing exploitation of the supply chains of workplaces where workers work through small to medium enterprises for some of the richest multinationals in the world. There is no due diligence here, I can tell you, and there is no sanctioning of practice by Government. When you have a woman who is frightened for her 12-year-old son; she does not have family support; she is forced to do overtime with a few minutes’ notice and she can be at work until 10, 12 or 2 in the morning without even food with a voucher for a canteen that opens at 6 a.m., that is an impact on her and her family’s circumstances, that is frightening. And indeed, when I have been in the homes of workers who have been sacked for trying to stand up and collectively organize for minimum wage increases so they could live with dignity by some of our richest multinationals, then I can tell you when one-day’s wages equals one week’s baby formula for one child, two-day’s wages, two children, this is not a country that is respecting workers’ rights.

And I cannot leave this room in conclusion without drawing attention to the actions of a country exploiting migrants and calling for migrant workers’ rights in other countries, to actually continue to exclude categories of foreign workers and others from freedom of association it is an act of hypocrisy. We can only say please act with the support of the ILO, please act to the Government of the Philippines to actually regularize laws and end the culture of fear and impunity.

Observer, Building and Wood Workers’ International (BWI) – The BWI expresses its concern about the rampant violations of workers’ rights in the Philippines. This international foundations of labour rights continue to be violated with impunity in both subtle managerial and governmental actions through the violence whose perpetrators have never been brought to justice. Murder has no place in industrial relations, workers’ lives should never be sacrificed in the exercise of their rights. This is our primary message to the Committee. The latest victim of this murderous attacks against trade unions was Dennis Sequeña who was conducting a basic trade union seminar for workers. Dennis Sequeña is not the only trade union leader – he is also a husband and a father. Dennis Sequeña is not only one name. Nonoy Palma, a farmer in Southern Philippines was killed at his house. Orlando, local organizer in Cebu, was killed while conducting a union seminar. Ryan, Nelly, Villegas, Angelipe, Peter, Dodong, Morena, Dumaguit, Bingbing, Jomarie. There are at least 43 trade unionists and labour rights defenders assassinated under the Duterte Administration. I want you to remember these names as workers and committed trade unionists like many of us here in this room. They are not statistics to be recounted year after year. They are individuals who believed in working and fighting for a better world for themselves and their families. The killings must stop. Enough is enough.

There have been numerous public outcry and condemnations both within the Philippines and globally on the extrajudicial killings of ordinary citizens. At least 33 people are killed every day in the Philippines. The United Nations Commission on Human Rights estimates that at least 20,000 people may have been killed in the context of the government’s campaign on illegal drugs since mid-2016. This is a war on the poor. This is a war on the workers. We have the moral responsibility. How many more committee meetings do we need before we start to address this issue? How many more tripartite meetings do we convene before we take action to stop these killings? How many more speeches do we deliver before we truly listen to the voices of the families asking for justice? We can express our deep concerns on the statements and reports but I believe that the moral force of ILO should now be truly a force of justice. Building a future of decent work will never be achieved if the numerous violations and attacks on the trade unionists remain case files. Enough is enough. It is time to act.

Observer, International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) – The IAC established pursuant to AO35 has verified only 11 cases of extrajudicial killings of trade unionists out of 65 cases it has investigated. We have some serious concerns about the criteria provided under AO35 to determine extrajudicial killings. Allow me to share an example of an active case to demonstrate this. The Committee has previously heard about the murders of Antonio Petalcorin and Emiliano Rivera – both leaders of the ITF-affiliated Confederation of Transport Unions. On the 28 November 2012, Petalcorin and Rivera filed a complaint with the National Ombudsman against the Director of the Transportation Board, alleging corruption. Just two months later, on the 23 January 2013, Mr Rivera was killed by unknown assailants near the office of the Transportation Board. On the 2 July 2013, Mr Petalcorin was fatally shot three times in the chest while on route to the Transportation Board. It is clear that they were targeted by forces close to the authorities for their trade union activities, which includes attempts to combat corruption. Yet, the IAC found that these two cases did not meet the criteria for extrajudicial killings. Therefore, it is imperative that the Government ensures that the criteria used by the IAC for screening cases should be broader than the judicial criteria used by the courts so as not to unduly exclude possible freedom of association cases and to ensure that trade union activities give rise to an in depth review of the possible motivation of the crime or murder. We must also underscore the need to rapidly identify the perpetrators of violence against trade unionists and bring them to justice in order to combat impunity even when cases are handled through the regular criminal law. The families of Mr Rivera and Mr Petalcorin have been waiting six years for justice.

I will very quickly speak to a second issue. While the Committee of Experts have discussed the application of sections 279 and 287 of the Labor Code in relation to the criminalization of industrial action, another piece of legislation has also been used recently criminalize strike action. In December 2017, George San Mateo, leader of the ITF-affiliated PISTON union, was arrested under a WWII-era law for supporting the right of transport workers to undertake industrial action. Mr San Mateo was charged with breaching section 20(k) of the Commonwealth Act of 1946 for “knowingly and wilfully instructing members of his union to conduct a nationwide strike.” Resorting to arrests in connection with the organization of a peaceful strike is a grave threat to freedom of association. The Government should now review all relevant legislation to ensure that no penal sanctions are imposed against a worker for having organized or carried out a peaceful strike.

Observer, Education International (EI) – I am General Secretary of the Botswana Sectors of Educators Trade Union, and I will be speaking on behalf of EI and the Filipino Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT). I wish to denounce the infringements of the labour rights of teachers in public and private schools, and specifically: the illegal collecting of data on union membership of teachers in order to profile members of the teacher union Alliance of Concerned Teachers; and secondly, the red-tagging of ACT as a “terrorist” organization and the harassment and threats against unionists and leaders of ACT. In December 2018, the police started visiting schools to inquire about ACT members, requesting lists of union members and investigating about specific individuals. The leak of “confidential” memoranda from the police provided evidence that the order to collect data on unionists came from the Police Directorate for Intelligence. The collection of data on union membership and profiling of union members have been closely followed by acts of anti-union discrimination. ACT members and leaders at local and national level have been followed, harassed, intimidated and have received threatening text messages and calls. To date, the teacher union documented 45 such cases in ten of the 17 regions in the Philippines, including death threats received by ACT General Secretary, Raymond Basilio, on his mobile phone during an ACT press conference. The General Secretary of ACT cannot spend two consecutive nights in the same location and changes regularly his cell phone. The Government denied ordering the profiling of union members, but at the same time, they admit that intelligence gathering is part of their operations against crime and terrorism. They accuse ACT of being a “front organization” of the Communist Party of the Philippines and of recruiting for the New People’s Army. This red-tagging of ACT, which also targets other organizations and individuals critical of the Government, continues until now. This anti-union climate has caused public and private school teachers to fear for their liberty and safety, especially since their unions and organizations are branded, without legal and factual basis, as “rebels”, “communists”, or “terrorists” – and thus “enemies of the State”. These violations cast a chilling effect on teachers’ right to form and join trade unions, and the attached rights of negotiation, assembly, and speech. They amount to governmental interference in trade union activities, and also amount to discrimination and repression. I have faith that this commission will adopt supportive recommendations in this case.

Worker member, Finland – I speak on behalf of the Nordic countries. We express our deep concern about the situation in Philippines, where the violation of freedom of association continues to be serious. We are also worried about the violence and harassment against trade union activists, as well as the red-tagging, and assassinations of trade union leaders. It seems that the Government has not done anything to investigate the matters to bring the perpetrators to justice. The Committee has previously requested the Government to continue taking actions to ensure a climate of justice and security for trade unionists in the Philippines. To our regret, the information of new assassinations of trade union leaders – like the recent case of Dennis Sequeña – demonstrates, that the Government’s actions have not been enough. If one would use the data of the Center for Trade Union Rights, Dennis Sequeña is the 43rd worker assassinated since the Mr Duterte came to power in 2016. A key issue that makes trade union representatives susceptible to being targeted, is the fact that the AFP continues to identify one particular ideology as the enemy of the state. It is for this reason that red-tagging, in addition to other deployment of violence and harassment, becomes a deadly practice that needs to be stopped.

Article 2 of the Convention states, that workers have the right, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing, without previous authorization. As the Committee on Freedom of Association states in many of its decisions, “a climate of violence, coercion and threats of any type aimed at trade union leaders and their families does not encourage the free exercise and full enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set out in Conventions Nos 87 and 98. All States have the undeniable duty to promote and defend a social climate where respect of the law reigns as the only way of guaranteeing respect for and protection of life.”

We urge the Government to show the earnest will to take all necessary measures to solve this concerning situation. Work, that all remaining alleged cases of violations of trade union rights and deaths of trade unionists will be subject of appropriate investigations and effective measures to ensure accountability must be taken.

Observer, IndustriALL Global Union – I am speaking in the name of IndustriALL Global Union (representing 50 million workers worldwide), to express our extreme concern following reports from our affiliates in the Philippines, regarding red-tagging and very recent cases of violations of worker and union’s rights to exercise simply their freedom of association. Immediately, several cases now:

- Immediately after management and the SPI Workers Union reached a settlement in November 2018, on the issue of illegal closure, the management filed a case against 52 union officers and members of the SMT, accusing these workers of grave coercion, trespassing and malicious mischief. The case was dismissed in April by the Court, but nevertheless, in May 2019, the management appealed. Workers have now submitted their counter affidavit, the case is in process.

- In another company in January 2019, the majority of long-term contractual workers from a manufacturing company, filed for union registration and were accepted. The company then started to harass the workers and illegally dismissed 52 workers for having joined May Day celebrations. On June 3, 2019, 22 more workers, including nine union officers were illegally dismissed.

- In again another company, on April 22, 2019, workers were organizing since 2018, the management forcibly dismissed 27 workers, including all the union leaders. The workers still registered their union on 29 April even though the day before, the management recorded a case of insubordination against 200 workers, to prevent them from attending the Union’s General Assembly. Six more workers, with three officers, were preventively suspended last May.

- The Union President, Eugenio Garcia, was arrested based on planted evidence, after the police carried out a search warrant in Garcia’s home, on the evening of March 18, 2019. The Pasig police alleges that Garcia was in possession of a 9mm pistol, which was actually planted by policemen in the course of their so-called search. The search warrant issued, and illegal arrest, took place precisely the day that the Union was asserting its Collective Bargaining Agreement.

- The search warrant in the residence of Ricky Garcia, on March 20, 2019, was issued and was carried out by 50 members of the PNP, aboard ten vehicles to search for this leader. Only his wife was there, but just before the search, Chavez had joined his union’s protest at the GT Tower in Makati, to commemorate the 18th year of their struggle. Chavez is one of the 233 unionists illegally terminated from the automobile giant’s factory in 2001.

In Cavite industrial zone, last week, hundreds marched at the funeral of party member and EPZ union organiser, Ka Dennis Sequeña, shot dead on 6 June, while giving a trade union lecture. Following this assassination, we make ours the statement by Senator Risa Hontiveros, “The right of our workers to organise themselves, to rally for their quality of living, should not come at the cost of their freedom and most importantly, of their lives”. We are happy to provide the names of dismissed workers and companies to the Committee, if needed.

Observer, International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations (IUF) – What is widely referred to in the Philippines as “contractualization” is a practice built on the denial of freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining set out in the Convention and Convention No. 98. It is appropriate and necessary that we discuss the issue in these terms at a review meeting of the Committee. The “contractualized”, precarious worker is denied her right to a collective bargaining relationship with the company, or the state entity, that organizes the system, yet has no responsibility or legal accountability to the worker. It is a massive denial of rights, built on what the ILO terms as “disguised employment relationship” in the Employment Relationship Recommendation, 2006 (No. 198). The Government of the Philippines is clearly failing to ensure respect for the implementation of Conventions Nos 87 and 98, and the scope of that human rights failure grows as the employers increasingly result to indirect, third-party employment relationships. In the IUF sectors, a telling example is the Government’s failure to implement a Department of Labour and Employment order to regularize 6,400 workers at a fast food chain.

The Committee on Freedom of Association, in its 2016 response to our complaint No. 3236 concerning a major dispute in the seafood sector, noted that over four years had elapsed without any meaningful governmental action in response to allegations of mass dismissals in response to workers’ efforts to organize and join unions. We note that the Committee’s 2016 recommendations have not been acted upon.

The problem of corruption should similarly be examined within the specific rights frameworks of Conventions Nos 87 and 98. Workers and their unions have a right to a fair, transparent, impartial and speedy judicial and administrative process. This right is undermined by the delays and bias clearly rooted in corruption, with the consequence that workers are denied their rights.

Extrajudicial killings, including the killing of trade union members and leaders, and judicial impunity have multiple rights impacts, not least their impact on workers’ ability to access their trade union rights. The Committee on Freedom of Association has stated, with some understatement that “A climate of violence, coercion and threats of any type aimed at trade union leaders and their families does not encourage the free exercise and full enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set out in Conventions Nos 87 and 98.” Murder is the ultimate threat. The fight against corruption and against impunity is a fight to ensure respect for the Convention and Convention No. 98.

Worker member, Republic of Korea – In 2016, I spoke on behalf of the Korean workers about the chronic infringement of the freedom of association in EPZs with specific examples happened in Korean-owned companies in Cavite and Laguna. Nothing has changed and freedom of association is systematically being violated in the zones until today. Unfortunately PEZA is remiss in safeguarding and promoting the right to organize. Let me give some clear examples. In a Korean-owned garment factory named Dong Seung in the Cavite EPZ, management suspended all 16 union officers for 30 days in mid-2018 on the pretext that they smeared the company by seeking actions from the global garment brand which are its costumer, regarding violation of freedom of association and labour standards. The mass suspension follows on the heels of harassment of workers who joined or are supporting the union. Unionists were deprived of availing loans and transferred to different production lines to demote from mechanic to sewer. In another Korean-owned factory in Cavite EPZ, workers started forming unions in 2017. Identified union leaders were all transferred to one production line to separate them from the rest of the workers. The company interrupted union certification election by convening a big meeting of workers in the premises of the Cavite EPZ to campaign against voting for the union and the union lost the election. But, to finally bust the union, the company shut down and the workers suspected that the orders are being shifted to its sister companies and the shutdown was meant to harass union members. In the third Korean-owned factory, once management learned that workers were unionizing, it began threatening and harassing union officers and members. Management told workers that the company would close if they vote yes to the union. As a result, the union lost the certification election. In extreme cases, union organizers are assassinated to stop a union organizing drive. The murder of Dennis Sequeña which the Worker spokesperson mentioned, is believed to be linked to three organizing initiatives in the Korean company in the past few months. The premium that Government gives the investors’ rights, even at the expense of workers and trade union rights is the root cause of the chronic violation of the freedom of association in EPZs. So the legislation effort should be continued including Amendment of the Special Economic Zones Act of 1995 to include labour standards compliance as a requirement for a company’s continued access to the incentives provided by the PEZA.

Worker member, Japan – As the report of the Committee of Experts clearly indicated, there are lack of progress of many pending legislations and amendment of laws which shows weak or lack of willingness of the Government to implement the Convention ratified in 1953. Example of pending legislations are: section 240 (c) of the Labor Code, to reduce requirement of 20 per cent membership for trade unions registration; section 278 (g) of the Labor Code to restrict Government intervention leading to compulsory arbitration to essential services; sections 279 and 287 of the Labor Code to ensure that no penal sanctions are imposed against worker for having carried out a peaceful strike; and sections 284 and 287 of the Labor Code, to grant the right to organize to all workers residing in the Philippines including foreign workers. It is regrettable that in spite of the promises of the Government, it has been no progress on the large number of pending legislations and the lack of enforcement of the Convention which has caused many serious problems on trade unions activities including the killing of trade unionists. Also, I have to mention the issue of contractualization which is a major obstacle to exercise freedom of association in private and public sector. Despite all the hype given by the Department of Labor and Employment over the reforms, none of it made a dent on the prevalence of contractualization in the country. The Government took several legislative measure to reduce contractualization, Department of Labor Order No. 174-17, issued on 16 March 2017, and Executive Order No. 51 on May 2018. Even the Security of Tenure Bill recently passed by the Congress will not end “Endo”, which is an abusive labour practice where a worker is hired for up to five months to skirt a labour law granting permanent tenure on the sixth month of service. Endo was so bad that various labour groups denounced in the strongest possible term. Contractualization will continue to be the major reason why the vast majority of workers in the Philippines will not be able to exercise their right to freedom of association and collective bargaining.

Once again, I would like to reiterate to request the Government of the Philippines to take immediate action to amend the Labor Code in compliance with the Convention, especially on strict requirements on union registration and penalization on peaceful strike, just name a few, as well as pass a law that will strengthen security of tenure by prohibiting fixed-term employment for both the public and private sector workers. Many allegations mentioned here are showing how serious the situation in Philippines is. So real, immediate action is needed.

Worker member, Canada – I speak on behalf of the workers from Canada, the United States and Argentina. The Philippines is often described as the “world’s call centre capital”, with hundreds of American corporations and other multinationals depending on Filipinos for customer care service. The broad sector, known as the Business Process Outsourcing Industry, is the second largest source of income for the country, employing over 1.3 million people and generating over US$22 billion manual revenue, second only to workers remissions from abroad in the contributions to the economy. The Government also offers foreign-based contacts centre operators who begin operations in the Philippines generous multi-year cooperate tax exemptions. It is positive that these workers can find work at home, but that work must be made to comply with the Convention, which the Philippines has ratified. Workers in this sector, so key to the Philippines economy, face challenges in law and practice that effectively deny their freedom of association and right to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes especially in recent years. They have also often faced a hostile climate for exercising of freedom of association through threats against them and the all too common filing of false charges against them for simply announcing the intention to take peaceful and legal strike actions. Threats against workers organizing in this sector, have shown a pattern of harassment both through the legal system and threats of violence that have proven all too real in the Philippines. Major multinational employers know that they are operating in this repressive climate that works to the employers’ short-term benefit. In 2018 and this year, one group of workers that legally registered their union in 2015, has repeatedly suffered repression of these rights. In September 2018, these workers filed a notice of strike in response to union busting. As workers attempted to negotiate, several protest actions were held and management retaliated by firing workers and filing false charges against the union and its allies. While some of these charges were dropped in March of this year, to date the charges of liable and grave slander filed by the employer against union leadership are still pending. Though less discussed than those in manufacturing, global supply chains and services must also comply with international standards and support decent work as jobs are moved from countries where workers may have been able to organize and bargain to countries where these rights are difficult to exercise, due to hostile environments, threats and violence in limitations in the law. The Philippines is one such country that it is a major destination for call centre and other business process outsourcing work that can and must be made into decent work.

The actions described above have all been taken against workers trying to exercise their freedom of association at US-based Alorica, the world’s third largest call centre company that provides services from the Philippines to major United States, European and Asian multinationals. A country cannot build a sustainable development on the basis of an industry that receives large tax benefits but consistently denies workers’ rights.

Government representative – We also appreciate the space given to us to report to the Committee on the works of the Philippine tripartite partners in pursuance of the Recommendation of the 2017 direct contacts mission as provided for under the National Plan on the Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining (2017–2022).

The Philippines welcomes the comments and views of the Workers and Employers as well as the Governments with the intention to further our implementation in law and practice of the provision of the Convention. We would like, however, to clarify some points. First, the Philippines is a beautiful place for freedom of association. We do not belong in that list of worst countries for working people. Our office, particularly mine, is even a regular venue for picketing and strikes as well as full, frank and meaningful consultation with workers and employers alike. The assertion on alleged impunity are sweeping and mere general statement that do not reflect through the overall situation in the Philippines. While there may be incidents of violation of standards in workers’ rights, they may be considered as isolated cases as they do not mirror the real condition in the country. And to claim that nothing had changed since 2016 is to keep a blind eye on the substantial enjoyment of freedoms by Philippines trade unions and workers the last two years, for the last three years.

Contrary to claims, there are no new 43 reported cases of death of trade unionists in the Philippines under this administration. This representation therefore, respectfully requests the list of the reported 43 cases. We will appreciate if we could have at list so that we will accordingly respond to the same. The Philippine Government condemns the death of Dennis Sequeña. By reason of my position, I know him in person. Their Chairperson is a friend of mine. For the record, this particular case is not part of the report. Hence, we were not in advance required to provide detailed information. But since his case was already mentioned, may we inform the Committee that the existing monitoring and investigation mechanisms have already been mobilized. On the same day of the incident, 2 June 2019, a Sunday, the Secretariat of the NTIPC-MB in coordination with the regional Tripartite Monitoring Body of region 4A, was immediately dispatched to gather information about the incident. The report is now being prepared for consideration of regional Tripartite Monitoring Body before the same is endorsed to the National Tripartite Monitoring Body. In the meantime, criminal investigation has already started. At this juncture, let me reiterate that the most enabling environment for the free and full exercise of freedom in our country is a secured employment, in safe and healthy working condition in all places of work, free from violence and harassment.

On the issue of violence and harassment against trade unionists, let me again state that there is no increasing case of deaths of trade unionists in our country. What we have is a declining number. Conviction, however, has been the recurring and imposing challenge in all cases in view of the lack or insufficiency of evidence, especially against the backdrop that in our jurisdiction, just like perhaps many of yours, the quantum of evidence required to convict the perpetrators of crime is beyond reasonable doubt subject to rigid procedures in view of the right of all accused persons to be presumed innocent as guaranteed under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This challenge, however, is not insurmountable. We just need major support on this aspect. It may also be recalled that last year, a Philippine court convicted a retired army general and sentenced him and two others to 40 years of imprisonment. There are other similar convictions showing that when there is sufficient evidence, impunity will never lie. It is very timely to mention that the Philippines takes notice of the Report on Addressing Impunity: A Review of the Three Monitoring Mechanisms published last April on 2019 by the ILO Country Office Manila. We take its conclusion and recommendation closely and seriously. We recognized that the three existing monitoring mechanisms have their own strength and weaknesses. Their mandates, structures and internal rules need to be revisited. Interestingly, and in view of the recommendation of the particular report published in April 2019, module development and implementation of advocacy on freedom of association is under way. Prescription of freedom of association modules in the grants under the Workers’ Organization Development Programme may be considered. Intensification of the inspection system on compliance with international labour standards, including freedom of association, shall continue. AO 35 needs strengthening by ensuring openness and transparency on the prosecution and movement of extrajudicial killing cases, adopting an inclusive criterion in the screening of these cases, relatedness to the exercise of freedom of association, capacity building on freedom of association and capacity building on the collection of physical and vital forensic evidence to reduce heavy reliance on testimonial evidence.

On the legislative issues, the full use of government resources to expedite the enactment of major labour and employment legislative reform is not a mute indication of our oblivion to pursue the passage of other needed amendments to the Labor Code consistent with the comments and recommendations of the ILO and its supervisory bodies. There were bills filed in the last Congress. These will surely be filed in the next one. Resources will be redirected to this end.

Relatedly, it may be noted that the Philippines has ratified one more instrument, bringing the number of Philippine ratified Conventions to 39 including the eight fundamental Conventions. Prior to this, our last ratification was on Convention No. 151. We observed that there is renewed vibrancy in organizing in the public sector. Public sector unions especially in the local government units have been increasing. I would like to stress that we have an enabling rule, Executive Order No. 180 on the right to self-organize and collective bargaining in the public sector. To the Committee, our disposition to ratify Convention signifies our firm unequivocal commitment and obligation to promote decent work, not for the few but for all.

The Philippines thus trusts that through frank, full and meaningful social dialogue, the tripartite partners shall all rise together rather than pull down one another. We, the Filipinos, shall continue to pursue the National Action Plan on the Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining (2017–22), with the continuing technical assistance and guidance from the International Labour Organization, its supervisory bodies, including other developmental partners. To end, let us remember that “successful reform is not an event. It is a sustainable process that will build on its own success – a virtuous cycle of change”.

Employer members – We thank the Government for its remarks. I think the one thing that sort of stands out through this whole discussion is that this is not a new situation, we are not dealing with recent events, we are dealing with events that have taken place over a long period of time and another characteristic of that is that the progress has been rather slow. With that in mind, we are welcome and we do welcome the Government’s statements that it is actively working now in the space of investigating cases and I just go back to my earlier remarks and making sure that we are clear when we are looking at cases that we are dealing with, as in this case, issues of freedom of association because, as I noted, there are situations, for instance, where trade unionists and officials are caught up in the circle of violence but not necessarily because they are trade unionists, or any other form of official, it is simply that perhaps, on some occasions, it may be a coincidence so we need to be careful to distinguish between those issues that are genuinely related to an inhabiting or constraining of freedom of association and those that are simply collateral to wider issues and social issues.

When it comes to dealing with these things, we note and support the Government’s use of the tripartite monitoring mechanisms and the IAC. We do regret that these do not seem to have been as active lately as they were in the beginning so we, therefore, urge the Government to reactivate these, not on an “as needed” basis, but on a “continuous” basis. There is evidently plenty of work to be done and so it does not seem that there is a need to wait.

With relation to some of the more detailed aspects, we note again the Government’s commitment to ensuring that unions and employers’ associations are completely free to establish themselves and to operate themselves without public interference or governmental interference, but again, the Labor Codes that activate those provisions seem to be still in the process of development and once again, we urge the Government to progress those to fruition, to finality and to give them open and transparent effect. Similarly, in relation to the ability of unions to establish themselves with reasonable thresholds, we again welcome the Government’s commitment to lower the thresholds, to allow unions and employers’ associations to establish, and also opening up the doors to assistance from outside the country to enable organizations to develop and sustain themselves.

With those few things in mind, I think basically it comes down to a relatively small number of recommendations but they are, once again, a repeat of the recommendations that we have made in previous years. We simply hope that this year, having made the recommendations, we do not have to make them again in the future and those are:

- first of all to avail themselves of the readily available technical assistance from the ILO through the country office in Manila in particular;

- to get the monitoring mechanisms of the IAC back on track and active on a “continuous” basis;

- to complete the amendment of the Labor Codes to be in full conformity with the Convention;

- ensure that workers are not penalized for exercising the rights that are provided to them; and lastly; and

- to ensure that the social dialogue mechanisms that have been talked about themselves are a “continuous” process and not an “as needed” process.

Worker members – We have carefully listened to all interventions and specifically to the information provided by the Government to the Committee. However, there can be no justification or valid explanation for the systematic violence and indeed murders perpetrated against trade union activists. The Government simply has the obligation to stop this violence. Yet instead the absence of effective investigations and punishments of such cases of gross violations creates an atmosphere of impunity and casts doubt on the Government’s commitment to secure the rule of law. The Employers’ spokesperson highlighted that this case is also about human rights and the rule of law. We agree. However, we cannot agree that these questions fall outside of the scope of our discussion. In this regard, we remind the Employers’ group of the 1970 resolution of the International Labour Conference in relation to trade union rights and their relation to civil liberties. The resolution recognizes that the rights conferred upon workers’ and employers’ organizations must be based on respect for those civil liberties. We have recalled this resolution on many occasions and have adopted relevant conclusions in the Committee, including with regard to complaints brought forward by employers’ organizations in this regard. We must urgently see action on the investigation and appropriate punishment of violations of trade union rights, and in particular acts of violence. This must now become a priority for the Government and involves the allocation of sufficient funds and staff in order to effectively carry out this work expeditiously and to avoid a situation of impunity. The establishment of monitoring bodies alone is inadequate. To earn the trust of the social partners and victims, they must be operationalized in an efficient and effective manner and be transparent about the progress achieved. More broadly speaking, the Government must introduce preventative measures to prevent the repetition of crimes against trade unionists, including the institution of protection schemes for trade unionists.

When it comes to the conformity of national legislation with the Convention, it would be an understatement to emphasize that it remains wholly inadequate in guaranteeing the rights afforded under the Convention. The steps undertaken so far in order to bring the labour laws in line with the Convention seem to be stalled endlessly. To demonstrate good faith, the Government must ensure the timely adoption of appropriate legislative acts. I must urgently convene the social partners in order to develop a holistic plan of action to redress the numerous shortcomings of its legislation. This plan of action must include the removal of the requirement of government permission for foreign assistance to trade unions and the reduction of the registration requirement from ten to five duly recognized bargaining agents or local chapters. The excessively high threshold in place for unions seeking to form federations or national unions must be lowered. Moreover, the legislation must ensure that all workers without distinction enjoy the right to freedom of association. Specific attention on measures that would ensure the effective enjoyment of the right of freedom of association by precarious workers have become an urgent need. The Government must also take decisive measures in order to prevent the misuse of short-term contracts and misclassification in order to hinder the free unionization of workers. The definition of essential services must be defined strictly and must be limited to services whose interruption could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.

We also call on the Government to take concrete and time-bound steps to ensure that the provisions, which impose penal sanctions against workers for participating in or carrying out a strike action is amended. The right to strike falls under the scope of the Convention and our position on this issue has not changed. The Government must ensure that legislative amendments are compliant with the international legal obligations of the Philippines and is swiftly adopted after full and frank consultation with the social partners. It is our expectation that the Government immediately and fully reports progress made to the Committee of Experts. We conclude, given the gravity of the issues in this case the Workers call for a high level tripartite mission.

Conclusions of the Committee

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted with concern the numerous allegations of murders of trade unionists and anti-union violence as well as the allegations regarding the lack of investigation in relation to these allegations.

The Committee noted that the Government has introduced legislative reforms to address some of the issues but regretted that these reforms were not adopted and urged the Government to bring the law into compliance with the Convention.

Taking into account the discussion of the case, the Committee requests the Government to:

- take effective measures to prevent violence in relation to the exercise of workers’ and employers’ organizations legitimate activities;

- immediately and effectively undertake investigations into the allegations of violence in relation to members of workers’ organizations with a view to establishing the facts, determining culpability and punishing the perpetrators;

- operationalize the monitoring bodies, including by providing adequate resources, and provide regular information on these mechanisms and on progress on the cases assigned to them; and

- ensure that all workers without distinction are able to form and join organizations of their choosing in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention.

The Committee calls on the Government to accept a high-level tripartite mission before the next International Labour Conference and to elaborate in consultation with the most representative workers’ and employers’ organizations, a report on progress made for the transmission to the Committee of Experts by 1 September 2019.

Government representative – Once again, the Philippine Government appreciates this space given to us, not only to report on the progress of our tripartite undertaking, but also to clarify points raised and dispute recourse and new unfounded allegations heard. Let me reiterate there are no new 43 reported cases of death in my country. We therefore note with reservation the conclusions reached by the Committee. It is quite surprising in view of the works done by the Philippine social partners in pursuance of the tripartite agreed national action plan. At any rate, we continue to undertake that at the national level no social partner shall be left out, in as much as in the international level, no country, worker or employer shall be left behind to ensure decent work based on social justice in a brighter future. We will respectfully inform this Committee on the official response of the capital on this matter.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2016, Publication: 105th ILC session (2016)



The Government provided the following written information.

In six years of sustained constructive engagement with the ILO, the Government has diligently reported concrete results, framed in our four areas of commitment. The National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council (NTIPC) constituted and institutionalized as the high-level monitoring body with regional tripartite monitoring structures, the Regional Tripartite Monitoring Body (RTMB), has built a comprehensive inventory of 65 cases of extrajudicial killings, 11 cases of abduction and 12 cases of harassment. Of the 65 cases, 50 occurred from 2001 to June 2010 under the Arroyo Administration, while 15 – the cases of Rodel Estrellado, Kenneth Reyes, Rudy and Roderick Dejos, Bonifacio Labasan, Santos Manrique, Josephine Estacio, Carlo Rodriguez, Celito Bacay, Poncing Infante, Emilio Rivera, Romy Almacin, Antonio Petalcorin, Kagi Alimudin Lucman, Rolando Pango and Florencio Romano – are under the Aquino Administration. The NTIPC–MB, with 20 representatives each for employers’ organizations affiliated with the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) and labour organizations affiliated with the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), is monitoring the movement of these cases, including the four resolved by the trial courts; these are: (1) Teotimo Dante, which resulted in the conviction of all four accused on 28 May 2012; (2) Ricardo Ramos, which resulted in the acquittal of the accused for failure to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt on 7 February 2012; (3) Antonio Pantonial, which resulted in the conviction of the accused for murder qualified by treachery; and (4) Fr William Tadena, which resulted in the acquittal of one accused on reasonable doubt, while the other accused is at large. The NTIPC–MB has brought before the Department of Justice (DOJ) chaired AO35-Inter-Agency Committee (AO35-IAC) all of the 65 cases of extrajudicial killings, 11 cases of abduction and 12 cases of harassment. The AO35-IAC report however has focused on the 65 cases of extrajudicial killings, and 11 of which (Diosdado Fortuna, Florante Collantes, Fr William Tadena, Abelardo Ladera, Samuel Bandilla, Tirso Cruz, Gil Gojol, Benjamin Bayles, Rodel Estrellado and Rolando Pango) have been identified as extrajudicial killings based on their criteria/definition.

The 54 cases not covered by AO35-IAC are investigated as regular criminal cases. According to the DOJ, the reasons for the exclusion from AO35-IAC include: (1) insufficiency of evidence which triggers referral of the case to agencies like the police, the National Bureau of Investigation and the Commission on Human Rights for further investigation subject to a second review by the technical working group; and (2) absence of all the elements of extrajudicial killings as provided in the AO35-IAC Operational Guidelines. The non-AO35 cases include cases before the Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA). Case No. 3185 was first brought to the attention of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) through a press statement by the National Confederation of Transport Workers’ Union (NCTU) and the Alliance of Progressive Labor (APL) in June 2013. The case was previously with the Commission on Human Rights (CHR), the police and the DOJ, which spearheads the AO35-IAC. Considering its exclusion from the AO35-IAC, RTMB Region XI in Davao City was tasked with gathering additional information on this case for a possible second review by the AO35.

With regard to CFA Cases Nos 3119 and 3159, reports from the different RTMBs were deliberated at the Tripartite Executive Committee of the NTIPC–MB (TEC–MB) on 6 May 2016. In Case No. 3119, out of the six cases, only the case of Cañabano is considered to be related to freedom of association, but the TEC–MB tasked RTMB XI to further verify and interview Mr Cañabano and the radio anchor involved in the case of RMN Davao Employees Union. The TEC–MB elevates for consideration of the NTIPC–MB the case of Cañabano and the recommendation to refer the other five non-freedom of association cases to the Commission on Human Rights and the Advocate General’s Office of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP). Of the 65 cases of killings, only 12 were filed in court, with nine of the cases with resolution and three – two cases of ongoing investigation and one archived – pending resolution. A detailed breakdown of the status of the cases will be provided in a separate report. Progress on the 11 AO35-IAC cases is hindered by lack of material witnesses and/or non-cooperation of victims’ families and relatives. The limited capacity for forensic evidence and reliance on witnesses/testimonial evidence render the prospects not too positive. The Government continues to encounter the obstacles of desistance or disinterest of the victims or their families to pursue the cases. Much needs to be done in the criminal justice system that brought this situation.

The Government is addressing the source of the problem through wide-ranging reforms in labour market governance and the sectoral goal of ensuring decent work under the ILO Technical Cooperation Programme (TCP). The TCP with the ILO started only after the 2009 High-level Mission, or 56 years after the ratification of Convention No. 87 and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), on 29 December 1953. The ILO TCP on training and capacity-building can generally be classified into: (a) capacity-building and advocacy for international labour standards, freedom of association and collective bargaining; and (b) observance of prescribed conduct by the police and military. Over 70 capacity-building activities on labour rights have been carried out under the TCP. Around 4,384 stakeholders have been oriented and capacitated on international labour standards, and on the observance of tripartite instruments governing the engagement of the social partners, including the police, military and key government agencies, during labour disputes. TCP activities have resulted in:

(a) Key instruments governing the engagement of the social partners have been developed: (1) Joint DOLE–PNP–PEZA Guidelines (PNP Guidelines), signed on 23 May 2011; (2) DOLE Administrative Order No. 104, Operational Guidelines on Inter-Agency Coordination and Monitoring of Labor Disputes (DOLE implementors “dos” and “don’ts”), signed on 27 February 2012; (3) Guidelines on the Conduct of the DOLE, DILG, DND, DOJ, AFP and PNP Relative to the Exercise of Workers’ Rights and Activities (AFP Guidelines), signed on 7 May 2012; and (4) Operational Guidelines on the Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies. The PNP and AFP Guidelines have been effective in coordinating all stakeholders and preventing violence during strikes. In recent cases in Region 4A, violence was prevented when the newly engaged security agency was instructed to observe the PNP Guidelines and in the PhilSteel labour dispute, where the PNP has summoned the security agencies reported to have crossed the picket to explain why their license should not be revoked. In the Davao labour disputes at Lapanday Box (banana plantation) and RMN (radio station), the PNP Guidelines mobilized multi-stakeholder participation in ensuring the peaceful exercise of workers’ rights during collective bargaining negotiations. In the labour dispute at Albay Electric Cooperative, Inc. (ALECO), where the management directly requested the PNP Legaspi Station police to enter the company premises, the PNP Guidelines have helped to prevent the supposed plan to dismantle the picket line. Information on the PNP and AFP Guidelines is now part of the DOLE standard operating procedure in labour disputes likely to develop into a strike/lockout.

(b) To prevent the conversion of labour disputes into criminal cases, the DOJ issued Memorandum Circular No. 16 on 22 April 2014 to reinforce Circulars Nos 15, series of 1982, and 9, series of 1986, requiring fiscals/prosecutors to secure clearance from the DOLE and/or the Office of the President “before taking cognizance of complaints for preliminary investigation and the filing in court of the corresponding information of cases arising out of, or related to, a labour dispute”, including with “allegations of violence, coercion, physical injuries, assault upon a person in authority and other similar acts of intimidation obstructing the free ingress to and egress from a factory or place of operation of the machines of such factory, or the employer’s premises”. The DOLE and DOJ further issued Joint Clarificatory Memorandum Circular No. 1-15 on the requirement of clearance from the DOLE and/or from the Office of the President for cases arising out of the exercise of freedom of association, collective bargaining, concerted actions and other trade union activities.

The TCP includes a component on the improvement of labour market governance. Together with the social partners, labour rights violations and labour-related incidence of violence were addressed by identifying the root causes of labour disputes, resulting in the mechanisms for labour law compliance, dispute prevention, settlement and case disposition. Robust tripartite consultation with the social partners on policy and programme implementation were strengthened. These resulted in:

Substantially improved implementation of labour laws: the two-year-old Labor Laws Compliance System (LLCS), supported by the ILO and the tripartite partners, with a management information system (an online web-based application system that utilizes an electronic checklist for real-time transmission and processing of data collected from the field) and combines the regulatory and developmental enforcement approaches, achieved remarkable accomplishments: (a) projected company visitations become more frequent, from once every 16 years to once every two years; (b) the establishments covered increased, from an annual average of 23,000 in 2004–13 to an annual average of 63,627 in 2014–15; (c) the number of workers covered increased, from an annual average of 628,000 in 2004–13 to an annual average of 2.9 million in 2014–15; (d) compliance with general labour standards increased, from 70.73 per cent in 2004–13 to 77.59 per cent in 2014–15; (e) the correction rate increased, from 21 per cent in 2004–13 to 27 per cent in 2014–15; (f) the enforcement of a total of 94 labour laws, including regulations on contracting or ambiguous or disguised employment, compared to only 23 under the old enforcement system; and (g) with 574 labour law compliance officers compared with the previous 202 labour inspectors. The tripartite partners endorsed House Bill No. 4659 in the 16th Congress to institutionalize the LLCS, and it will be refiled in the 17th Congress as part of the DOLE 2016–2022 Priority Legislative Agenda.

Effective case management system: the 30-day mandatory conciliation-mediation services, or the Single Entry Approach (SEnA) for individual disputes, was institutionalized through Republic Act No. 10396, along with exhaustive conciliation-mediation for collective disputes and the overall objective of empowering the parties to process and resolve issues at the plant level through convergence with DOLE programmes and services. SEnA, as a prior mechanism, has afforded workers and employers fair, prompt, accessible and inexpensive settlement of labour issues. It has shortened the processing of labour disputes to an average of 15 days compared with the duration of one year to ten years in compulsory arbitration; 99 per cent reduction of small money claims before the DOLE Regional Offices and reduction in the dockets of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC); and free and accessible services, as it is present in all DOLE offices. SEnA has resulted in high settlement and disposition rates of 81 per cent and 94 per cent (102,382 cases settled and 128,257 cases disposed), respectively, from 2011 to 2015. It has benefited around 154,439 workers with PHP 4.951-B monetary awards.

Unprecedented single-digit strike incidence: empowering the parties through exhaustive conciliation-mediation of collective labour disputes and rationalized use of assumption of jurisdiction power of the Secretary of Labor and Employment resulted in single-digit annual strike incidence from 69 in 2005–10 to only 17 in 2011–15; while on assumed cases, from 104 in 2005–10 to just 14 in 2011–15, punctuated with a decline in 2013–15 to only three, resolved through a conciliation order.

Institutionalized expansive tripartism and social dialogue: tripartism and social dialogue is institutionalized through Republic Act No. 10395 as the primary instrument to promote transparency, participative governance and sectoral accountability, addressing social disparities, while improving social cohesion among all stakeholders. Several tripartite structures at the national level and across regions and industries have been created to serve as venues for stakeholder participation in policy- and decision-making processes on matters concerning labour and employment. As of January 2016, there are 134 regional Tripartite Industry Peace Councils (TIPCs); nine national Industry Tripartite Councils (ITCs); and 284 regional ITCs. These structures are forums for tripartite information and prior consultation in developing regional or industry framework agreements. Thus, in these tripartite structures, a total of 178 industry voluntary codes of good practices on productivity and decent work were formulated from 2011 to 2015 to serve as voluntary industry standards. Through social dialogue, the labour sector in the NTIPC was able to get commitment on linking investment incentives with compliance with international labour standards. To date, the creation of workers’ rights board for specific industries or tariff lines that will be accessed under the Generalized System of Preferences or free trade agreements is being worked out with the Department of Trade and Industry. At the workplace level, the single-digit strike incidence indicates the growing acceptance of social dialogue, either by them or through conciliation-mediation, as an empowering tool for the parties to resolve their disputes. This has been recognized even by the militant section of the labour movement with big cases that historically would have resulted in strikes or lockouts being settled through social dialogue. Tripartism and social dialogue have never been as robust and productive as under the current administration. The progress achieved through reforms implemented with support from the social partners is a good indicator of the constructive engagement ushered in by tripartism and social dialogue.

With respect to the recommendation by the High-level Mission to align the Labor Code, as amended, with international labour standards, particularly on freedom of association and collective bargaining, by amending the following: (a) Article 263(g) of the Labor Code, on overbroad assumption of jurisdiction power of the Secretary of Labor and Employment; (b) Article 234(c) of the Labor Code, requiring 20 per cent support signatures for registration of independent unions; (c) Article 264 and 272 of the Labor Code, imposing penal sanctions for peaceful strikes; (d) Article 270 of the Labor Code, requiring prior approval for foreign assistance; and (e) Article 237(1) of the Labor Code, on the ten locals requirement for registration of federations, the proposed bills failed to pass during the remaining sessions of the 16th Congress. Thus, all shall, subject to the discretion of the incoming administration, be part of the DOLE Legislative Priority Measures for the 17th Congress, including the following legislative proposals: (a) Security of Tenure Bill, Employment Relations, and Termination of Employment; (b) Rationalizing Government Intervention in Labor Dispute or the proposed modified Assumption of Jurisdiction Bill; (c) Magna Carta of Filipino Seafarers Bill; (d) LLCS Bill; and (e) Occupational Safety and Health Standards Bill. However, pending the adoption of these amendments, administrative issuances have been implemented and enforced through the ILO and tripartite partners supported LLCS, which contributed to the country’s industrial peace.

While progress has been achieved, the TCP with the ILO arising from the 2009 High-level Mission is not over. Reforms in labour market governance are foundational and sustainability would benefit from technical assistance on: (a) conciliation-mediation techniques and strategies; (b) application of international labour standards on adjudication; (c) obtaining high level of compliance with labour laws and management/development of the LLCS–MIS; (d) development/implementation of just transition and green jobs; (e) understanding non-standard forms of employment and policy approaches; and (f) business and human rights. The track followed to address the source of the problem affecting compliance with this Convention has shown positive results. The Government is committed to aligning the provisions of the Labor Code with Conventions Nos 87 and 98, and to fully realizing the potential of the NTIPC–MB and RTMBs in case build-up, the NTIPC has proposed a fully-funded, independent and capacitated case-based NTIPC–MB Tripartite Validating Team. The Validating Team will be constituted under NTIPC–MB auspices, on cases needing independent validation or for the review of the cases under CFA Cases Nos 3119, 3139 and 3185. In closing, the Government affirms its commitment to obtaining substantial progress on cases with allegations of trade union rights violations. The AO35 IAC and the National Monitoring Mechanism (NMM) (Note 1) are already in place and work with the NTIPC–MB in ensuring progress in observance of Conventions Nos 87 and 98. What remains to be done is the reform of the criminal justice system, which is forthcoming with the new Congress and under the administration of President Rodrigo R. Duterte.

In addition, before the Committee, a Government representative expressed her Government’s commitment to complying with the Convention in law and practice, building on the six years of sustained constructive engagement with the ILO supervisory bodies and the Office, including the 2009 ILO High-level Mission. It was the first time since the High-level Mission that the Philippines had reported to the Conference Committee on concrete measures and results achieved. She expressed great appreciation for the ILO’s support and technical assistance, the first provided to the Philippines since the ratification of the Convention. The Government, with support from the social partners, represented by local affiliates of the ITUC and the IOE, had implemented four major reforms towards giving full effect to the Convention. The first was the built-in institutionalized high-level tripartite monitoring body, the NTIPC–MB, with a regional tripartite structure, that helped to ensure observance of international labour standards, and particularly the Convention. The NTIPC–MB worked with an inter-agency committee created by the President under Administrative Order No. 35 (AO35), to provide appropriate redress using composite teams of investigators for unsolved cases of extrajudicial killings. The second reform was a proactive system of tracking cases involving allegations of labour rights violations, in coordination with the Commission on Human Rights, the Philippine National Police, the armed forces of the Philippines, the Department of Justice and the courts. The third reform consisted of tripartite-supported legislative reforms for effective compliance with the principles of freedom of association and collective bargaining. And the fourth consisted of foundational and wide-ranging reforms in labour market governance towards securing decent work for all, resulting in significant progress in the effective implementation of labour laws, fair and speedy settlement of disputes, including those involving industrial action, and strengthened tripartism and social dialogue. The impact of the reforms would not be felt overnight, as the root causes of the problems needed to be addressed in order to find lasting and sustainable industrial peace based on social justice. Thus, the collaboration and constructive engagement under the ILO technical cooperation programme on freedom of association encompassed a much broader agenda, with the concrete results presented in detail in the written submission to the Committee.

The NTIPC–MB had built a comprehensive inventory of 65 cases of extrajudicial killings, including those covered by Cases Nos 3185 and 3119 of the Committee on Freedom of Association. The information concerning the two cases was raw and validation by the Regional Tripartite Monitoring Body (RTMB) was still ongoing. Regarding Case No. 3159, the initial finding of unfair labour practice with fines was under appeal before the National Labour Relations Committee (NLRC). Although the case was pending in the legal and judicial systems, the Government was committed to providing the Committee with an update on its progress. In the absence of judicial reforms, in addition to the information provided in the written submission, the Government had diligently pursued, under the technical cooperation programme, awareness raising and capacity building on fundamental labour rights. The Philippine National Police (PNP) and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) guidelines had been effective in coordinating the action of all stakeholders to allow the free exercise of trade union rights and to prevent violence, injuries and death in strike and picket areas. It formed part of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) standard operating procedure in labour disputes likely to ripen into a strike/lockout. The Department of Justice (DOJ) Memorandum Circular No. 16-14 had reinforced the requirement for prosecutors to secure clearance from the Department of Labor and Employment or the Office of the President for all complaints arising out of, or related to, a labour dispute with a view to preventing indiscriminate conversion of labour disputes into criminal cases. Certification had been issued in at least five criminal cases, which had resulted in their dismissal. With the effective use of these instruments, there had been no reported cases of violence in strike and picket areas.

Implementation of labour law compliance had substantially improved through the new Labor Laws Compliance System (LLCS). Trade union organizations had been engaged in the conduct of the Special Assessment or Visit of Establishments (SAVE), with nationwide operation, and their participation had been institutionalized in the revised Labor Laws Compliance System rules. Under separate issuances, terms and conditions of work of seafarers engaged in domestic shipping and international voyages, fishers on board commercial fishing vessels, collection agency, bus drivers and domestic workers were covered for the first time by the LLCS. A more effective case management system was in place, namely through the SEnA for individual disputes, and an improved labour arbitration system had shown its capacity to decide cases within a shorter period of six months with a higher degree of fairness, equity and consistency, compared to the previous record of one to two years.

Supplementing the information provided in the written submission, she also emphasized the unprecedented single-digit incidence of strikes, as well as the rare use of the assumption of jurisdiction, only upon the consent of the parties, with no record of defiance and ending in conciliated decisions. Stronger and more expansive social dialogue was in place and there was commitment for trade and economic agencies to link investment incentives to compliance with international labour standards. The creation of a workers’ rights board for specific industries or which that would be accessed under the Generalized System of Preferences or free trade agreements, was being worked out by the social partners in the Clothing and Textile Industry Tripartite Council. With respect to the call by the High-level Mission to align the Labour Code with international labour standards, the NTIPC had adopted tripartite resolutions endorsing draft bills. Although deliberations on the proposed bills had been completed in the Lower House of Congress, they had failed to be passed by the Senate for various reasons, including the change in leadership in the Committee on Labor. The Chairperson of the Committee on Labor and Employment in the Lower House had committed to refile all the bills as principal sponsor in the 17th Congress starting on 25 July 2016.

On behalf of the NTIPC, as part of the priority legislative agenda 2016–22, the Government was committed to: (i) aligning the provisions of the Labour Code with the Convention; (ii) strengthening the NTIPC–MB and fully realizing its potential in case build-up, by operationalizing the recently approved NTIPC Resolution for a fully-funded, independent and capacitated case-based tripartite validating team for cases needing independent review, such as Cases Nos 3119, 3159 and 3185; (iii) ensuring funding for the operation of the validating teams that would be constituted from the existing 2016 DOLE budget for the NTIPC; and (iv) including its funding as a separate budget item in the proposed 2017 General Appropriation Act. She concluded by affirming the Government’s commitment, along with the social partners, to obtaining sustained progress in compliance with the Convention in law and practice, and to working with relevant government agencies for reforms in the criminal justice system towards ending cases of impunity arising from trade union rights violations. Recognizing that the work was far from complete, but also the concrete results already achieved, she reiterated the Government’s gratitude to the ILO, its supervisory bodies and donor countries.

The Employer members recalled their disagreement with the views of the Committee of Experts concerning the right to strike, and particularly that, since there were no ILO standards on strikes, the scope and conditions of the exercise of the right to strike should be regulated at the national level, a position endorsed by the Government group at the tripartite meeting in February 2015 and by the Governing Body in March 2015. They emphasized that, at face value, this was a case of systemic discrimination by the State against workers’ organizations and their members. Closer examination of the issues suggested, however, that this long-standing case had three facets. The first concerned the specific allegations made by workers’ organizations over the years. The Employer members emphasized that they did not wish to denigrate in any way the seriousness of the issues brought to the attention of the Committee. This year’s observation concerned serious allegations of human rights violations, including: two killings and an assassination attempt on trade union officials; the violent suppression of strikes and other collective actions by the police and the armed forces; harassment of unionists and prevention of people from joining trade unions in export processing zones; breaches of the Memorandum of Agreement between DOLE and the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA); and bankruptcy falsification to deny workers trade union rights. Such cases could not go unchallenged.

The second facet was the Government’s response to those allegations, and the context of that response. The Government had not been idle. The main elements of its activity included: (i) the National Monitoring Mechanism (NMM), with the mandate to monitor the nation’s progress on the resolution of human rights violations, prioritizing in the short term cases of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and torture, and to provide legal and other services, which had resulted in several convictions for unlawful killings; (ii) the Inter-Agency Committee on Extra-Legal Killings, Enforced Disappearances, Torture and Other Grave Violations of the Right to Life, Liberty and Security of Persons (IAC), entrusted with the investigation of cases of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture and other grave human rights violations perpetrated by state and non-state forces, the prioritization of unsolved cases and the creation of special investigation teams. The social partners had been invited to participate actively in the investigations, while members of the NTIPC–MB had been given observer status in the IAC; and (iii) awareness-raising campaigns on observance of freedom of assembly, capacity building for monitoring focal persons and measures to strengthen the existing monitoring structures. The Employer members welcomed these developments and requested the Government to provide further information on the functioning of the NMM, the Department of Justice Special Task Force and the IAC in practice, including on the participation of the social partners in IAC investigations, as well as the number and types of cases addressed by these mechanisms. Progress in many cases was still inconclusive. For example, the main update provided on three cases of the union officials killed was, respectively, that the victim’s mother had decided not to pursue the case, that the case was still on trial and that assistance from the victim’s wife could not be obtained. However, the Employer members believed that the context in which the Government must investigate these serious allegations, a long-standing background of political and civil instability, including armed insurrection, had not been given sufficient weight in the consideration of this case, both at present and in the past. Not every human rights violation was a breach of labour rights, especially if the person against whom the violation had been committed had been engaged in an unlawful or criminal act at the time. It was therefore vital to the consideration of the cases that it be made clear what law was being transgressed and whether that law conformed with international standards. This was not always clear and any lack of clarity could only inhibit fair consideration of the case. The unions had expressed concerns that the Human Security Act could be misused to suppress legitimate trade union activities. For its part, the Government had stated that the Act could not be used against the exercise of trade union rights, especially legitimate trade union activities, and that guidelines existed to ensure that the armed forces and the police could only intervene in trade union activities if expressly requested to do so by the DOLE, if a criminal act had been, was or was about to be committed, or in the case of actual violence arising out of a labour dispute.

With respect to the Labour Code, the Employer members noted that a Tripartite Labour Code Review Team was a partner in the drafting process. Concerning Article 2 of the Convention, Bill No. 5886 currently before Congress only assigned the right to establish and join organizations to aliens with a valid working permit and did not deal with concerns over the denial of the right to organize to certain public servants. The Employer members recalled that, while it was possible under Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), to exclude certain public servants from collective bargaining, this was not a matter contemplated by Convention No.87, which dealt with the right to organize. They hoped that legislative measures would ensure that all workers benefited from the right to establish and join organizations and requested the Government to provide information on any developments in this respect. With regard to Article 3, the Employer members noted that the proposed changes harmonized the list of industries indispensable to the national interest, in which governmental intervention was possible, with the essential services criteria of the Convention. They welcomed the Government’s initiative to limit governmental intervention to industries which could be defined as essential services in the strict sense of the term. In relation to the comments of the Committee of Experts concerning the principle that no penal sanctions should be imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike, they expressed concern as there was no consensus over the existence of a right to strike in the Convention. They also noted other positive steps, such as bills, removing the requirement for government permission for foreign assistance to trade unions and reducing the registration requirement from ten to five affiliates for federations.

The third facet of the present case was the manner in which the Committee of Experts considered and reflected upon the information received. It was this aspect upon which the Employer members harboured concerns relating to the scope of the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee to reach conclusions on matters that were not labour issues covered by the Convention. It was not the report of the Committee of Experts to the Conference Committee, but rather the conclusions of the Conference Committee on the case that formed the basis for government action. It was therefore important for the Committee of Experts to reflect the information received factually and to consider all the facts in a balanced manner. The Employer members criticized the fact that the Committee of Experts noted “with deep concern” alleged serious violations of trade union rights, while it simply reported the details of the Government’s response. An uninformed reader could interpret the presentation of the report as having a particular emphasis, when that ultimately might not reflect the outcome of the Conference Committee’s deliberations.

In the view of the Employer members, there were three lessons to be learned: (i) cases often had more to them than was apparent from the initial allegations; (ii) government responses were not of themselves proof of solution, conclusive results being the preferred outcome; and (iii) the Committee of Experts needed to ensure balanced consideration of cases by not emphasizing or characterizing any particular aspect of allegations or government responses, this being a matter for the Conference Committee. The Employer members therefore made the following recommendations: (i) that the Committee hope that all alleged cases of the violation of trade unions rights would be the subject of appropriate investigations, which would be vigorously pursued and finalized in the near future with a view to establishing the facts, determining responsibilities and punishing the perpetrators; (ii) that the Committee acknowledge the establishment of several monitoring entities and requested the Government to provide further information on these mechanisms and progress on the cases assigned to them; (iii) that the Committee urge the Government to continue bringing national legislation into conformity with certain Articles of the Convention; and (iv) that the Committee of Experts be encouraged to confine its observations to a factual reporting of the concerns of the social partners and government responses, and leave it to the Conference Committee to place emphasis on any aspect it deemed appropriate.

The Worker members considered that the designation by the Committee of Experts of violation of freedom of association in the Philippines as a double-footnoted case was an appropriate reaction to the ongoing violence against trade unionists and the lack of prosecutions for extrajudicial killings. They were deeply concerned that the exercise of the right to freedom of association would further suffer under the newly elected President, who had openly admitted his association with death squads responsible for over 1,000 executions while Mayor of Davao and had threatened to rule the country by executive fiat if the legislature or courts stood in his way. The avoidance of unions through false forms of employment and the defects in existing laws and their enforcement had led to a climate in which freedom of association was nearly impossible to exercise. The Worker members recalled that the Committee of Experts had expressed deep concern over the allegations of anti-union violence and had urged the Government to undertake appropriate investigations. They further emphasized that the Government had an obligation to take measures to guarantee that trade union rights could be exercised in normal conditions with respect for basic human rights and in a climate free of violence, pressure, fear and threats of any kind, but that it had so far failed in this regard, as shown by some recent cases of anti-union violence. On 2 July 2013, Antonio Petalcorin, President of the Davao-based Network of Transport Organizations (NETO) had been killed as a result of his campaign to expose corruption at the Transportation Board Office in Davao. The Government claimed that, pursuant to its guidelines, this murder was not an extrajudicial killing. Shortly afterwards, one of his colleagues had been murdered and another had been subjected to threats and violence forcing him into hiding. On 29 November 2014, Rolando Pango, who was organizing sugar plantation workers on land leased and operated by the President of the United Sugar Producers Federation of the Philippines, had been killed in Binalbagan town in Negros Occidental. The case had been determined by the Government to be an extrajudicial killing. Latest reports indicated that two men had been charged with murder, but the status of the case was unknown. On 8 March 2015, Florencio Romano, an organizer of the National Coalition for the Protection of Workers’ Rights, affiliated to Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU), who was actively organizing workers in a food-processing plant, had been found murdered in Batangas City, south of Manila. No one had been charged with the murder. In April 2016, gunmen had opened fire on a KMU camp set up by agricultural workers in preparation for a strike in Pantukan town, Compostela Valley, concerning the dismissal of 52 workers, and there had been an attempt to burn down the workers’ camp. No one had been arrested for the crime. Such cases were evidence that trade unionists were at great risk. The Human Security Act constituted a powerful tool to further undermine freedom of association, as it vaguely defined terrorism, allowing the Government to arrest and detain persons suspected of terrorism without warrants. Under the Act, citizens, including labour leaders, could be subjected to surveillance, wiretapping, detention, interrogation and the freezing of bank accounts on mere suspicion of terrorism. Mandatory prison sentences were set at 40 years without the possibility of parole, and heavy penalties were also established for lesser crimes. The United Nations Human Rights Council and numerous human rights organizations had raised serious concerns about the impact of the Act on the exercise of freedom of association, which needed to be remedied in law to prevent the Government from the misapplication of these provisions when it so wished.

The use of dubious forms of employment to obscure the existence of an employment relationship was a serious problem intended to divest workers of their rights under the law, which was particularly acute in the Philippines. Over 73 per cent of the workforce was estimated to be employed on short-term contracts in 2013, which undermined the ability of trade unions to recruit members, as contract workers were not allowed to establish and join unions by law. Misclassification of workers as “confidential” was very common, since under the Labour Code such workers were prohibited from joining a union. In other cases, workers were simply given a different denominator, to exclude them from an employment relationship. Employees in broadcasting companies were referred to as “talents”; companies engaged in tuna fishing and processing referred to their fishers as “industrial partners”; in one case, the denial of the employment status of fishing workers had been used to refuse critical assistance to 43 crew members captured and held in captivity for months in Indonesia. In addition, several classes of workers, such as firefighters and prison wardens, were excluded from the Code. The Committee of Experts had noted obstacles to the registration of trade unions, including high minimum membership requirements. In 2009, in the context of the High-level Mission, the ILO had noted that, under Executive Order No. 180, that the percentage requirement was calculated as a proportion of all government employees throughout the country, which was likely to preclude the establishment of a union of public sector employees. The Committee of Experts had also taken note of allegations of the violation of freedom of association in export processing zones (EPZs) and the violation of the Memorandum of Understanding between DOLE and PEZA. The measures in place to combat violations in EPZs were ineffective to sanction those who violated the law, even when courts ordered reinstatement. The Worker members referred to the case of a company in the EPZ in Batino, Laguna, supplier to a major Korean electronics multinational company, which had retrenched more than 30 workers who were known to be union activists a few weeks before the certification elections, had refused to allow these workers to cast their votes inside the company premises, contrary to the law, and had refused to recognize the union that had nonetheless been chosen as the bargaining representative.

The Worker members concluded by recalling the numerous legislative issues raised by the Committee of Experts, including the amendment of the law to remove the possibility of compulsory arbitration in sectors that were not essential in the strict sense of the term, the amendment of sections 264 and 272 to remove the possibility of penal sanctions for participating in a peaceful strike, and section 270, which prohibited unions from receiving foreign assistance without prior approval. Despite the High-level Mission that had visited the Philippines in 2009 with regard to freedom of association, and a number of activities undertaken under the auspices of the ILO, many of the concerns raised remained unresolved and it could be time for another such mission to return to the country.

The Employer member of the Philippines qualified his reaction to the double-footnoting of the case of the Philippines by the Committee of Experts as suspended belief. He raised questions concerning: (i) the extent of the mandate of the Committee of Experts to make conclusions and recommendations on the subject of criminal cases and their prosecution under the national law of a member State; (ii) when there would be a procedure for the closure of recurring and continuing general allegations of harassment and threats to the right of workers to organize; and (iii) the mandate of the Committee of Experts regarding matters of the national security of a member State. His country should not be taken to task for substantially criminal cases remotely connected to labour standards, which should be left to the national justice system. He believed that the Philippines was a very, if not the most, compliant country with the Convention in that part of the world. The Committee of Experts should have given more thought to the background of a continuing armed insurgency that hopefully might be resolved soon. Investigations into violations of the Convention were different in situations of relative peace or of armed conflict. Rebels in the guise of trade unionists, or vice versa, might be hard to distinguish in a very fluid situation, where objectives were identical. The better part of discretion was to be discreet in telling a member State, in the context of armed conflict, to stop military operations conducted in the interests of national security simply because trade unionists might be involved.

Double footnoting was justified by the seriousness of a case, which seemed to be equated with failure to provide quick results or automatic responses. That could not always be achieved by a legal system that recognized independent branches of government put in place to achieve checks and balances in the exercise of governmental powers. In a constitutional democracy such as the Philippines, structural challenges to the well-meaning and inspired work of the Committee of Experts must be recognized. For instance, the executive could not order: the judiciary to speed up the wheels of justice, although several procedural reforms were in place to achieve this; or the Congress to enact laws recommended by the Committee. In general, the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee of Experts read like directives to the executive department of a sovereign state to: drop alleged trumped up criminal cases involving trade unionists; provide security to trade unionists allegedly under threat; or stop legitimate military operations in response to an armed insurgency. He raised the question of whether the Committee of Experts should make such requests and whether a member State was obliged to do more than expected under its own legal system and pursuant to its own determination of self-preservation and the national interest.

The Worker member of the Philippines said that there would be opportunities for reform, since a new Government would take office on 30 June and the President-elect had promised to end unlawful contractual employment schemes and to uphold the rights of workers to security of tenure. Prospects were bright for peace negotiations with the aim of ending decades of war in the Philippines. Recalling that the right to organize had been recognized in the Constitution of the Philippines since 1899, he said that, in practice much still remained to be done to fully comply with the Convention, which could only be achieved by the Government with the cooperation and active participation of the social partners. Following the 2009 High-level Mission, which had been welcomed by the tripartite constituents, a comprehensive technical cooperation programme to improve understanding and respect for the fundamental principles and rights of freedom of association and collective bargaining had been adopted. Nevertheless, reported killings of trade unionists had continued, namely of Antonio Petalcorin and Rolando Pango, reported by the Center of United and Progressive Workers (SENTRO) in 2015. Mr Pango’s killing had been considered to be trade union-related, while that of Mr Petalcorin was being treated as an ordinary crime. This was a serious matter that should not be taken lightly by the social partners. Much had already been done, as reported by the Government, but more was needed to further reduce the number of cases of violations and the existing gaps between law and practice. The ITUC, Education International (EI), the Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (TUCP) and SENTRO had referred to particular cases, and the Federation of Free Workers (FFW) had a number of cases which it was trying to resolve domestically. As examples of violations of Article 3(2) of the Convention, he said that, while the FFW was organizing tugboat workers in 2012, government agencies had been used to harass union leaders to discourage union organizing. The Special Board of Marine Inquiry in Manila had been used to harass the union president, Jose Emmy Tiongco, of the Malayan Tugboat Officers Association, through an administrative case for allegedly violating marine safety in 2013. Qualified theft charges had also been brought against Tugboat Captain Ruel Guda, as well as Bendell Esquerra, Mark Anthony Orbito and John Mark Trio to destroy their resolve to maintain their union membership, and the case had been dismissed for lack of probable cause in 2014. A case had also been brought against union President Tiongco and 15 others for illegal strikes, not with the DOLE or NLRC, which had jurisdiction over labour disputes, but before the Maritime Industry Authority, at the latter’s initiative, despite objections by the union and the fact that there was no verified complaint. The case had later been dropped. Despite the requirement in the AFP Guidelines for clearance from DOLE or the Office of the President before filing criminal information in court on cases arising out of or related to labour disputes, Captain Tajanlangit and Ramil Estolloso, Federation of Free Workers members, had also been indicted for attempted homicide. These cases had subsequently been dismissed after trial for lack of evidence. Similarly, women trade union leaders Jocelyn Nono and Bing Jumamil had been indicted and were facing libel charges for allegedly holding a streamer with a derogatory statement against their employer at a picket line of striking workers. A positive example of the application of the Guidelines had resulted in criminal charges being dismissed against 15 trade unionists in a delivery company and nine trade union members in a bus company, due to lack of clearance from DOLE. Although both workers and employers were involved in the national monitoring body, the latter needed to be funded and given full-time personnel to fulfil its functions effectively of monitoring violations of trade union rights. He also lauded the tripartite legislative proposals to amend the Labour Code in line with the Convention and other ILO standards, while emphasizing that continued lobbying for the adoption of such amendments in law was needed. He concluded by urging the Government to: end killings of trade unionists and stop other trade union rights violations; review the case of Antonio Petalcorin, the killing of whom was in the view of the trade unions related to his initiative of organizing a union; prosecute and punish perpetrators of trade union rights violations; provide adequate funding and capable staff for the national monitoring body; effectively implement the requirement for clearance before filing criminal charges against workers in cases related to or arising out of the exercise of the right to freedom of association; remove the harsh punishment of termination of employment for workers involved in illegal strikes or for defiance of the assumption order of the Secretary of Labor and Employment; certify as urgent all tripartite endorsed bills in Congress related to freedom of association to be compliant with ILO standards; and ratify the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151).

The Government member of Cambodia, speaking on behalf of the Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Republic of Korea, acknowledged the efforts made by the Government to address issues pertaining to the application of the Convention and Convention No. 98 and encouraged its continuing technical cooperation with the ILO. The tripartite-endorsed reforms instituted by the Government in response to the 2009 High-level Mission included the establishment of the monitoring and investigation mechanisms, including the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council – Monitoring Body (NTIPC–MB), the National Monitoring Mechanism (NMM) and the Inter Agency Committee on Extra Legal Killings, Enforced Disappearances, Torture and Other Grave Violations of the Right to Life, Liberty and Security of Persons (IAC); capacity building for national and regional monitoring focal persons, such as the police and the military, the judiciary and prosecution, on the observance of freedom of association and collective bargaining since 2010; as well as reforms of labour justice administration, trade incentives linkage with the observance of labour rights and a creative track of securing high-level compliance with labour standards by transforming the enforcement mechanism into the LLCS. He highlighted the reduction in the number of cases of trade union rights violations as a tangible demonstration of bringing an end to cases of civil liberties and trade union rights violations, and called on the Committee to consider the foregoing efforts and progress, and most especially the commitments made by the Government to align its legal and institutional mechanisms with the requirements of Conventions Nos 87 and 98.

The Government member of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States, as well as the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Norway and the Republic of Moldova, emphasized their involvement in the promotion of universal ratification and implementation of the core labour standards in the framework of the Action Plan on Human Rights, adopted in July 2015, and recalled the commitments made by the Philippines within the framework of the GSP+ Agreement and the Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the One Part, and the Republic of the Philippines, of the Other Part. She noted with deep concern the allegations of violations of freedom of association in the Philippines and, in particular, the killing of trade union leaders, the abduction and arbitrary detention of trade union members and the dramatic rise in false criminal charges against them. Welcoming the establishment by the Government of monitoring entities entrusted with investigating extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and torture, she concurred with the Committee of Experts and expressed the firm hope that the established bodies, with the active participation of the social partners, would appropriately investigate all cases, determine responsibilities and punish the perpetrators. Referring to the EU–Philippines Justice Support Programme, now in its second phase of implementation, she urged the Government to provide information on the number of cases investigated and the punishments imposed. Furthermore, as indicated in the observation of the Committee of Experts, the Government should take measures to: amend the Labour Code so as to bring it into conformity with the Convention; ensure that House Bill No. 5886 safeguards the right to establish and join organizations of all workers in the Philippines, irrespective of their residence or work permit; and adopt legislation which would guarantee to public sector, temporary or outsourced workers, as well as workers in managerial positions, the right to establish and join organizations to defend their occupational interests. A reasonable minimum membership requirement for establishment of an independent trade union should be determined in consultation with the social partners and a requirement for government permission to receive foreign assistance should be repealed. Relevant legislation should be adopted to give effect to the Government’s intention to restrict compulsory arbitration to essential services and to remove penal sanctions for the exercise of the right to strike.

The Worker member of Japan, also speaking on behalf of the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF), said that trade unions should have the right to organize their activities without interference by the Government. He shared the deep concern expressed by the Committee of Experts with regard to numerous serious violations of trade union rights, including harassment, disappearances and killings of trade unionists. He considered that the current situation in the country could discourage foreign investment and urged the Government to investigate the murders.

The Employer member of the United Kingdom, referring to the observation of the Committee of Experts in relation to the right to strike, recalled that there was no consensus of the social partners as to whether Convention No. 87 included the right to strike. He pointed out that the Government group considered that the right to strike was to be regulated at the national level and expressed concern about the fact that the Committee of Experts continued to make observations regarding the right to strike in the context of Convention No. 87. He considered that such observations, which were intended to facilitate the work of the Conference Committee, the apex of the ILO supervisory machinery, risked being misinterpreted. He therefore hoped that the Committee of Experts would reflect upon the tension that such observations created and the importance of the harmony of the social partners and the Government group across the ILO supervisory system.

An observer representing Public Services International (PSI) recalled the previous discussion of this case in 2009 and said that the “soft” approach in terms of government initiatives and the availability of ILO assistance had not delivered the expected results, as the case was being discussed again. The core issues of labour law reform and non-compliance with the Convention remained at stake. Referring to the statement made by the Worker member of the Philippines, she hoped that the promises made by the incoming President would be fulfilled in relation to ending unlawful short contracts of employment and upholding the right of workers to security of tenure. At the same time, she recalled that the change of Government would lead to the reinitiation of complex negotiations and referred to ambiguous statements by the President-elect during the electoral campaign on the role of labour unions that sounded more like threats than an invitation to cooperation. Public Services International affiliates had cooperated in good faith with the former Government and encouraging results had been achieved in the campaign to ratify Convention No. 151. This had primarily been done through the work of the social partners in the public sector, and she suggested that the results achieved in the public sector could serve as good practice for correct industrial relations in the private sector as well. Recalling the strong final statement made by the Employer members seven years ago regarding the need to take urgent action for the implementation of the Convention in law and practice, she expressed the hope that ILO constituents would work together to produce tangible change in the Philippines.

The Worker member of the Republic of Korea drew the Committee’s attention to the infringement of freedom of association in export processing zones (EPZs). Despite the fact that the Department of Labor and Employment had promised to amend the Labour Code and to investigate extrajudicial killings of trade unionists in the wake of the ILO High-level Mission in 2009, violations of freedom of association, union busting and employer interference still prevailed, especially in EPZs. The Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) had been closely monitoring the situation of workers’ rights in EPZs, especially in Cavite, the biggest EPZ in the country employing around 60,000 workers, and Laguna. According to interviews with workers carried out in 2014 and information reported to the KCTU and other Korean NGOs, workers often faced oppression when they tried to establish a union. For example, according to a worker from a Korean company in Cavite, on 24 June 2014, workers had submitted a petition for certification of election to the DOLE to set up an independent trade union. Although 95 out of 258 workers had initially signed the petition, 35 had withdrawn their signatures after the company had threated to move out if the union was established. The company had also coerced people to sign statements attesting that they would not join the union promising in return financial aid for typhoon damage. According to another worker from a different company, managers interfered whenever workers tried to set up a union, sometimes by promoting workers or paying them more. Freedom of association was thus in danger and the connivance of state agencies, especially the DOLE and the Philippines Export Zone Authority (PEZA), in union busting and management interference in union establishment should be seriously addressed. The reform of the Labour Code, as recommended by the Committee of Experts, should be completed as a matter of urgency to ensure that all workers could exercise freedom of association rights without any fear of interference.

The Government member of India noted that the Government was committed to addressing all issues pertaining to the application of Conventions Nos 87 and 98 and recalled that, following the 2009 ILO High-level Mission, a number of substantial reforms had been undertaken to align national policies and measures with international obligations. They included capacity building and awareness raising among law enforcement agencies and other stakeholders, as well as an increase in the number of compliance officers. These measures had had a positive effect in upholding the enforcement of labour rights and protection, including through the promotion of social dialogue. The Committee should take into account the progress achieved in its conclusions and the Government should continue its long-standing cooperation with the ILO and avail itself of its technical assistance, as appropriate.

The Worker member of Indonesia drew the Committee’s attention to the massive practice of labour contractualization in the Philippines, both in the public and private sectors, which deprived workers of security of tenure, benefits and the right to organize, and therefore, excluded them from collective bargaining. It was alarming that regular employment in government offices was increasingly being replaced with contractual work. The Philippines had currently had almost 20 million contractual workers out of 42 million workers. Under the scheme of contractualization, a worker was hired for five months, fired, and then rehired for another five months by a subcontractor, who avoided paying social and health contributions for which regular employees were entitled. The five-month contract was known as contractualization, 5–5–5 or “endo” (end of contract). This practice violated the labour law that required employers to regularize workers after six months of continuous service and give them full benefits, such as health insurance, social security coverage and housing. The links between precarious employment and the increasing numbers of the poor in the Philippines were clear. Contractualization and agency labour had also weakened the trade union movement through the reduction of permanent workers, who were the traditional basis of trade unions. The latter were facing difficulties in organizing contractual workers, who feared losing their jobs. Labour’s bargaining power was undermined by the preference of employers to use short-term workers. Currently, less than 7 per cent of the Philippine’s total labour force was unionized, and even fewer workers were covered by collective agreements (about 228,000 workers in 2013). Attempts by the Federation of Free Workers (FFW) and other unions in the Philippines to organize contractual workers in shopping malls had failed because of strong union busting mechanisms by management. Despite such mechanisms, the Federation of Free Workers continued to organize workers to fight precarious work and the massive practice of contractualization in the country. She urged the Government to bring its law and practice into line with Convention No. 87 and to ratify Convention, No. 151.

The Worker member of Burkina Faso voiced concern at the large number of individual cases that concerned Convention No. 87 and recalled that the issues before the Conference were all based on respect for the social thermometer represented by the trade union movement and for the freedom of association and right to strike, which were its underlying features. Without them, speaking of trade unionism would be little more than an illusion. The situation in the Philippines was alarming and the Committee of Experts was to be congratulated on its work, as well as governments and employers that complied with their international commitments. In an ultraliberal world, in which the system was continually endeavouring to overturn the balance, no social gain was stable or secure. Unless they were counterbalanced by standards, power and wealth offered fertile ground for social injustice and war. He concluded with the observation that, if commitments and promises were to have any meaning, education was a fundamental factor in creating a world in which social relations were genuinely humane.

The Government representative, noting the statements and expressing appreciation of the dialogue, emphasized that, while the reforms were not complete, the bills were ready, had the support of all the social partners in the NTIPC and would be pursued by the new Congress. As to the criminal cases related to the exercise of labour rights, there was a shared will to end impunity and continue capacity-building efforts, strengthening the powers and resources of the NTIPC–MB to conduct independent reviews to assist the police and prosecutors. As to the issue of contractualization, the Government did not tolerate illegitimate contracting and subcontracting to circumvent labour laws. Pending the adoption of the three bills already prepared on the subject, the Government was strictly applying Department Order 18-A, which clarified allowable and prohibited practices, was supported by employers and workers and had led to the regularization of workers in cases of violations. The discussion encouraged the Government to keep focusing on addressing the recommendations of the 2009 High-level Mission, which had already borne results. As to the right to strike, the concerns had become practically moot as the assumption of jurisdiction had been almost discontinued, as the Government proactively facilitated conciliation between the parties to foster settlement. She noted that the incoming administration would be fully briefed on the measures taken since 2009 and the comments made to address any remaining gaps concerning the implementation of the Convention in law and practice.

The Worker members emphasized that a climate of violence, including the murder of trade union leaders, constituted a serious obstacle to the exercise of trade union rights. While monitoring mechanisms had been established to address anti-union violence, it was clear that they had been ineffective in preventing the number of trade unionists or ending impunity. The Government must redouble its efforts and, together with trade union representatives, find effective measures to protect trade unionists at risk and to ensure that investigations were undertaken to identify, prosecute and punish the perpetrators. They were deeply troubled by the various means by which workers were prevented from exercising their rights, either through exclusion in the labour laws, the use of short-term contracts or the misclassification of the employment relationship. All workers should be able to enjoy the right to organize. The Government must ensure this right in law and in practice, as well as the right to bargain collectively with the employer with whom they had an employment relationship. Violations of freedom of association in EPZs had been a serious problem for many years and, despite the regular attention brought to this matter, the situation had not improved. The Government should act without further delay to guarantee the exercise of freedom of association in EPZs. With regard to the legislative issues raised by the Committee of Experts in relation to the right to strike, including the imposition of compulsory arbitration in sectors that were not essential in the strict sense of the term and the possibility of imposing penal sanctions for participating in a peaceful strike, the Worker members recalled that no one should be imprisoned for participation in peaceful industrial action. With reference to the observations of the Committee of Experts, they urged the Government to take the necessary measures to bring to an end the impunity in relation to acts of violence against trade unionists and to institute independent investigations so as to ensure that the intellectual and material perpetrators of the crimes were arrested, tried and, if found guilty, appropriately sanctioned. Sufficient funds should be allocated and staff hired for this purpose. They further urged the Government to: take adequate measures to prevent other trade unionists from being murdered, including through protection schemes for trade unionists who were considered to be at risk by an impartial body; ensure that all workers, without distinction whatsoever, including migrant workers, those in managerial positions or with access to confidential information, firefighters, prison guards and other public sector workers, temporary and outsourced workers, as well as workers without an employment contract, could exercise their right to freedom of association; take effective measures to prohibit the intentional misclassification of employees, which deprived them of the free exercise of the right to organize; ensure that the Human Security Act was not used to suppress legitimate trade union activities; reduce the minimum membership requirement for the registration of a union, federation or confederation; allow trade unions to receive foreign financial assistance, including from an international union, without prior permission; and amend sections 263(g), 264 and 272 of the Labour Code. A direct contacts mission should visit the Philippines this year in order to follow up on these recommendations.

With regard to the right to strike, the Worker members emphasized that the Employer members had once again mis-characterized the following statement made by the Government group in February 2015: “The Government group recognizes that the right to strike is linked to freedom of association which is a fundamental principle and right at work of the ILO. The Government group specifically recognizes that without protecting a right to strike, Freedom of Association, in particular the right to organize activities for the purpose of promoting and protecting workers’ interests, cannot be fully realized”. While not an absolute right, it was not acceptable that the scope of the right was only regulated at the national level, as that would render meaningless the remainder of the statement by the Government group. As the Employer members recognized that the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee were the twin pillars of the ILO supervisory system, the Worker members did not understand the position of the Employer members that governments had no obligation to respond to the Committee of Experts, but only to the political direction given to its report by the Conference Committee. That would render the work of the Committee of Experts meaningless. It would also lead to the wrong interpretation that the Conference Committee was superior and somehow supervised the work of the Committee of Experts. Finally, the Worker members did not understand how the observations of an independent body such as the Committee of Experts, which was entrusted with evaluating the application of the Convention by member States, could be questioned as unbalanced, when they expressed concern with the Committee of Experts when the Convention was not applied.

The Employer members took note of the comprehensive discussion of the case and indicated that there was no doubt that the issues and allegations were real. They supported the call by the Worker members for action and most of the recommendations made. They also acknowledged the Government’s statement that those issues needed to be considered, taking into account the background of each case, as no case was identical to another. Also, without denigrating the role of the Committee of Experts, they observed that the Conference Committee was the final body which based itself on the facts reported by the Committee of Experts. While the Conference Committee could not perform its work without the report of the Committee of Experts, the latter should not formulate conclusions or directions in each case, which were a matter for the Conference Committee. They concluded by stating that, in the absence of a unanimous view, the issues regarding Convention No. 87 were being taken forward in the agreed way and congratulated the Government for the measures that had been taken, inviting it to consider any technical assistance that could be offered.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed on issues raised by the Committee of Experts.

The Committee noted with concern the numerous allegations of anti-union violence and the lack of progress in the investigation of many such cases. The Committee noted that the Government has introduced legislative reforms to address some of the Committee of Experts’ concerns but regretted that they were not adopted and urged the Government to bring the law into compliance with the Convention.

Taking into account the discussion of the case, the Committee requested the Government to:

• - undertake appropriate investigations on the alleged cases of violation of trade union rights in the near future with a view to establishing the facts, determining responsibilities and punishing the perpetrators;
• - ensure that sufficient funds and staff are available to effectively carry out this work expeditiously so as to avoid a situation of impunity;
• - establish monitoring bodies and provide regular information on these mechanisms and progress on the cases assigned to them;
• - institute adequate measures to prevent the repetition of crimes against trade unionists, including the institution of protection schemes for trade unionists that are determined to be at risk by an impartial body;
• - bring national legislation into conformity with the Convention with regards to the requirement of government permission for foreign assistance to trade unions and to reduce the registration requirement from ten to five duly recognized bargaining agents or local chapters;
• - amend the legislation to allow currently excluded classes of public servants to associate freely;
• - take effective measures to prohibit the intentional misclassification of employees so as to deprive them of the right to freedom of association under the Convention.

The Government should accept a direct contacts mission this year in order to follow up on these conclusions.

The Government representative thanked the Committee for its comments, which were constructive and useful for assisting the Government to address the gap in the application of the Convention. She made a reservation as regards the request for a direct contacts mission, however, as she was unable to bind the incoming administration, which would assume office at the end of the month, to such a commitment.

Note 1: The NMM is a tripartite body that brings together government agencies, NGOs, civil society organizations and the independent national human rights institution (NHRI) in a credible and inclusive forum for monitoring the country’s progress on the resolution of human rights violations cases, prioritizing extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and torture. The NMM has been regularly conducting its meetings. At present, the CHR together with the other concerned agencies, including the DOLE, is conducting an audit or investigation into the human rights situation at Semirara Island, Caluya and Antique following the accident at the open pit coal mine of the Semirara Mining Corporation.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2009, Publication: 98th ILC session (2009)

A Government representative expressed regret for the delay in the submission of the Government’s replies on Convention No. 87. The reply was submitted on 1 June 2009, and the delay was due to the considerable time devoted to conducting consultations with the concerned government agencies and the social partners. The consultation took into account matters raised in the 2009 report of the Committee of Experts, which included the request for the Government to accept a high-level ILO mission to obtain a better understanding of all aspects of the case. The consultation yielded positive results. The Government decided to accept the ILO mission as soon as possible.

The Government welcomed the mission at this opportune time, after the tripartite partners had adopted the Philippine Decent Work Common Agenda 2008–10 with the theme “Narrowing decent work deficits”, with the assistance of the ILO Subregional Office. Under Strategic Objective No. 1, there were 13 items on rights at work that the Government and the social partners agreed to pursue to strengthen compliance with ratified Conventions, especially the eight core Conventions. One item was the labour law reforms with the objective of evolving an overall tripartite position on proposed legislation that would bring the national law into conformity with the Convention. Initially, the project entailed review and formulation of a common trade union position on possible amendments to the Labour Code provisions, particularly articles 234(c), 269, 272(b), 263(g), 264(a), 272(a), 237(a) and 270, referred to by the Committee of Experts in its report. Referring to article 263(g), the Government representative indicated that there were already four Bills undergoing committee hearings in both Houses of Congress: Senate Bills Nos 159 and 606 and House Bills Nos 2112 and 1717, which limited the authority of the Secretary of Labour to specific sectors in the economy. The project was enrolled by the Workers’ group through the Federation of Free Workers (FFW). Relating to the reduction of the 30 per cent membership requirement for registration of public sector unions and their full representation on the Public Sector Labour Management Council (PSLMC), the Government had scheduled the review and possible amendment of Executive Order No. 180, and the worker members of the Council were commencing a forum on decent work in the public sector.

On issues relating to the Labour Standard Enforcement Framework formulated in consultation with the social partners and with the assistance of the ILO Subregional Office, the tripartite partners were going to a labour inspection audit in July 2009, in a collaborative effort based on the request of the Government to improve the efficiency, effectiveness and governance of the labour inspection system. Also, the worker members of the Council, through the Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (TUCP), would conduct research on the modalities of labour standards enforcement to make the framework more responsive to the emerging needs of workers, and for better implementation of the labour standards enforcement system. Additionally, the worker members of the Council would conduct capacity-building activities to fully equip workers and their organizations with the technical knowledge and skills to enhance their participation in the enforcement of labour standards. The employer members of the Council would help establishments to strengthen compliance with labour standards through training and deployment of social compliance assessors using SA 8000 on social accountability.

With reference to the alleged restrictions on workers’ rights and the intervention of the police and the military in labour disputes, especially inside export processing and special economic zones, the Government had a continuing labour–management education programme on employer and labour relations with culture orientation for expatriates and workers. Also, the TUCP offered distance education on the fundamental principles and rights at work to increase awareness and capacity of the workers, trade unions and workers’ support groups on the effective exercise of their fundamental labour rights. The employer members of the Council were also implementing a rights-based approach to global competitiveness through the promotion of fundamental principles and rights at work, in line with the principle of corporate social responsibility.

Other measures included the review, in consultation with the social partners, of the joint guidelines on the conduct of the Philippine National Police personnel, security guards and private company guards during strikes, pickets and lock-outs, to facilitate better implementation. The guidelines defined the role of the Department of Labour and Employment and the police and set strict conditions on the involvement of the military in labour disputes. The Memorandum of Social Understanding on Labour and Social Issues Arising Out of the Activities of Multinational Enterprises/Foreign Direct Investments had also been due for review. The Memorandum reaffirmed a commitment to observing the principles of the ILO core Conventions and respect of the right of workers to freedom of association and collective bargaining. In pursuit of tripartism and social dialogue, a series of forums had been conducted for a broad range of members of society. The objective had been to raise awareness on the role of international labour standards and decent work already integrated into the Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan 2004–10, with a view to mainstreaming decent work in government policies, plans and programmes, and ensure more effective implementation.

With regard to cases of alleged extrajudicial killings involving trade unionists, the Government welcomed the opportunity for the high-level ILO mission to have direct contacts with the complainants and the competent authorities concerned. This would enable the mission to have a better appreciation and understanding of the case and to recommend appropriate measures to ensure the fair and rapid investigation, prosecution and conviction of the violators.

The Philippines had demonstrated, through a long history of harmonious cooperation with the ILO, the shared goal and strong commitment to securing decent work for all Filipinos under conditions of freedom, equity, security and dignity. Such commitment was also shared by the social partners, as reaffirmed in the joint statement on the implementation of the Philippine Decent Work Agenda 2008-2010, in which they declared they would uphold their commitment to the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, respect and promote freedom of association, recognize the right to collective bargaining, the abolition of forced labour, the elimination of child labour and the elimination of discrimination with respect to employment and occupation. They recognized the immediate need to address the decent work deficits in the country and agreed that the third cycle of the Philippine Decent Work Common Agenda should be participatory, results-based, impact-oriented and with clear accountabilities. They adopted the theme “Narrowing decent work deficits” for our common agenda to embody the aspirations of enhancing opportunities for women and men to obtain decent and productive work, in conditions of freedom, equity, security and human dignity. They also agreed that the Decent Work Common Agenda represented their point of convergence as their activities contributed towards the common goal of reducing decent work gaps by enhancing workforce productivity, competitiveness, representation and equity at work.

It should also be noted that on the occasion of the ILO’s 90th anniversary celebrations, the President of the Philippines had taken the opportunity to renew this commitment when issuing Proclamation No. 1752 declaring 21 April to 1 May 2009 as ILO week. The Government representative assured the Committee that the Government would extend all its support and assistance to ensure the success of the high-level mission to the Philippines. She also hoped that the information provided by the Government would be useful to the high-level mission in carrying out its mandate.

The Worker members emphasized the numerous violations of the Convention that had been occurring for many years. The violations consisted of acts of violence against trade unionists and other activists, including murders, assassination attempts, abductions and acts of torture. These multiple violations had already been denounced on many occasions by the Committee of Experts and the Committee on Freedom of Association. This year, however, the Government had not submitted a report and had just provided oral explanations several months late, repeating information that had been provided previously. It had referred to: the establishment in 2007 of the Melo Commission, an independent body responsible for examining the murders of journalists and activists; the monitoring of the establishment of special regional tribunals; the establishment of a special unit within the national police; the organization in 2007 by the Supreme Court of a consultative summit on extrajudicial killings and forced disappearances; and the establishment of a so-called “amparo” procedure for the protection of constitutional rights.

These measures, however, had not resulted in much progress in practice. New summary executions had taken place in 2007 and 2008, raising to 87 the number of trade unionists killed since 2001. Between July 2007 and August 2008, five trade union leaders had been murdered and three abducted. Others had been intimidated and threatened, or placed on blacklists available on the Internet. Demonstrations were still violently dispersed and work relations had become increasingly militarized in export processing and special economic zones, as the Committee would realize when it heard the testimonies on this subject. The hundreds of acts of violence were not giving rise to investigations or convictions, as in the past five years only two cases had led to the prosecution of four suspects, none of which related to anti-union acts.

The high-level mission proposed by the Committee in 2007 had only just been accepted by the Government. This was to be welcomed as the situation had not really changed. This had just been confirmed by the United Nations Special Rapporteur in a recent report indicating a decline in extrajudicial killings, but also many cases of impunity. According to this report, the most serious shortcoming was the Government’s failure to institutionalize or implement the many reforms that had been recommended. In the absence of these measures, any progress made remained fragile and easily reversible.

Finally, a number of other problems of a legal nature remained. The Human Security Act defined terrorism in vague terms as an act that caused “widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace”. In 2007, the Committee had asked for clarifications on the impact this Act had on the application of the Convention, to which no reply had as yet been provided. Furthermore, for several years, the Committee of Experts had been calling for amendments to the provisions of the Labour Code, which required that, for registration, trade unions should provide a list of all their members, and that their membership comprised at least 20 per cent of the employees in the enterprise concerned. In 2007, the Government had indicated that the Labour Code had been amended, but it had not yet been able to provide the text of the amendment concerned. Other amendments to the Labour Code were required in order to: limit compulsory arbitration to essential services in the strict sense of the term; review the penalties for participation in a strike considered illegal; lower the excessively high number of trade unions (ten) required to establish federations or confederations; and not to make foreign assistance to trade unions subject to the prior authorization of a minister or secretary of state.

In addition to legislative measures and acts of violence, certain economic measures, such as the excessive use of contractual workers through outsourcing, could also be used to undermine the trade union movement. These mechanisms were in themselves prohibitive, as the workers who were “contracted” for a maximum period of five months could not dream of joining a union if they wished to keep their jobs and their income. This was an apparently innocent practice that had become a particularly effective means of controlling the trade union movement and of circumventing in practice the application of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Convention.

The Employer members thanked the Government representative for the information provided. However, they expressed surprise that she had not spent more time on the issue of impunity and the arrests and harassment of trade unionists, which accounted for over half of the observation of the Committee of Experts. They also missed the determination on the part of the Government to ensure that the situation started to move. They recalled that it had taken two years to accept the high-level mission. It was the view of the Employer members that the high-level mission needed to cover certain fundamental aspects of the case if progress were to be made in addressing the issue of compliance with the Convention in law and practice and of impunity. Without going into the details of the case, which had been reviewed very thoroughly by the Worker members, they noted the explanations provided for the delay in replying to the observation of the Committee of Experts, as well as the very positive development of the enhanced consultation with the social partners for the preparation of the report, on which the Government was to be commended. However, the problems were more basic than the adoption of a Decent Work Agenda, as they went to the heart of the issue of freedom of association. The Committee’s conclusions therefore needed to emphasize the gravity of the situation of impunity and to reaffirm the urgent need to take action in order to tackle the long-standing problems that hindered the implementation of the Convention both in law and practice. In conclusion, they recalled that Convention No. 87 was not a promotional instrument, but set out minimum standards to which effect needed to be given upon ratification.

The Government member of the United States remained very concerned at the situation of workers’ rights, including freedom of association, in the Philippines, particularly in light of the ongoing review of the Philippines’ status as a beneficiary country under the United States’ Generalized System of Preferences (GSP). A key concern highlighted by the petition requesting the review of the Philippines’ GSP status had been the Government’s reluctance to accept an ILO high-level mission, as had been requested by the Conference Committee in 2007, to visit the country and assess all aspects of the application by the Philippines of Convention No. 87. She was very pleased to learn that the Government had recently decided to receive such a mission. The issues that were being examined by the Committee of Experts and the Committee on Freedom of Association were serious and long-standing. With respect to violations of the civil liberties of trade union members and leaders, they were also well documented. She urged the Government to cooperate fully with the ILO and take the necessary steps to implement the recommendations that would be generated by ILO technical assistance.

The Worker member of the Philippines commended the Government for accepting the high-level mission to look into allegations and reported violations of trade union rights, including killings, attempted murders, death threats, abductions, disappearances, assaults, torture, military interference in trade union activities, violent police dispersion of marches and pickets, arrests of trade union leaders in connection with their activities, and widespread impunity for the authors of such acts. Through its acceptance of the high-level mission, following tripartite consultation, the Government was demonstrating its commitment to ILO processes. The mission would undoubtedly serve as the most appropriate forum for those who had complaints to be heard and to substantiate their claims and allegations. The members of the high-level mission would be able to observe, investigate and verify the situation so that the truth could prevail.

He condemned every case of extrajudicial killing, whether it was committed by the armed forces of duly constituted governments, armed rebel forces or criminal elements. He therefore called upon the Government to mobilize its resources to pursue the investigation and prosecution of those responsible. He emphasized that extrajudicial killings created an environment of fear that was not conducive to the exercise of civil rights and liberties or freedom of association. They eroded the foundations of the global and national institutions upon which social justice depended.

He expressed confidence that the high-level mission was not intended to find fault or ascertain guilt, but rather to explore the immediate and remote causes of the situation in an objective manner and to develop appropriate responses through technical cooperation to help the country fulfil its obligations and also to suggest concrete steps and practical ways in which the ILO and the social partners could combat extrajudicial killings.

With reference to the repeated requests by the ILO supervisory bodies to align the Labour Code with the respective Conventions, he noted that the country had adopted the Philippine Decent Work Common Agenda 2008–10 with the theme of “Narrowing decent work deficits”, which included a trade union programme for the review and reform of the Labour Code led by the FFW and assisted by the ILO subregional office in Manila and ILO ACTRAV. The programme had provided a venue for the various trade union organizations to reach common ground on the approach to be adopted to the adaptation of the Labour Code and the promotion of the principles of freedom of association in the country. The first phase of the programme had recently been completed, consisting of a number of regional consultations attended by over 250 trade union leaders from the private and public sectors representing over 40 labour federations and workers’ alliances. They had discussed reforms in the areas of promoting trade unionism, collective bargaining and the right to strike and combating the harmful effects of flexible employment arrangements on fundamental principles and rights at work. Based on the reports and observations of the ILO supervisory bodies, they had also served to discuss pending legislative bills proposed by certain trade union organizations to strengthen the constitutional rights of workers to organize, collective bargaining, the right to strike and employment protection. Significant dialogue would also be held to engage the social partners, including employers, workers, the Government and civil society at large, in the process of review and reform.

He explained that the next step would be to synthesize the findings and recommendations of the regional consultations and to ensure the mainstreaming of the gender dimension in the recommendations, on the basis of which the participating trade unions would propose legislative measures to remove the offending legislative provisions, and push for other measures to regain the two lost decades of organizing workers to achieve social justice and peace.

Meanwhile, with regard to the reiterated requests of the ILO supervisory bodies to amend article 234(f) of the Labour Code, which required the submission of all the names of an organization comprising at least 20 per cent of all employees in the bargaining unit where it sought to operate, he indicated that with the adoption of the Republic Act No. 9481, this requirement had already been removed. Similarly, concerning the indiscriminate exercise of the power to assume jurisdiction over labour disputes set out in article 263(g), he recalled that the Government representative had indicated to the Conference Committee in 2007 that the Government agreed to limit the exercise of assumption of jurisdiction to cases involving “essential services”, as defined by the ILO.

The programme adopted by the tripartite social partners followed another ILO-supported initiative to build the capacity of trade unionists on the use of international instruments and the supervisory system to create an enabling environment for trade unionism and collective bargaining. Those who had attended the training were now in the forefront of efforts to raise the awareness of the social partners, and particularly the workers, on the importance of international standards and the use of international supervisory mechanisms with a view to bringing the Labour Code into greater conformity with ILO standards. The experience in his country showed the importance of ILO technical cooperation in improving the implementation of international labour standards, particularly through the strengthening of social dialogue. He therefore hoped that the high-level mission would adopt a similar approach by combining fact-finding with concrete technical cooperation programmes to help solve the problems indicated by the supervisory bodies.

The Employer member of the Philippines supported the Government’s decision to accept the high-level mission requested by the Conference Committee to obtain a better understanding of the situation concerning extrajudicial killings, and other acts against trade unionists. He described some of the initiatives and activities that were taken by the Employers Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP) to ensure the full implementation of Convention No. 87 and the other fundamental Conventions. He recalled that the third cycle of the Decent Work Common Agenda had recently been launched. He noted that this had been the result of tripartite initiatives, in which organized labour and the employers, represented by ECOP, had found common ground in promoting and implementing the Decent Work Action Plan. This was a sign of the success of social dialogue in the country. However, full implementation of the National Action Plan remained a daunting challenge in view of the scarcity of government resources, the chronic unemployment and underemployment, which were exacerbated by the 2.36 per cent annual population growth rate that had eliminated the otherwise positive effects of the country’s annual economic growth. Although the contributions made by the Government and the social partners to reducing decent work deficits were too numerous to enumerate, their collective activities had served to develop strategies for the implementation of the National Action Plan for Decent Work for the benefit of the country. Moreover, ILO technical assistance and sustained support would be necessary to reduce the deficit.

He added that social dialogue had become the lynchpin of industrial democracy in the country. Bipartism and tripartism had contributed to the statutory recognition and acceptance of social dialogue as a vital tool for the achievement of industrial peace. He recalled that the country had been affected by a series of debilitating strikes induced by the political and economic crises in the 1970s and 1980s. At that time, the social partners had taken it upon themselves to help resolve the worsening problem, by concluding an agreement under which the employers reaffirmed their respect for workers’ fundamental rights. The workers, in turn, had undertaken to exercise their rights within the rule of law and the established rules of industrial relations. The timely intervention by the social partners had preserved industrial stability and helped to prevent labour and social policy conflicts. It had also enabled the country to minimize the effects of liberalization and acquire the necessary resilience to withstand the effects of the 1997 Asian financial crisis and the present global crisis. Accordingly, social dialogue had helped to save jobs and had ensured the survival of enterprises. It allowed for collaboration between workers and employers in peace and harmony.

The Worker member of the United States emphasized the fundamental importance of the right of workers, as set out in the Convention, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization, and the duty of the Government to refrain from any interference whatsoever which would restrict or impede this right. However, despite these protections, many unions in the Philippines, when organizing or exercising their right to freedom of association, were subjected to government interference intended to instil fear and erode support for unions. Unions of which the agencies of the Government, and particularly the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), did not approve, were often dismantled. The impact of these anti-union activities was that there was a climate of impunity for human rights abusers, resulting in killings, abductions, torture, arbitrary arrests and a general state of fear for many union leaders in the country.

The AFP was the body responsible for conducting anti-union campaigns, which often began with the drawing up of lists of unionists deemed by the Government to be sympathizers of the internal insurgency led by the Communist New People’s Army (NPA). This was followed by anti-union campaigns and seminars intended to categorize listed trade union leaders and organizers, in particular those affiliated with the Kilusanag Mayo Uno (KMU), as “fronts” for insurgents and terrorists. Sometimes union leaders or their families were threatened with death or harm if they continued to work for a particular union. The AFP also sometimes established or supported civic organizations professing to be workers’ organizations and assisted them in conducting seminars in local villages to try and turn the local population against democratically elected unions. Unions were often accused, without evidence, of using union dues to fund the NPA. The military would visit the homes of union leaders to pressure them to resign from the union, refrain from organizing or asking for too much in contract negotiations and accepting what was offered by the company. Other unions had also experienced such harassment, including the Alliance of Progressive Labour (APL), the Buklaran ng Manggagawang Pilipino (BMP) and the Partido ng Manggagawang, Makabayan (PM). As the United Nations Special Rapporteur had indicated, the worst effect of the Government’s anti-union activities was the increased likelihood of murders, disappearances, threats and harassment of listed trade unionists. The 2008 report of the Philippine Commission on Human Rights (CHR) had noted a resurgence of such acts of violence against activist groups and labour organizations and, according to the United States Department of State, the CHR suspected the Philippine National Police (PNP) and the AFP of a number of killings of leftist activists in rural areas. The CHR had also noted a shift in methods intended to silence civil society, with a significant drop in extrajudicial killings and an increase in arrests and enforced detentions. Trade unionists who were detained languished in jail without protection facing slow trials, therefore effectively being removed from their movement. This had led many workers to live in hiding.

In response to the Government’s claim that it was pursuing legitimate counter-insurgency tactics and that the military had been absolved by the Melo Commission, he claimed that the Government was in fact intentionally blurring the lines between armed insurgents and legitimate trade unions. However, he recalled the conclusion of the Melo Commission that only an organization with intelligence and coordination capacities would have been capable of carrying out such killings. He questioned the Government’s political will to stop the violence against trade unionists, particularly in view of its failure to investigate the involvement of General Palparan, now a member of Congress, in the killings, despite the fact that a 2008 Court of Appeal ruling had found evidence to be credible of his responsibility in the killings, as a minimum by virtue of “command responsibility”.

An observer representing the International Metalworkers’ Federation (IMF) reported that his union, the Toyota Motor Philippines Corporation Workers’ Association (TMPCWA), had suffered serious anti-union discrimination and interference by the corporation. Although since 2001 the Committee on Freedom of Association had been recommending the reinstatement of the trade unionists and leaders who had been illegally dismissed, no effect had been given to the recommendation. His union had appealed to the OECD National Contact Point through its group of supporters in Japan, but with no results so far. Despite the clear rulings by the Supreme Court in 2003 and 2004 requiring the Toyota Company to negotiate a collective agreement with the TMPCWA, the company had not respected the ruling, concluding instead a bogus agreement with the “yellow union” it had created, which had been issued a registration certificate. He further alleged that the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals were thwarting the Constitution in favour of the company’s interests and that the management was doing everything in its power to destroy the TMPCWA. Picket lines had been broken up by force, criminal charges fabricated against union members and even a striptease organized to draw workers away from union meetings. He reiterated the seriousness of the climate of violence against activists and trade unionists in the country and indicated that the placement of a detachment of the 202nd Infantry Brigade had been located very close to his union’s office, which had been subject to frequent visits and searches for the union leaders. As a union leader, he personally had to sleep every night in different places, as union leaders were under constant surveillance.

In conclusion, he appealed to the Committee to send a high-level mission to investigate the situation and to take all effective measures to compel the Government to fully recognize the TMPCWA, reinstate the illegally dismissed workers with full compensation and to fully respect freedom of association.

The Worker member of Australia noted that the violations of freedom of association in the Philippines had a severe impact on the capacity for workers to freely organize, form or join trade unions, run elections, certify unions, negotiate collective agreements and take up campaigns or seek legal redress for matters in dispute. Companies could be involved in standoffs with their democratically-elected trade union for years and the Department of Labour’s (DOLE) own statistics said that a mere 226,000 workers were covered by CBAs. She drew attention to the three most recent cases before the Committee on Freedom of Association concerning the infringement of workers’ rights brought by the International Metalworkers’ Federation concerning the situation referred to by the previous speaker, the International Union of Food Workers (IUF) on behalf of the NUWHRAIN Dusit Hotel workers, and the International Wiring Systems Workers’ Union in the Special Economic Zone in Northern Luzon.

She added that since the Conference Committee had last examined this case in 2007, the number of extrajudicial killings and disappearances of trade unionists had fallen. However, the very incidence of killings was a symptom of a bigger problem – that of the lack of criminal accountability and the ongoing existence of the environment that allowed these violations to happen. She therefore welcomed the fact that the Government had indicated its acceptance of an ILO high-level mission and emphasized that the mission would have to:

– first and foremost, consult the local trade unions that had raised the concerns with the ILO, including the Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU);

– with regard to the role of the military in legal issues, look at the counter-insurgency policies of the Government and the armed forces, which had equated the militant unions with the insurgencies and were blurring the lines between illegal activities and legitimate trade union activities. This would include not only an examination of the assassination of trade union leaders and organizers, but also of other human rights violations and the impunity enjoyed by the military;

– examine the military’s efforts to establish anti-union education campaigns, especially in Mindanao and Luzon Provinces, and the role of the army’s Civil-Military Operations units;

– focus on the Government’s implementation of the recommendations and make contact with the UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions in relation to trade unions and their ability to organize;

– examine the relationship between the Philippine Economic Zone Authority and the Department of Labor, which had, in practice, ceded authority for labour law implementation, as well as the key constraints to organizing in the Special Economic Zones, which had had a de facto no-union, no-strike policy in place for years. Local government units in and around the Special Economic Zones had been conducting anti-union education efforts, as well as intimidating those who sought to form unions. Union organizers were prohibited from entering Special Economic Zones and if workers were identified as being union organizers, they lost their jobs;

– examine the Assumption of Jurisdiction Statute 263(g), both for its scope (going beyond essential services) and implementation (some unions were prevented from calling strikes, while others were allowed to do so);

– examine the application of criminal law in industrial issues, criminal libel statutes and the use of criminal libel charges, sedition charges and other criminal charges aimed at unionists engaged in protected activities or to undermine union leadership;

– examine the implementation of the Labour Code, and especially that of the Republic Act No. 9481 (the union organizing bill), which appeared to favour organizing efforts by national federations over independent unions;

– examine the Government’s definition of what encompassed a strike or concerted action and engage in discussions with the Supreme Court and the legal justice system;

– examine and recommend measures to ensure that Filipino workers could enjoy security of tenure and the right to organize. It was common practice to illegally classify workers as “casual” or “contractual”, or to dismiss workers after six months and then to rehire them; and

– meet the full range of trade unions and acknowledge them all as key social partners.

She expressed the strong hope that the preparation and process of the mission would assist the Government and social partners to resolve the serious issues, improve compliance with the Convention and strengthen social dialogue for the benefit of the country.

The Government representative of the Philippines thanked the members of the Committee for their statements and welcomed the support expressed for the Government’s decision to accept a high-level mission with a view to gaining a better understanding of all the aspects of the case. She also noted the comments made concerning the Decent Work Common Agenda and the strength of the tripartism and social dialogue that had led to its adoption. The Common Agenda included an arrangement to monitor its implementation and would provide a basis for the provision of ILO support and assistance to the tripartite constituents to strengthen the application of international labour standards.

She added that she shared the valid and serious concerns raised in relation to cases of alleged extrajudicial killings involving trade unionists, to which reference had been made in the report of the Committee of Experts. In this respect, she indicated that the Human Security Act had been challenged before the Supreme Court, and had not therefore been implemented. She emphasized that cases of alleged extrajudicial killings were a very serious matter and had provided compelling grounds in the Government’s decision to accept the high-level mission, which would be able to undertake an independent and impartial examination of the case within the purview of the Convention. She expressed full trust and confidence in the independence, impartiality and high degree of competence of the high-level mission in carrying out its task. Finally, she reiterated her assurances of full support for the ILO mission.

The Worker members said that for years they had been denouncing the continued violations of the Convention in both law and practice. It was therefore appropriate to call once again for the Labour Code to be amended in accordance with the recommendations that had been made for several years by the Conference Committee and the Committee of Experts; as well as for detailed information on the effects of the Human Security Act on the application of the Convention and the levels of unionization in the export processing zones. The Government should also be urged to indicate the measures adopted to bring a definitive end to the climate of violence and impunity, and to ensure that murders, disappearances and other violations of the fundamental rights of trade unionists were rapidly investigated, prosecuted and punished. In order to encourage this approach, the Worker members welcomed with satisfaction the Government’s statement that it would accept an ILO high-level mission. This mission would have to investigate, together with the unions, the acts of violence against trade unionists; follow up all the cases under consideration by the Committee on Freedom of Association; examine the manner in which the Convention was being applied in the special economic zones; and ensure the implementation of the recommendations of the Committee of Experts, those of the United Nations Special Rapporteur and those of the Conference Committee, particularly in relation to impunity.

The Employer members thanked the Government representative for the very helpful statement. They indicated that the Committee’s conclusions would need to call for action to give full effect to the Convention in law and practice. They expressed the belief that the key to the achievement of progress in this case was the high-level mission, the objective of which needed to be broader than that proposed in the conclusions adopted by the Committee in 2007, when the proposal of a mission had been made with a view to achieving better understanding of all aspects of the case. The high-level mission that had now been accepted by the Government needed to address and clarify all the shortcomings in the application of the Convention and identify the areas in which action needed to be taken. As it was doubtful whether the Government would be able to provide much new information in time for the next session of the Committee of Experts, the Employer members hoped that the next observation of the Committee of Experts would include the findings of the high-level mission and its appreciation of the situation, with a view to promoting action to achieve a tangible improvement in the situation.

On a more technical point, the Employer members recalled that the issue of EPZs was more closely related to the application of Convention No. 98, whereas it had been raised by the Committee of Experts under the present Convention.

In conclusion, they expressed the hope that, when working with the high-level mission, the Government would develop a timeframe for action to be taken to achieve the implementation of the Convention in both law and practice, particularly since the principal issues involved were long-standing problems. Although there might be slight differences of views on the situation between the Employer and Worker groups, they were in agreement on the fundamental elements of the case, and in particular on the need for effective implementation of the Convention in law and practice.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the statement made by the Government representative and the debate that followed. The Committee observed that the Committee of Experts’ comments referred to serious allegations of the murder of trade unionists, death threats, arrests of trade union leaders in connection with their trade union activities, widespread impunity relating to violence against trade unionists and the militarization of workplaces in export processing zones (EPZs) and special economic zones. The Committee also noted that the Committee of Experts had been referring, for many years, to the need to amend the current Labour Code to bring it into conformity with the Convention.

The Committee noted the Government’s statement according to which important labour law reforms were under way and four Bills were before the Congress limiting the authority of the Secretary of Labour to impose compulsory arbitration. The Government representative also referred to joint guidelines on the Conduct of the Philippine National Police (PNP) personnel, security guards and private company guards during strikes, pickets and lock-outs. The Government representative welcomed the opportunity for the ILO high-level mission to have direct contacts with the complainants and concerned competent authorities. This would enable the mission, in a fully independent and impartial manner, to recommend appropriate measures towards ensuring fair and fast investigation, prosecution and conviction of the violators.

In reply to a question concerning the Human Security Act, she had indicated that its application had been suspended as it was currently the subject of an appeal to the Supreme Court.

Deeply concerned at the continuing allegations of violence against trade unionists, the Committee emphasized that respect for basic civil liberties was essential for the exercise of freedom of association. While noting with satisfaction the Government’s acceptance of an ILO high-level mission with respect to this serious situation, the Committee remained concerned at the allegations of a continuing situation of violence against trade unionists and urged the Government once again to ensure that all the necessary measures were taken to restore a climate of complete freedom and security from violence and threats and bring an end to impunity so that workers and employers could fully exercise their freedom of association rights. The Committee further urged the Government to take measures, in full consultation with the social partners concerned, to amend the legislation taking into account the comments that the Committee of Experts had been making for many years and urged it to adopt a time frame for all the above measures.

Welcoming the Government’s acceptance of an ILO high-level mission, as requested when it considered this case in 2007, the Committee expressed the firm hope that this mission would be able to take place in the near future and be able to clarify the gaps and propose solutions relating to the question of violence against trade unionists, the matters pending before the Committee on Freedom of Association, as well as the other matters pending under Convention No. 87. Elements of the UN Special Rapporteur’s report as they related to trade unionists could be of assistance for the mission’s consideration. It expected that the mission would be in a position to report back to the Committee of Experts this year on the important elements of its findings. The Committee expressed the firm hope that, following this mission and the additional steps promised by the Government, it would be in a position to note tangible progress in the application of the Convention both in law and in practice in the very near future. It requested the Government to provide precise information on all the points raised in a detailed report for the examination of the Committee of Experts this year.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2007, Publication: 96th ILC session (2007)

A Government representative assured the Committee that her Government was deeply committed to the application of all the Conventions that it had ratified. Every effort was being made at all levels to establish the legislative and institutional framework for the exercise by workers of their right to organize. She emphasized, however, that in examining compliance with ILO standards, the context and circumstances unique in the Philippines needed to be considered, together with its history of membership and overall compliance with the many Conventions it had ratified. The Philippines was still a third world country struggling with poverty among 30 per cent of its people, while fighting an active rebellion. She added that it was a lead country in the promotion of the Decent Work Agenda in the region. It was also a country that had seen 480 strikes in 1986, falling to 12 in 2006, with only one recorded strike in the first five months of 2007. This was being achieved, not by curtailing trade union rights, but through advocacy of social dialogue, through labour education that targeted both labour and management and through conciliation and mediation, which had proven to be successful because of the increasing labour relations maturity of the workplace parties.

With regard to the comments made by the ICFTU, which referred to allegations of killings of trade unionists, she said that, in response to the alarming newspaper reports of the rising number of killings of trade unionists and journalists, the President had constituted an Independent Commission to Address Media and Activists Killings headed by a retired Supreme Court Justice, José Melo. The Commission had concluded in its report in January 2007 that "... there is no direct evidence, but only circumstantial evidence, linking some elements of the military to the killings". It had further concluded that: "Due to lack of cooperation from the activist groups, not enough evidence was presented before the Commission to allow it to pinpoint and eventually recommend prosecution of the persons ultimately responsible for the killings." Considering the recommendations of the Commission, the Supreme Court had designated 99 regional trial courts as special tribunals to resolve expeditiously or decide cases of extrajudicial killings. The special courts were mandated to: give priority to cases of activists and media personnel; conduct continuous trials to be terminated within 60 days from commencement; and render judgement within 30 days from submission for decision, among other measures.

She emphasized that these steps were concrete and conscious efforts by the Government to address the killings, including attempts to prosecute the guilty parties, whoever they were - the police, military, insurgents or ordinary murderers. The limitations imposed by the unavailability and refusal of witnesses to come forward, even when their welfare and safety were guaranteed under the Witness Protection Program, had however made it difficult, if not impossible, to arrest, prosecute and punish the culprits.

The findings of the Melo Commission clearly indicated that there was no evidence showing that the police and the military were the perpetrators of killings and other actions against trade unionists. The link to the police and the military appeared to be merely circumstantial. If and when the police and military committed the crime of killing trade unionists on the basis solely of their trade union activities, there was machinery to address these violations. In this respect, she drew a distinction between legitimate trade union activities, entitled to lawful protection, and the commission of crimes against the State, which needed to be prevented. The police and military only pursued trade unionists committing rebellion, not trade unionists exercising trade union rights. However, there was a thin line dividing some trade unionists from the illegal activities of certain rebel groups. Where a trade unionist crossed this line, there should be no question of the legitimacy of the police or military action, provided that such action was carried out in accordance with the Constitution and the law.

Turning to the issue of the suppression of trade union rights and the case of the Hacienda Luisita in 2004, she recalled that seven union members had been shot and killed during the strike by the workers of the Hacienda Luisita, while a composite team of police and military had been enforcing the assumption of jurisdiction order by the Secretary of Labour. Congressional hearings had been held on the incident and the Congressional Committees on Human Rights, Labor and Employment and Agriculture had concluded in part that human rights violations had been committed against the striking workers. However, this was not a pure case of police action against strikers. The dispersal of the strike had occurred several days after the strike, not immediately after its commencement. There were clear indications of provocation by the strikers, which had compelled the police and military forces to use force to give effect to the order by the Department of Labor and Employment. Of course, the strikers could have actually contributed to the peaceful resolution of the dispute had they complied with the legal order issued by the lawfully constituted authority.

She emphasized that the exercise of the right to strike carried with it the correlative obligation to observe the limitations imposed by law, especially those essential to the maintenance of peace and order in the community. Under Filipino law, a strike should not result in the obstruction of entry to and exit from the enterprise. When this statutory limitation was violated by the strikers, it might be necessary to enforce the law. In the context of the Hacienda Luisita strike, the excesses committed by the strikers had dictated the intervention of law enforcement officers.

In relation to the suppression of trade union rights in export processing zones, she said that the Labor Code also applied to these zones. Labour unions organized in these zones were increasing. Based on Bureau of Labor Relations data, the number of unions in special economic zones had grown from 251 in 2000 to 341 as of September 2005. The workers covered had increased from 23,000 in 2000 to nearly 34,000 in 2005. This development followed efforts to educate both the locators and the local officials on the country's labour laws and disproved the alleged harassment and intimidation of trade unionists in the zones.

With regard to the recommendation to amend article 234(c) of the Labor Code to lower the 20 per cent membership requirement for union registration, she expressed support for the removal of the minimum threshold of support signatures required for the registration of independent labour unions. She indicated that an Act had been adopted in May 2007 strengthening the right of workers to self-organization. The Act sought to expand the capacity of legitimate federations and national unions to organize and to help their local chapters acquire representation status for the purposes of collective bargaining. Any legitimate labour federation or national union could now create a local chapter which could in turn file a petition for the certification of an election without the minimum 20 per cent membership and without revealing the names of the officers and members of the local chapter. This was a positive development and a significant step towards the attainment of the change suggested by the Committee of Experts. However, the 20 per cent membership requirement was still relevant in the case of unions seeking independent registration. The Committee should note that the membership requirement served the purpose of protecting the majority from being dictated to by an extreme minority.

Turning to the recommendation to amend articles 269 and 272(b) of the Philippines Labor Code, she recalled that the Convention requested that anyone legally residing in the territory of a given State should benefit from trade union rights without distinction based on nationality. The law in her country effectively granted trade union rights to foreign nationals who were lawfully residing and working in the Philippines, and whose country of origin either extended the right to the citizens of the Philippines to join or assist labour unions or which had ratified ILO Conventions Nos 87 or 98. The exclusion from trade union rights concerned foreign nationals whose residence or employment in the Philippines was not legal, whose country of origin discriminated against foreign workers exercising trade union rights in their territory, or did not subscribe to Conventions Nos 87 or 98. She added that such exclusion was not based on the nationality or citizenship of the foreign worker, but on the lack of willingness of the country of origin to be bound by Conventions Nos 87 or 98, or to extend similar trade union rights to foreign nationals in their territory, including Filipino nationals. The exclusion therefore gave effect to the constitutional responsibility of the State to protect its citizens through lawful measures, including those intended to promote reciprocal or fair treatment of Filipino nationals in foreign countries.

With regard to the suggested amendment of articles 263(g), 264(a), 272(a), 237(a) and 270 of the Labor Code, she noted that the proposal to amend article 263(g) to limit the powers of the Secretary of Labor to intervene in labour disputes to activities or undertakings involving essential services had not become law. She recalled in this respect that the legislative process rested entirely on the judgement of the legislature, and that the Executive could only propose legislation. She added that under articles 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labor Code, the conduct of a strike per se was not criminally punishable. Mere participation in an illegal strike did not result in dismissal from work. Only union officers who knowingly participated in an illegal strike or workers who knowingly participated in the commission of illegal acts during a strike could be dismissed. Non-compliance with the substantive or procedural requirements for a valid strike could result in the strike being declared illegal. However, a strike without valid grounds was not tantamount to an illegal strike if the workers believed in good faith that an unfair labour practice had been committed against them by the employer, where such belief was based on actual circumstances. Nor did the mere participation in an illegal strike or defiance of a return to work order necessarily result in the imprisonment of strikers. However, a penalty of imprisonment could be imposed if acts of violence, force, intimidation, threat or coercion were committed during a strike. A union officer who knowingly and deliberately participated in a strike which failed to observe the requirements of the law forfeited her or his employment. Any worker who knowingly and deliberately participated in acts of violence, force, intimidation or coercion upon persons or things was liable to criminal action for her or his personal acts.

She said that the suggested amendment to article 237(a) had been discussed in the Tripartite Industrial Peace Council, but its members had decided to keep the requirement of ten member-unions for purposes only of the registration of federations or national unions. It was not required for the maintenance of legal personality, nor was it a ground for cancellation of registration. Finally, she noted that article 270 was still under consideration.

In conclusion, she said that the system was certainly not perfect, but great strides had been taken and she asked the Committee to take the small successes into account. It was the essence of democracy that people could decide for themselves the laws and policies that should govern them. It should therefore not be counted against the Government if the legislation had not yet reached the ideal standards of the ILO. She nevertheless reaffirmed her Government's intent to comply with the Convention.

The Employer members recalled that the last occasion on which the case had been discussed was in 1991. Before then it had regularly come before the Committee, including on five occasions during the 1980s. Despite the 16-year gap since the last discussion of the case, the problems were essentially the same. In this respect, it should be noted that Convention No. 87 was not an ideal, but a minimum standard. It was therefore not a promotional instrument, for which ratifying States had a certain time to bring their law and practice into conformity with its requirements. As a minimum standard, there was a requirement upon ratification to bring law and practice into line with the Convention. The 16-year gap also highlighted a problem with the present system for the selection of cases to be examined by the Committee; while certain cases were examined on an almost constant basis, it was to be regretted that cases such as that of the Philippines were not selected and discussed more frequently.

The Employer members emphasized the importance of the case, which involved allegations of murders, violence and death threats against workers. This suggested that civil liberties might not be fully protected in the country and that the investigations undertaken were not adequate. The main issue involved was not therefore that focused on by the Government representative, but the question of the extent to which life in general was protected. The Employer members recalled in this respect that a climate free of violence and intimidation was a prerequisite for the exercise of freedom of association in any country.

Of the issues raised by the Committee of Experts, with regard to the limitation on the registration of trade unions, the Employer members noted that there had been some legislative changes which would have to be examined by the Committee of Experts. In relation to the right to organize of foreign nationals, the Government indicated that this right had been extended, but the Committee of Experts was calling for its extension to cover everyone. The Government representative had not really addressed the issue of the number of trade unions required to establish a federation. The provisions relating to the receipt of foreign assistance by trade unions also still appeared to be problematical. It was therefore important for the Government to provide a full report outlining all the amendments that had been made or were proposed to the legislation and other relevant measures, so that it could be examined by the Committee of Experts at its next session with a view to assessing the extent to which the Government was in compliance with its obligations under the Convention.

The Worker members noted that the latest observation by the Committee of Experts raised the same points as in 1991, including: the minimum membership requirement for registration of a trade union; the fact that the legislation did not grant the right to organize to all nationals lawfully residing in the country; and the excessively high requirement to form federations or national unions. They also noted the points raised by the Government representative and called for a report to be sent to the Committee of Experts for assessment.

The current situation in the country was a matter of concern. Only half of the population had a permanent job, and most of them were paid the minimum wage of around 350 pesos, or less than 5 dollars a day. Little progress had been made in terms of legislation over the past 16 years, but the situation of trade union rights was even more distressing in that over 800 people, about 80 of whom were trade unionists, had been killed in the last year alone. Thousands more suffered from intimidation and harassment, either due to their political affiliation, trade union activities or the exposure of graft or corruption cases. Under these circumstances, people lacked access to decent work, a living wage or essential services free from corruption.

The Worker members recalled that the Government representative had referred to "isolated incidents" of extrajudicial killings. They indicated that the number of such cases was much too high to be called isolated and they were therefore worried that the Government was failing to recognize the gravity of the problem. The Committee of Experts had raised the issue of violence, including: the murder of four trade union leaders in 2005; anti-union violence in the sugar sector; death threats to discourage unions in the EPZ in Cavite; and the impunity of the authors of killings of seven strikers. But these were far from giving a full picture. The United Nations Special Rapporteur, who had visited the country earlier in the year, had emphasized the serious impact of extrajudicial killings and that the mere existence of such killings had an effect on society and undermined political discourse, which was essential to the resolution of the country's problems.

The Government had established the Melo Commission, thereby showing that the President acknowledged the seriousness of the problem. But its findings had not yet been made public. The Government had also introduced a witness protection programme, but few witnesses had come forward as they feared for their lives and those of their families. Furthermore, not a single perpetrator had been apprehended, and there were strong indications that the abductions, disappearances and killings were connected to members of the police or the military. The Worker members warned that impunity led to trade union rights violations and contempt of the law.

The Worker members also referred to the case of Crispin Beltran, a labour leader and member of Congress, who had been detained for 15 months, along with five other politicians. On 1 June 2007, the Supreme Court had dropped the rebellion charges against him and the other politicians. They were delighted with this ruling and hoped that he would be released in the near future.

The Worker members said that another serious violation of freedom of association consisted of the deployment of military or police forces in companies that were strike bound, where there were disputes between the management and the workers, where unions existed or were being organized. The intention of such militarization was to oppose union organization and harass and intimidate workers. They added that certain employers ignored decisions by the Supreme Court on labour matters and they therefore urged the Government to take action to implement the law and the fundamental Conventions.

In June 2007, the Anti-Terrorism Act would enter into force. The Worker members feared that this instrument would be used to silence critics of the Government, including trade unionists, lawyers and judges calling for the protection of human rights. They therefore urged the Government to: recognize the seriousness of the problem; take effective steps to end extrajudicial killings; conduct independent and impartial investigations; put into place transparent social dialogue; establish permanent independent monitoring mechanisms for trade union and human rights abuses; and restore a climate of complete freedom and security from violence and threats as a basis for the full exercise of freedom of association.

The Worker member of the Philippines expressed his support for the comments of the Committee of Experts recommending the amendment of section 270 of the Labor Code (prior permission of the Secretary of Labor for the receipt of foreign assistance by trade unions), section 234(c) (requirement of the names of 20 per cent of all employees in a bargaining unit in which a trade union seeks to operate), section 263(g) (intervention of the Government resulting in compulsory arbitration) and sections 264(a) and 272(a) (dismissal of trade union officers and penal liability for participation in illegal strikes). He urged the Government to make the recommended amendments so as to comply with Convention No. 87.

However, he expressed sadness at the perception that trade union leaders had been killed because of their exercise of the right to organize. He said such view was inaccurate and indicated that the Federation of Free Workers (FFW) and the Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (TUCP) had no such experience since the 1990s. Such killings were motivated by reasons other than the exercise of the right to organize. He emphasized that all killings had to be condemned, whatever the circumstances, and he called on the Government to conduct thorough, impartial and meaningful investigations and hold those responsible accountable.

He finally urged the social partners to: stop all killings; support all efforts to create an environment conducive to investment so as to eradicate poverty; uphold the rule of the law; and create an environment that promoted observance of, at the very least, the ILO's fundamental Conventions.

The Employer member of the Philippines agreed that the case of the Philippines was a reprise of 1991, when it had last been discussed. He also agreed with most of the points made by the Government representative. However, certain other speakers had seemed to view the Philippines as a totalitarian State, which was totally untrue. In relation to the issue of the country's compliance with international instruments, he expressed his dismay that complaints of a political nature were being brought before the Committee, when they should be dealt with by other United Nations bodies. It was important for the Committee to focus on the issue of freedom of association.

With regard to the so-called extrajudicial killings, he said it was not correct that people had been killed because of their membership to trade unions. Such a view, which tended to imply a certain responsibility of employers, was unfair. Employers, as well as workers, condemned all killings, which were a matter for the police and should be handled by public prosecutors. The discussion of such matters in the present forum might constitute interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign State.

He said that employers in the Philippines felt harassed by some recent legislative developments. For example, Act No. 9481, which strengthened the workers' right to self-organization, allowed any legitimate workers' unions or federations to establish local chapters, even if they had very few members. This Act, by giving greater freedom, was likely to increase uncertainty.

With reference to the decision by the Supreme Court concerning Mr Crispin Beltran, he said that the decision should be respected, as it had been reached through due process and on the basis of the facts.

The Worker member of Indonesia regretted, despite national and international calls for convincing measures to guarantee the safety of trade unionists and journalists in the country, that the Government had not conducted prompt, thorough, impartial and effective investigations to prosecute the perpetrators of anti-union crimes. Reports from organizations such as the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), Amnesty International, the Center for Trade Union and Human Rights and the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) confirmed that the situation seemed to be getting out of control, with an increase in anti-union violence and killings.

He referred to the killing on 21 May 2007 of the journalist Dodie Nunez as an example of the continued killings and disappearances since President Arroyo had taken office. As indicated in the letter from the ITUC to the President, the high number of assassinations of trade unionists placed the country in the second place after Colombia in this respect. He also referred to the report of the IFJ indicating that the country had the second highest rate of murders of professional journalists after Iraq. He emphasized that violence against journalists was contrary to fundamental principles of civil liberties, which were essential for the exercise of freedom of association. He therefore urged the Government to redouble its efforts to investigate those responsible for the deaths of trade union leaders, to bring them to justice and to stop targeting unionists by linking them with opposition groups.

He expressed full support for all journalists and workers in the country in their struggle for a safe and free working environment. He called on the Government to act now to end the culture of impunity and to show the world that the country protected its citizens, punished criminals and valued freedom of the press and democracy.

The Worker member of the Republic of Korea, focusing on the violation of the right to freedom of association in the export processing zone (EPZ) in Cavite, in which there were 254 companies, said that trade union activities were seriously discouraged and suppressed in practice, even though the Labour Code could in principle be applied equally to EPZs. He indicated that many workers had been dismissed merely because they had formed or joined a union, or had taken part in union activities. Employers had refused to recognize or negotiate with unions, or had set up their own "yellow" unions. In the EPZ in Cavite, many of the unions that had been set up had succumbed to employer pressure, and no fewer than 11,000 workers had lost their jobs, had been forced to take leave of absence, harassed, charged or arrested as a means of denying their right to organize.

He referred to the example of the Chong Won Fashion Trade Union. The workers had voted in August 2004 to support the trade union as their sole bargaining agent. The management, however, had harassed, intimidated and taken retaliatory action against the leaders and members of the union. When the workers had formed a peaceful picket in front of the company in September 2006, the production manager had brought in police officers from the Philippines Export Zone Authority (PEZA) and security guards. In contravention of the existing guidelines on strikes, which prohibited police officers and security guards from positioning themselves within 50 metres of the picket line, the picketing workers had been dispersed forcibly, resulting in 40 workers being injured. As the union had fulfilled the legal procedures for a strike, the management had no legal basis or justification for its action.

He emphasized that it was the responsibility of the Government to promote an environment favourable to the exercise of trade union rights. Yet, instead, it had tried to prevent the organization and exercise of trade union rights by maintaining a "union free, strike free" policy in EPZs. In accordance with the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (2000) and the ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy (1977), the Government should not restrict the right of workers to organize in order to attract foreign investment.

He indicated that the Committee of Experts had made the same recommendations in all cases in which there were alleged killings of workers, emphasizing the interdependence between civil liberties and trade union rights and recalling that workers, without distinction whatsoever, should be able to enjoy the right to freedom of association in a climate free from violence. He very much hoped that Filipino workers would be able to enjoy this right soon.

In view of the number of killings of trade unionists, he urged the Government to take immediate action to bring an end to extrajudicial killings and all forms of violence against trade unionists and to take concrete measures to launch immediate impartial and independent investigations of such killings. He also called on the Government to show its commitment to ILO principle through the immediate release of Mr Crispin Beltran of the Kilusang Mayo Uno Labour Center (KMU) and other trade union leaders.

The Worker member of Germany expressed her concern over the deterioration of the situation with regard to freedom of association in the Philippines, as indicated in the report of the Committee of Experts, including the severe obstacles to establishing and joining trade unions, compulsory arbitration by the Government and increasing anti-union violence, even involving killings of trade unionists, for which investigation and judicial proceedings had been pending for several years, which constituted clear evidence of impunity.

She also expressed concern at other matters. She referred to the issue of the lack of legal security in the country, citing for example the decision by the Supreme Court of March 2006 concerning the University of San Augustin, in which it had declared a strike illegal that had previously been ruled legal. Under such circumstances, it was difficult to trust the judicial system. Trade unionists could be arrested, as seen in the case of Crispin Beltran, and were under threat of disappearance or murder. The activities of trade unions were often limited by legally supported anti-union discrimination exercised by important private and public employers. Trade union leaders ran the risk of facing fabricated criminal charges and of being sent to jail, and were not sure of a fair trial. They had to operate in a country where 70 unionists had already been killed in 2007 and to survive they had to change their locations frequently, as had been the experience of the president of Toyota Motors Philippines Corporation Workers Association. The effective exercise of trade union activities was made difficult where an employer supported the establishment of a "yellow" trade union and restricted independent trade unions. This was the case of Bayer Philippines, where a solution had been found through an agreement for coexistence in collective bargaining between the company and the independent trade union.

Against this background, she urged the Government to revise its legislation and improve its court system so as to provide better protection for the population in general, including trade union members, thereby giving effect in practice to the principles of Conventions Nos 87 and 98.

The Government member of Colombia indicated that the Philippines was a democratic developing country, endeavouring to combat poverty and improve the living conditions of its citizens. She referred to the Government's efforts to encourage social dialogue and make progress in the application of the Decent Work Country Programme. She emphasized that the Government was willing to provide clarifications with regard to the acts of violence against trade unionists and on the creation of special courts to investigate these matters. Finally, she said that the international community should encourage and appreciate the efforts made by the judiciary.

The Government representative expressed sadness at the manner in which the present issues were being discussed in this forum. Her Government had never denied the existence of killings and the President had appointed an impartial commission to investigate the problem and bring the authors to court. However, the figures mentioned during the discussion were very doubtful, and there had been little agreement on the figures provided to the Melo Commission. Moreover, there was no evidence that the killings were based merely on trade union activism or the exercise of trade union rights. She recalled that trade union rights were protected by the Constitution. She also expressed sadness that the discussion had moved away from the provisions of the Convention and had turned to political issues.

She recalled that measures were being taken to address the problem of the killings. The President had given instructions and had asked the Melo Commission to continue its work to produce a supplementary report. The Government had sought cooperation from European Union countries, investigated the alleged involvement of the military, expanded the witness protection programme and established 99 special courts. Amendments had been made to the legislation as an initial step setting out the requirement of 20 per cent membership for the creation of a local chapter of a trade union and copies of the new legislation would be provided to the Committee of Experts. The Tripartite Industrial Peace Council had decided to retain the requirement of ten members for the establishment of federations or national unions, but only for registration of a federation or a national union, not for maintenance of legal personality or as a ground for cancellation of registration. In relation to the allegations of harassment and intimidation in EPZs, she said that the Labour Code applied equally in such zones, which were not considered to be union free, as demonstrated by the number of unions operating in the zones with the agreement of employers. She strongly rejected the allegation that a culture of impunity prevailed in her country and emphasized that it was the strong desire of the President to bring an end to the killings. In the case of Crispin Beltran, she recalled that the Supreme Court had found that there were no grounds for his continued detention and that the release order would be issued in due time. She added that his detention had had nothing to do with his trade union leadership or activities.

The Employer members emphasized the significance of the case in view of the important issue of whether civil liberties were adequately protected in the country. The Committee had been informed of legislative changes, but there were still certain matters that had not been addressed. A report should be provided in good time reflecting the amendments that had been made so that the Committee of Experts could examine the situation more closely. The conclusions should propose that a high-level mission visit the country to make a fuller assessment of all the aspects of the case.

The Worker members encouraged the Government to involve the social partners in the continued process of revising the Labour Code with a view to bringing it into conformity with this and other ILO Conventions. The Government should send copies of the amended texts to the Committee of Experts for examination. With regard to the killings, it was the responsibility of the Government to take all the necessary measures to protect witnesses and to ensure that thorough and impartial investigations were carried out. Although other United Nations bodies had their responsibilities, it should be emphasized that it was necessary to guarantee other basic human rights if labour rights were to be exercised effectively. The conclusions should call for a high-level mission to visit the country.

The Committee took note of the statement made by the Government representative and the debate that followed. The Committee observed that the Committee of Experts' comments referred to serious allegations of the murder of trade unionists, anti-union violence in the sugar sector, death threats to discourage union formation in an economic zone and impunity relating to the killings of workers. The Committee also noted that the Committee of Experts had been referring for many years to the need to amend the current Labour Code to bring it into conformity with the Convention.

The Committee noted the Government's statement according to which, following recommendations of the Melo Commission established to investigate the rising number of extra-judicial killings, 99 regional tribunals have been designated to expeditiously resolve these cases. The Government also referred to the increasing numbers of unions in special economic zones and the recent passage of an Act strengthening the workers' right to self-organization.

Deeply concerned at the allegations of the murders of trade unionists, the Committee emphasized that respect for basic civil liberties is essential for the exercise of freedom of association. While noting the initial steps taken by the Government to address this serious situation through the establishment of the Melo Commission and the subsequent creation of special regional tribunals, the Committee, concerned at the absence of judgements against the perpetrators and instigators of these crimes, stressed the importance of ensuring that all instances of violence against trade union members are properly investigated and that any evidence of impunity is firmly combated to ensure the full and free exercise of trade union rights and their accompanying civil liberties. The Committee urged the Government to ensure that all necessary measures are taken, including through the creation of independent and impartial investigations, so as to restore a climate of complete freedom and security from violence and threats thus enabling workers and employers to fully exercise their freedom of association rights.

While noting with interest the information provided by the Government on certain recently adopted amendments to the Labour Code, the Committee urged the Government to take measures to ensure, in full consultation with the social partners concerned, that further amendments are adopted in the very near future taking into account the comments made by the Committee of Experts for many years. It requested the Government to provide precise information on all the points raised, including as regards the impact of the Anti-Terrorism Act upon the application of the provisions of the Convention, and copies of all relevant legislative texts, in a report to the Committee of Experts. The Committee requested the Government to accept a high-level ILO mission so as to obtain a greater understanding of all aspects of this case. The Committee expressed the firm hope that it would be in a position to note tangible progress in the application of the Convention both in law and in practice in the near future.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1991, Publication: 78th ILC session (1991)

A Government representative indicated that serious note had been taken of the Committee of Experts' observation and request that the Government revise certain provisions of the Labour Code, specifically some of those amendments introduced in 1989 by Act No. 6715. He observed that in May 1990 a national tripartite conference was convened to examine existing labour laws and regulations. As a result of that conference the Tripartite Industrial Peace Council was created through Executive Order No. 403 and charged, among other things, to advise the President and the Secretary of Labour and Employment on labour policy. In April 1991 this Council included in its agenda the review of existing labour legislation; the result of this review will be sent to the legislative body for consideration. The Government representative assured the present Committee that the issues raised by the Committee of Experts would be raised in the Council's deliberations. He emphasised that as the amendments being questioned were products of tripartite consultation any subsequent revision of the same should be the result of tripartite discussion; this was also consistent with the Government's recent ratification of Convention No. 144 on Tripartite Consultation. The speaker informed the Committee that continuing efforts, with the assistance of the ILO, were being undertaken to conform the existing national laws with international labour standards. To this end several discussions between ILO experts and Philippine legislators and employers' and workers' representatives have been held. In fact the Philippine delegation to the Conference this year was composed of several legislators; this was a positive development which the speaker hoped would lead to resolution of issues raised in the report.

The Workers' members thanked the Government representative for the information provided and expression of good intentions and continuing efforts. They observed that the Committee of Experts had raised five points which needed to be addressed: the requirement that at least 20 per cent of the workers in a bargaining unit be members of a union for the union to be registered; the requirement of too high a number of unions to establish a federation or central organisation; the prohibition of aliens - other than those with valid permits if the same rights are granted to Filippino workers in the country of origin of alien workers - from engaging any trade union activity under penalty of deportation; compulsory arbitration when, in the opinion of the Secretary of Labour and Employment, a planned or current strike affects an industry indispensable to the national interest, resulting in restrictions on the right to strike in non-essential services; and harsh penalties for participation in illegal strikes. The Workers' members noted the acknowledgment of the Government in its report that the law in question needed some improvement and that nothing to the contrary had been said by the Government representative in the Committee.

The Employers' members believed that this case showed the viability and usefulness of the supervisory machinery and the work of this Committee in promoting improvements in labour law and working conditions. This was the sixth time in the past decade that the case of the Philippines had been brought to the attention of this Committee; it had twice been noted by the Committee of Experts as a case of progress. Although the Employers' members generally thought the Workers' members' comments were well made, they wished to express some reservations. They reiterated their view that the permissible limits of the right to strike were drawn too narrowly by the Committee of Experts and that it was difficult to prejudge those circumstances where strike action would threaten national interest. Furthermore, in setting forth the line between legal and illegal strikes the Employers' members believed that the yardstick used by the Committee of Experts was not limited to the terms of Convention No. 87 and that the view of the Experts was too broad as it might prevent governments from legislating in a way which would adequately deter illegal activites. In conclusion, they noted that the Labour Code needed to be amended and looked forward to appropriate changes being made.

The Committee noted the report of the Committee of Experts and the information provided by the Government representative. The Committee noted also that amendments made to the Labour Code had improved application of the Convention in law and practice. However, it noted that certain serious divergences remained with respect to the criteria for trade union registration, the constitution of federations and the rights of alien workers to take part in trade union activities, compulsory arbitration and penalties for illegal strikes. The Committee expressed the hope that appropriate measures would be adopted in the near future, if necessary with the assistance of the ILO, so as to bring law and practice in line with the requirements of the Convention.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1989, Publication: 76th ILC session (1989)

The Government representative informed the present Committee that Senate Bill No. 530 and House Bill No. 11524 mentioned by the Committee of Experts had already been consolidated and enacted into law as Republic Act 6715. This law became effective on 21 March 1989, just prior to the termination of the Committee of Experts' session. A copy of this law would be submitted to the Committee of Experts for its information and examination. The rules and regulations implementing Act 6715 were signed by the Secretary of Labour and Employment on 24 May 1989 after about two months of tripartite consultations and deliberations; they would also be sent to the Committee of Experts. He trusted that the Committee of Experts would find that most, if not all, its concerns are answered by these documents. He pointed out that, since the new Government came into power and Congress became operational, the Labour Code had undergone two amendments: Executive Order No. 111 of 1986 and Act 6715 of 1989. The speaker said this was not a bad record considering the relatively short period in power of the current administration and the time required for public hearings and tripartite deliberation in this connection. He added that the National Tripartite Review Committee, which was now a permanent mechanism, convened regularly for the purpose of reviewing legislation so that necessary amendments could be formulated and introduced to give full meaning and effect to the present Convention.

The Workers' members noted that problems under the Convention had been addressed by the Committee on Freedom of Association and, for several years, by the Committee of Experts to the effect that the legislation was not in conformity with the Convention. It was now time to act. They understood that the country had known a dictatorship which had probably hindered action, but the new regime had been in place for three years and should be in a position gradually to improve its legislation and practice. They were aware that the country still suffered economic difficulties and high unemployment, as well as the internal problem of the guerrillas. This was not the subject under discussion here, but it cost much in terms of money and human lives. The tripartite activities referred to could be a means of realising progress, and they were pleased to note that a new law had been promulgated, coming into force March 1989. They hoped that this legislation had been, or would be, transmitted to the Committee of Experts for examination so that it would be able to see whether progress had been made. They also hoped that most, or all, of the comments outstanding for so long would be met by this legislation and that the present Committee would be in a position to note its conformity with the Convention.

The Employers' members noted that this case concerned a series of provisions relating to and interfering with freedom of association, and that some were useless and therefore should be eliminated. They referred the Committee of Experts' comments on the restrictions imposed on the right to strike, recalling that these were the sort of cases where the employers had a differing view as to the requirements of the Convention. In any case, the current legislation contained enough problems concerning conformity with the Convention; for example, interference in the internal affairs of the unions. A certain number of points might be resolved by the new law which had been drawn up following tripartite consultations; however, a series of other legislative measures were still necessary. They hoped that in the reasonable and foreseeable future there would be amendments since, for 25 years, there had been divergence between law and practice and the requirements of the Convention.

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative and of the debate which took place. The Committee noted with interest that certain draft laws had been adopted and called on the Government to send the texts in question to the ILO so that the Committee of Experts could examine them. Taking into account the importance of the points raised by the Committee of Experts, the Committee requested the Government to take all necessary measures to bring about rapidly full conformity between the legislation and practice and the Convention. The Committee hoped that the Government would. in its next report, be in a position to indicate significant progress in the application of the Convention on all the points raised by the Committee of Experts.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comment

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE), received on 1 September 2023, reiterating the comments made in the discussion held in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2023 on the application of the Convention, and the Government’s reply thereto. It further notes the joint observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF), received on 27 September 2023, relating to matters addressed below and alleging continued and serious violations of workers’ civil liberties and trade union rights. The Committee also notes the observations of the Center of United and Progressive Workers (SENTRO), received on 19 October 2023, referring to matters addressed below and alleging the murder of a trade union officer. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 111th Session, June 2023)

The Committee notes the discussion that took place in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards (Conference Committee) in June 2023 concerning the application of the Convention. The Committee observes that the Conference Committee urged the Government, in consultation with the social partners, to: (i) put an immediate end to any act of violence and intimidation against union members for the legitimate exercise of their rights under the Convention as well as violations of freedom of association, in line with the recommendations of the ILO high-level tripartite mission; (ii) immediately and effectively undertake investigations into the allegations of violence in relation to members of workers’ organizations with a view to establishing the facts, determining culpability and punishing the perpetrators; (iii) operationalize the monitoring bodies, including by providing adequate resources, and provide regular information on these mechanisms and on progress on the cases assigned to them; and (iv) ensure that all workers without distinction are able to form and join organizations of their own choosing in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention. The Conference Committee also urged the Government to take decisive and effective measures to promote a climate of non-violence, as well as constructive social dialogue and labour relations at all levels in the country. Finally, the Conference Committee requested the Government to finalize, with ILO technical assistance and in consultation with the social partners, the road map on effectively addressing all outstanding issues and transmit a report on progress made to the Committee of Experts by 1 September 2023.

Tripartite road map to implement the 2019 Conference Committee conclusions and achieve full compliance with the Convention. High-level tripartite mission. The Committee had previously called on the Government to rapidly and genuinely engage with the social partners in order to elaborate a constructive tripartite road map detailing progressive steps to be taken to implement the conclusions of the 2019 Conference Committee and to achieve full compliance with the Convention. The Committee had noted the Government’s indication that it would develop such a road map and review its Guidelines on the conduct of stakeholders relative to the exercise of workers’ rights and activities though the institutionalized tripartite process, and expected both instruments to significantly contribute to addressing in a meaningful manner the long-standing concerns and serious violations of civil liberties in the exercise of freedom of association rights.

The Committee notes the report of the high-level tripartite mission requested by the 2019 Conference Committee, which visited the country in January 2023. It further notes the Government’s indication that discussions on the road map continued with the social partners and that, on 23 August 2023, the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council (NTIPC) convened to consider a draft road map structured along the areas of action identified by the 2019 Conference Committee. The Committee notes that during this meeting, the NTIPC issued Resolution No. 3, which approved the tripartite road map on freedom of association, and Resolution No. 2, which called on the Department of Budget Management, the House of Representatives and the Senate to increase the budget of the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) to allow it to independently perform its constitutional mandate to promote and protect human rights and to provide remedies in case of violations (both resolutions are still being circulated to NTIPC members for signature). As regards the review of the Guidelines on the conduct of stakeholders, the Committee notes that the Government states that the Department of Labour and Employment (DOLE) convened four inter-agency technical working group meetings to draft consolidated Guidelines, which have been approved in principle and elevated to the NTIPC. The Committee also notes that the Government indicates that, in line with the recommendations of the high-level tripartite mission, the President of the Philippines issued Executive Order No. 23 on 30 April 2023, thereby creating an Inter-Agency Committee (EO23 IAC) to promote and protect freedom of association and the right to organize of workers. The Government adds that the EO23 IAC, which is directly under the Office of the President, chaired by the Executive Secretary, and has already convened twice, is tasked, inter alia, with receiving inventories of cases and incidents related to freedom of association from concerned agencies, consolidating and evaluating reports from such agencies, and monitoring progress in the implementation of their action plans. The Government also informs of the recent signing of a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between DOLE, the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA), which provides for the establishment of an Ecozone Tripartite Advisory Council, as well as ecozone tripartite working committees, with the aim of promoting industrial peace in ecozones. The Government adds that on 10 August 2023, a first ecozone tripartite working committee was established in the Mactan Export Processing Zone. The Committee also notes that on 20 October 2023, another MOA was concluded between DOLE and the CHR to foster cooperation on the promotion and protection of the human rights of Filipino workers, the conduct of investigations, the referral of cases, the provision of legal advice, and the conduct of trainings and activities.

The Committee notes that the ITUC and the ITF, in their joint observations, confirm that the road map is being finalized, but state that the social partners were not consulted in the drafting of Executive Order No. 23, and consider that the latter falls short in several fundamental aspects, as it does not include representation from social partners, and fails to connect the work of the EO23 IAC with that of a specialized, eminent, independent non-judicial body or provide dedicated funding. The Committee further notes that SENTRO, in its observations, similarly states that the issuance of Executive Order No. 23 occurred without any discussion with workers’ organizations and that the social partners have been excluded from the EO23 IAC, the members of which are mainly elements of the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC). SENTRO also affirms that DOLE, DTI and PEZA concluded their MOA without any consultation with workers’ organizations. While the Committee welcomes the progress achieved with respect to the elaboration of the tripartite road map and the review of the Guidelines on the conduct of stakeholders, it also notes the concerns raised by the ITUC, the ITF and SENTRO regarding certain elements linked to the recommendations of the high-level tripartite mission, namely the lack of consultation with the social partners in the preparation of Executive Order No. 23 and the MOA between DOLE, DTI and PEZA, the lack of reference to a specialized, eminent, independent non-judicial body in Executive Order No. 23, and the composition of the EO23 IAC. Underlining the importance that should be attached to full and frank consultation taking place on any questions or proposed legislation affecting trade union rights,the Committee expects that the tripartite road map, with agreed timelines as requested by the high-level tripartite mission, and the Guidelines on the conduct of stakeholders will be finalized shortly and will significantly contribute to ensuring full respect for the civil liberties of trade union leaders and members. It requests the Government to transmit both documents once they are adopted. The Committee further requests the Government to take the necessary measures to review Executive Order No. 23 in full consultation with the social partners, and to provide information on any progress made in this regard.

Civil liberties and trade union rights

Previous allegations. The Committee recalls that it has received repeated allegations of serious violations of basic civil liberties in the exercise of trade union rights submitted by the ITUC in 2015, 2019, 2020 and 2021, by Education International (EI) in 2019, and jointly by EI, the Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) and the National Alliance of Teachers and Office Workers (SMP-NATOW) in 2020, all of which are detailed in its previous comments. The Committee has, on numerous occasions, requested the Government to ensure that these allegations were duly investigated and perpetrators punished to effectively prevent and combat impunity.

The Committee notes that the Government indicates, with respect to the alleged killings of three union leaders reported in 2015 by the ITUC, that: (i) in the case of Florencio Romano, the investigation is still ongoing; (ii) in the case of Rolando Pango, the police are still unable to locate the only potential witness; and (iii) in the case of Victoriano Embang, the two people accused in 2015 remain at large. As regards the allegations of extra-judicial killings of eight trade unionists in the education sector submitted in 2020 by EI, ACT and SMP-NATOW, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that four cases are pending before the courts, one case was dismissed by the prosecutor, and three are under investigation. The Committee observes, however, that the Government does not provide updated information on the status of investigation of the other serious allegations, which concern specific incident of killings, attempted killings, death threats, profiling, surveillance, violent strike dispersal and military and police raids on union offices. Noting with deep regret that no concrete progress appears to have been made in the investigation of these incidents and the punishment of their perpetrators,the Committee firmly expects the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that all allegations presented by the ITUC, EI, ACT and SMP-NATOW since 2015 are properly and fully investigated, and that the cases are reviewed by the CHR when unresolved, so that the facts are established, including any links between the violence and trade union activities, culpability determined and perpetrators brought to justice, thus contributing to the prevention and elimination of impunity. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the status of the investigations and their outcome.

The Committee had previously noted with concern the 2022 ITUC allegations that the police entered the offices of SENTRO without justification and repeatedly inquired about union activities in November 2021, and that the police brutally repressed a strike and arrested 44 workers in a pasta-making company in December 2021. The Committee had requested the Government to ensure that the incidents were adequately addressed, that any unionists detained in relation to the legitimate exercise of trade union activities were released, and that the criminal system was not used to repress freedom of association rights. The Committee notes that according to the Government, the police visit, which was a fact-finding and validation exercise prompted by a reported labour dispute, was misinterpreted as a form of harassment. The Government adds that after a dialogue took place between representatives of the FCCU-SENTRO and the Philippines National Police (PNP) on 5 October 2022, no further incidents of surveillance have taken place. The Committee further notes that SENTRO, in its observations, states that the unannounced visit to its office followed a complaint against members of the police, and occurred within a larger context of red-tagging and harassment, including recent incidents at a plantation in Governor Generoso, at a mining company in Surigao, and at a cable company in Davao City. With respect to the alleged arrests at the pasta-making company, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that complaints have been filed against 44 arrested workers for alarms and scandal, absence of permit, disobedience to authority and disregard of COVID-19 protocols, among other charges. The Government indicates that these complaints were dismissed by the prosecutor for lack of probable cause, but that an appeal was filed by the management of the above-mentioned company before the Office of the Justice Secretary on 2 March 2022. The Government informs that this appeal is currently on hold, as it was filed during the previous administration. Taking note of the above, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that trade unionists are able to exercise their activities in a climate free from violence, harassment and intimidation, and within the framework of a system which guarantees the effective respect of civil liberties and freedom of association rights. The Committee also requests the Government to provide its observations on the new allegations of red-tagging and harassment submitted by SENTRO.

New allegations. The Committee notes that the ITUC and the ITF, in their 2023 observations, allege that Alex Dolorosa, an officer of the BPO Industry Employees Network (BIEN), was stabbed to death in April 2023. According to these organizations, 16 killings of trade unionists have been documented by Filipino trade unions since 2019. The ITUC and the ITF also affirm that two organizers of the Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU), Alipio “Ador” Juat and Elizabeth “Loi” Magbanua, disappeared on 3 May 2022, and that in September 2022, the Court of Appeal ruled that military officers and officials were accountable for their enforced and continued disappearance. The organizations further allege that two labour organizers, Elgene “Leleng” Mungcal, and Elena “Cha” Cortez Pampoza, went missing on 3 July 2022 after having been subjected to red-tagging, that two union leaders were abducted, detained and questioned about their political activities by state security forces for six days in January 2023, and that two union leaders were arbitrarily arrested and accused of assault and robbery during a rally in June 2020 before being released on bail. The Committee further notes that SENTRO, in its 2023 observations, also denounces the murder of Alex Dolorosa. Noting these serious allegations with deep concern, the Committee requests the Government to provide its observations thereon.

Measures to combat impunity. Monitoring mechanisms. In its previous comments, the Committee strongly encouraged the Government to fully engage with the social partners in the review of the operational guidelines of the monitoring mechanisms, including in the framework of the mentioned tripartite road map, and requested it to continue to further strengthen these mechanisms, including by allocating sufficient resources, staff and security to personnel. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that DOLE has strengthened the role of the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR) in performing overall supervision and monitoring of the Convention and related issues, and that funds have been allocated to strengthen the operation of monitoring mechanisms in the 2024 General Appropriations Act. The Government also indicates that the tripartite road map, as presently drafted, includes action points towards the strengthening of monitoring bodies, ensuring adequate budget allocation, and assignment of focal persons and support staff for tripartite activities and mechanisms. The Committee further notes that the Government provides the following information on the status of the 30 cases involving 43 killed trade unionists reported to the 2019 Conference Committee, and on the additional 12 incidents involving 22 victims reported by the ACT Teachers Partylist, the Nagkaisa Labour Coalition, and other labour groups: 12 cases were filed in court, eight are with the prosecutor’s office, one was closed due to the death of the accused, and 21 are still under investigation.

The Committee also notes that the ITUC and the ITF, in their 2023 observations, allege that the existing monitoring bodies, such as the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council Monitoring Body (NTIPC-MB) and the Regional Tripartite Monitoring Body (RTMB), lack budget and staff to operate properly. They also affirm that the Inter-Agency Committee on Extrajudicial Killings, Enforced Disappearances, Torture and Other Grave Violations of the Right to Life, Liberty and Security of Persons under Administrative Order 35 (AO35 IAC) was supposed to address grave human rights violations, including labour-related killings, but that despite its resources, few cases have progressed or have been resolved. Taking due note of the Government’s indication that funds have been attributed in the 2024 General Appropriations Act and action points have been included in the tripartite road map to strengthen the monitoring bodies, the Committee expects that these bodies will be allocated more resources and staff in the very near future, with a view to ensuring their full operationalization and, in turn, the effective and timely monitoring, investigation, and, as appropriate, referral for prosecution of all pending labour-related cases of extra-judicial killings and other violations against trade union leaders and members. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard, as well as updates on the progress made by the monitoring mechanisms in collecting the necessary information to bring the pending cases of violence against trade unionists to the courts.

Measures to combat impunity. Training and Guidelines on the conduct of stakeholders. The Committee previously encouraged the Government to continue to promote comprehensive training activities, with a solid focus on freedom of association and collective bargaining, among government agencies, and looked forward to receiving the revised Guidelines on the conduct of stakeholders. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that between June and August 2023, DOLE organized consultations and orientations with the CHR, the NTF-ELCAC and the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency (NICA) to coordinate and strengthen their programs on freedom of association. The Government adds that DOLE has conducted four area-wide dialogues to promote common understanding of the principles of freedom of association between unions, employers, law enforcement agencies and other government stakeholders, which took place in the national capital region on 2 March 2023, in Visayas on 17 March 2023, in Mindanao on 28 March 2023, and in Luzon on 26 April 2023. The Government informs that these social dialogues will be a continuing activity under the tripartite road map, which will provide for the conduct of capacity-building activities and trainers’ training to ensure the effective implementation of the Guidelines on the conduct of stakeholders. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that Executive Order No. 23 requires concerned agencies to submit a comprehensive education and capacity-building program to foster common understanding among these agencies of the principles, policies, laws and regulations on freedom of association and the rights to self-organization and collective bargaining. The Government also states that it is looking at the possibility of availing itself of technical assistance from the ILO to strengthen the forensic capacity of its investigative bodies with a view to expediting fair investigation and resolution of the cases related to freedom of association. Welcoming these initiatives, the Committee expects that the above-mentioned training activities will continue within the framework of the tripartite road map and significantly contribute to raising awareness on matters related tofreedom of association and collective bargaining among State officials. Noting the Government’s interest in receiving technical assistance from the Office, the Committee hopes that this assistance will be provided in the near future.

Measures to combat impunity. Pending legislative matters. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the Government’s indication that Senate Bill No. 2121 (defining and penalizing the crime of red-tagging) had been filed in March 2021, and requested the Government to provide information on the progress made in its adoption. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that Senate Bill No. 2121 was not refiled in the Senate of the current Congress, but that House Bills Nos 1152 and 4941, which also seek to define and criminalize red-tagging, were filed in the House of Representatives. The Government informs that these two bills have been pending with the House Committee on Justice since August and September 2022, respectively. In this regard, the Committee notes that SENTRO, in its 2023 observations, states that the proposed new legislation to help address red-tagging has yet to show any real prospect of enactment and has not been recommended by DOLE as urgent. Taking due note of the above, the Committee encourages the Government to take concrete time-bound measures towards the adoption of House Bills Nos 1152 and 4941, and requests it to provide information on any progress made in this regard.

The Committee had also previously noted the Government’s indication that House Resolution No. 392 (calling for justice for the victims and urging the House Committee on Human Rights to investigate the state of enforced disappearances in the country) and House Resolution No. 45 (directing the Committees on Justice and Human Rights to jointly conduct an inquiry into the implementation of the Act against Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance of 2012) had been filed in Congress, and encouraged the Government to continue to support legislative efforts that could have a positive impact on the exercise of civil liberties and trade union rights. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that House Bill No. 407, which seeks to declare unlawful and criminalize wilful interference with, harassment and coercion of any worker, workers’ association or trade union in the exercise of their right to self-organization, was filed in the House of Representatives and has been pending before the House Committee on Labour and Employment since July 2022. The Government adds that four other bills advocating for civil liberties and trade union rights in both the public and private sectors (House Bills Nos 1513, 1518, 550 and 7043) were filed in the House of Representatives. Taking due note of these initiatives, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress achieved in the adoption of House Resolution No. 45, House Bills Nos 407, 1513, 1518, 550 and 7043, or any other draft legislation aimed at ensuring respect for civil liberties in the exercise of trade union rights.

Anti-Terrorism Act. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to take any necessary measures to ensure that the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2020 does not have the effect of restricting legitimate trade union activities. The Committee understood that following a Supreme Court judgement of December 2021 which nullified two provisions of the above-mentioned Act, terrorism as defined in section 4 does not include advocacy, protest, dissent, stoppage of work, industrial or mass action, and other similar exercises of civil and political rights, and welcomed this development. The Committee notes that the Government states that the judicial process provided in the Act for declaring a group of persons, an organization or an association as terrorist includes three levels of investigation, and that with the Supreme Court’s ruling, there is no leeway by which the law can be used to restrict legitimate trade union activities and related civil liberties. The Committee expects that the Government will continue to ensure that the Anti-Terrorism Act is not implemented in a way which has the effect of restricting legitimate union activities and related civil liberties.

Legislative issues

Labour Code. The Committee had previously noted that no recent amendments had been made on the matters raised in its previous comments, even though a number of measures had been filed with the Senate and the House of Representatives over the years, and expected concrete measures to be taken to pursue the revision of the Labour Code without additional delay. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that several labour relations bills have been filed and are now pending in the Senate and the House of Representatives of the present Congress. It refers in particular to: (i) House Bills Nos 1518 and 5141, as well as Senate Bill No. 560, on union registration and membership requirements under the Labour Code; (ii) House Bills Nos 5536 and 5789, as well as Senate Bill No. 741, on the power of the Secretary of Labour and Employment under section 278 of the Labour Code; and (iii) House Bill No. 5789 on the penalty of imprisonment during a strike or lockout under article 279 of the Labour Code. Noting with regret that despite the filing of these new bills, no concrete amendments appear to have been made in relation with the pending matters, the Committee once again reiterates all its previous comments, and firmly expects that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary measures to bring the national legislation into conformity with the Convention as soon as possible.

The Committee also reiterates its comments contained in the 2020 request addressed directly to the Government.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 1 September 2022, referring to matters addressed below and alleging continued and serious violations of workers’ civil liberties and freedom of association rights. The Committee requests the Government to provide its reply thereto.

Tripartite roadmap to implement the 2019 Conference Committee conclusions and achieve full compliance with the Convention. High-level tripartite mission. The Committee recalls from its previous comments that in June 2019, the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards (Conference Committee) requested a high-level tripartite mission to the country, which, until early 2022, could not take place due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In the meantime, a virtual exchange was organized by the Office between the Government, national social partners and designated representatives from the workers’ and employers’ groups of the Conference Committee in order to clarify any outstanding confusion in respect of the Conference Committee’s conclusions and to assist the Government and the social partners to take effective action for their implementation. In these circumstances, and in light of the conclusions of the virtual exchange transmitted by the ITUC, the Committee called on the Government to elaborate a plan of action, in consultation with the social partners, detailing progressive steps to be taken to implement the conclusions of the 2019 Conference Committee and to achieve full compliance with the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in this respect that it has consistently conveyed its readiness to accept an in-person high-level tripartite mission to the country and that such a mission was scheduled for May-June 2022 but did not take place due to a change in political administration following the May 2022 presidential elections. The Government, however, confirms its availability to receive a mission in January-February 2023 and informs that, in the meantime, it has scheduled to undertake activities to implement some of the recommendations of the virtual exchange, including capacity-building of regional tripartite monitoring bodies (RTMBs), development of a tripartite roadmap on the promotion of freedom of association and civil liberties, and review of the Guidelines on the conduct of stakeholders relative to the exercise of workers’ rights and activities, all of which will be pursued through the institutionalized tripartite processes. The Government adds that the tripartite roadmap will take into account the recommendations of the 2021 virtual exchange report, as well as the 2019 Conference Committee conclusions, and will focus on efforts to ensure prompt and effective investigation of allegations of killings and assaults against trade unionists, strengthen tripartite monitoring bodies, further operationalize the Administrative Order No. 35 Inter-Agency Committee (IAC) and ensure effective protection of labour rights in ecozones. Taking due note of the measures and initiatives undertaken, but also noting the concerns raised by the ITUC that no progress has yet been achieved to implementthe conclusions of the 2019 Conference Committee, the Committee calls on theGovernment to rapidly and genuinely engage with the social partners in order to elaborate a constructive tripartite roadmap detailing progressive steps to be taken to implement the conclusions of the 2019 Conference Committee and to achieve full compliance with the Convention. The Committee looks forward to receiving the roadmap, as well as the reviewed Guidelines on the conduct of stakeholders, and expects both instruments to significantly contribute to addressing in a meaningful manner the long-standing concerns of serious violations of civil liberties in the exercise of freedom of association rights. The Committee reminds the Government of the possibility to avail itself of ILO technical assistance in this regard. The Committee also expects that the high-level tripartite mission requested by the 2019 Conference Committee will be able to visit the country in the first quarter of 2023, as suggested by the Government, and will be allowed to meet freely with a broad range of interlocuters.

Civil liberties and trade union rights

In its previous comments, the Committee had received repeated allegations of serious violations of basic civil liberties in the exercise of trade union rights submitted by the ITUC in 2019, 2020 and 2021, Education International (EI) in 2019 and jointly by EI, the Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) and the National Alliance of Teachers and Office Workers (SMP-NATOW) in 2020. The Government had previously replied to some of these incidents and the Committee had, on several occasions, requested it to ensure that these allegations are duly investigated, and perpetrators punished to effectively prevent and combat impunity.

The Committee first notes the Government’s general update in this regard, informing about legal and administrative remedies and institutions available to persons or groups who allege that their civil liberties have been violated, as well as about other measures undertaken by the Government to address such allegations. The Committee notes, in particular, that the Government points to the active role of the Department of Labour and Employment (DOLE), informing that DOLE focal points in the 16 RTMBs assist aggrieved parties to access legal remedies available in cases of intimidation, harassment and red-tagging, including through securing affidavits and endorsing them to the appropriate office for verification and possible filing to entities with jurisdiction. The DOLE also sends communications to the armed forces, the police and companies, calling on them to ensure protection and promotion of workers’ rights to freedom of association, and its regional offices should act as intermediaries between the parties in the monitoring mechanisms, so as to limit any threat or intimidation of the complainants, an initiative accepted by the armed forces. Furthermore, to address the concern that most of the arrests previously denounced by the unions were made by virtue of search warrants from Manila and Quezon City courts, which were implemented in areas outside their regions, the Supreme Court issued an Administrative Matter, expressly limiting the power to issue search warrants within the bounds of one’s territorial jurisdiction, which has been met with positive response by labour groups. The Government adds that the previously mentioned Senate Bill No. 2121 (defining and penalizing the crime of red-tagging) was filed in March 2021 but was not enacted and may be refiled in the 19th Congress. The Committee takes due note of the above information and appreciates the described measures and initiatives, which it trusts will, together with the tripartite roadmap, contribute to ensuring full respect for civil liberties in the exercise of trade union rights. The Committee strongly encourages the Government to continue to take concrete measures in this regard and requests it to provide information on the progress made in the adoption of Senate Bill No. 2121.

The Committee further notes that the Government also provides updates on the concrete investigative and other actions undertaken to address some of the specific allegations previously reported by trade unions. In particular, the Committee notes the Government’s detailed information in relation to the allegations of extra-judicial killings of eight trade unionists in the education sector reported by EI, ACT and SMP-NATOW in 2020, indicating that three cases are pending before the courts, in one case the suspect is deceased and four cases are under investigation, the motive for the killings not yet ascertained. The Committee also duly notes the Government’s reporting on the status of monitoring or investigations initiated by various domestic mechanisms, including the Commission on Human Rights, the National Bureau of Investigation, a special investigation task group and the Administrative Order No. 35 special investigating teams, into the killings of 13 trade unionists, 17 cases of red-tagging and harassment, and 12 cases of forced disaffiliation alleged by the ITUC in 2021 and observes that for some incidents murder charges were filed against several policemen. The Committee welcomes the detailed observations and the measures taken to investigate these incidents and bring the perpetrators to justice. The Committee observes, however, that out of the 17 instances of arrests of unionists that were denounced by the ITUC, only two were released while the others have criminal cases pending against them. The Committee also observes that the Government does not provide updated information on the status of investigations into the other serious allegations previously reported, in particular many of those alleged by the ITUC and EI in 2019 and 2020 and some of the incidents submitted jointly by EI, ACT and SMP-NATOW in 2020, all of which are detailed in the Committee’s previous comments, and concern specific incidents of killings, attempted killings, death threats, profiling, surveillance, violent strike dispersal and military and police raids on union offices. In view of the above and having regard to the seriousness of the denounced incidents, the Committee expects the Government to continue to take measures to ensure that all allegations of killings, red-tagging, harassment and other serious forms of violence against trade unionists previously reported by the ITUC, EI, ACT and SMP-NATOW are properly investigated and lead to concrete results, so as to establish the facts, including any links between the violence and trade union activities, determine culpability, punish the perpetrators and contribute to preventing and combating impunity. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken in this respect and on the progress in investigations.

New allegations of violence and intimidation. The Committee notes that in its latest communication, the ITUC raises concerns about persistent violations against workers and their representatives and points to two illustrative incidents. In particular, the ITUC alleges that in November 2021, persons claiming to be members of the Quezon City Police Department entered the offices of the Center of United and Progressive Workers (SENTRO) and later the Trade Union Confederation of the Philippines (TUCP) without justification, repeatedly inquiring about SENTRO’s office, other unions present and their activities, as well as about the Nagkaisa Labour Coalition. In another incident in December 2021, the police brutally repressed a strike in a pasta-making company, using water cannons and truncheons, and 44 workers were arrested and charged with illegal assembly, disobedience and causing “alarm and scandal”; they were later released pending further investigation. According to the ITUC, the climate of pressure, fear and extreme physical violence gravely undermines the ability of workers to exercise the rights protected by the Convention, and the persistence of these violations, as well as the failure of State entities to seriously address the situation, continue to expose workers engaging in trade union activities to imminent danger and irreparable harm and requires immediate intervention. Noting these allegations with concern, the Committee requests the Government to provide its observations thereon and to ensure that the incidents are adequately addressed, including through investigation, that any unionists detained in relation to the legitimate exercise of trade union activities are released and that the criminal system is not used to repress freedom of association rights.

Pending cases of alleged killings of trade union leaders. For several years, the Committee has been requesting the Government to ensure that the investigations into the killings of trade unionists Rolando Pango, Florencio “Bong” Romano and Victoriano Embang are completed to shed full light on the facts and the circumstances in which such actions occurred and, to the extent possible, determine responsibilities, punish the perpetrators and prevent the repetition of similar events. The Committee notes from the Government’s information that the cases continue to be monitored by the regular process of criminal investigation and prosecution but observes that no apparent progress was made in the case of Rolando Pango (a murder case dismissed in 2015 for lack of probable cause) and Victoriano Embang (a murder case filed in 2015 with the two accused remaining at large). In the case of Florencio “Bong” Romano, the Government informs of police interviews and continuing investigation to identify the perpetrator. Observing with regret that despite continued monitoring and investigation reported by the Government, no substantial progress appears to have been achieved in bringing the perpetrators to justice or clarifying the circumstances of these incidents, the Committee urges the Government to step up its efforts in this regard and emphasizes that investigations into killings of trade unionists should yield concrete results, so as to determine reliably the facts, the motives and the persons responsible.

Measures to combat impunity. Monitoring mechanisms. In its previous comment, the Committee expressed trust that the review of the operational guidelines of the monitoring mechanisms would be completed without delay and would contribute to ensuring their full operationalization and requested the Government to continue to take measures to ensure effective and timely monitoring and investigation of all pending labour-related cases. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that both the review of the operational guidelines of the RTMBs and consultations on the possibility of creating mechanisms specifically for the purpose of monitoring freedom of association cases are part of the mid-term goals incorporated in the proposed tripartite roadmap and are expected to be completed by December 2023. The Government also reports on progress made in the collection of information and investigation in the 43 cases of killings of unionists reported by workers’ representatives at the 2019 Conference Committee, out of which 19 are being investigated, 18 are pending in court, three were dismissed, in one case the suspect died and in two cases the relatives filed affidavits of disinterest. An additional 12 incidents submitted by ACT Teachers Partylist, Nagkaisa Labour Coalition and other labour groups are, according to the Government, also being addressed, with four cases pending in court, six cases under investigation, in one case the suspect died and in one the relatives issued affidavits of disinterest. Taking due note of the above, the Committee strongly encourages the Government to fully engage with the social partners in the review of the operational guidelines of the monitoring mechanisms, including in the framework of the mentioned tripartite roadmap, and requests that the Government continue to take all necessary measures to further strengthen these mechanisms, including allocating sufficient resources, staff and security to personnel, in order to ensure their full operationalization and to allow for effective and timely monitoring and investigation of all pending labour-related cases of extra-judicial killings and other violations against trade union leaders and members. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide updates on the progress made by these mechanisms in ensuring the collection of the necessary information to bring the pending cases of violence against trade unionists to the courts.

Measures to combat impunity. Training and Guidelines on the conduct of stakeholders. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on several ongoing projects and training activities, including a project for various government agencies and sectoral partners on ensuring safe and decent work by improving the state of freedom of association in ecozones, which aims to strengthen social dialogue and labour relations laws, processes and institutions, as well as to build the capacity of government agencies on international labour standards, including the core Conventions on freedom of association and collective bargaining. The Government further informs that the 2011 and 2012 Guidelines governing the conduct of concerned agencies relative to the exercise of trade union rights and activities are being harmonized into a new set of guidelines, which will govern the conduct of government stakeholders but also workers and employers in the private sector, and will emphasize that all requests for police or military assistance during labour disputes, including in economic zones, should be processed through and coordinated with the DOLE. The Government indicates that these guidelines have been presented to the social partners, and are the subject of ongoing deliberations, and are expected to be finalized by the end of 2022. Welcoming the above initiatives, the Committee encourages the Government to continue to promote comprehensive training activities among government agencies, with a solid focus on international labour standards of freedom of association and collective bargaining, with a view to increasing awareness of the concerned State officials on these matters and improving their capacity to address and investigate alleged violations of human and trade union rights, thus ultimately contributing to combating impunity. The Committee looks forward to receiving the revised Guidelines on the conduct of stakeholders relative to the exercise of trade union rights and trusts that they will constitute a useful tool in preventing and addressing violations of civil liberties in this context. Further noting the Government’s willingness to receive ILO technical assistance on a number of specific points, including on identifying gaps in the exercise of freedom of association, the Committee trusts that the Office will be in a position to provide any relevant technical assistance requested by the Government on these issues.

Measures to combat impunity. Pending legislative matters. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide information on any developments in relation to the pending legislative matters referred to it by the Committee on Freedom of Association, in particular: (i) the adoption of a Bill concerning enforced and involuntary disappearances; and (ii) the previously announced review by the Supreme Court and the Commission on Human Rights of the witness protection programme on the writ of amparo adopted in 2007, as well as of the application of the Anti-Torture Act No. 9745 and of Act No. 9851 on crimes against international humanitarian law, genocide and other crimes against humanity. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that since House Resolution No. 392 was filed in October 2019 (calling for justice for the victims and urging the House Committee on Human Rights to investigate, in aid of legislation, the state of enforced disappearances in the country), no further action was taken by the Congress. It also informs that House Resolution No. 45 (directing the Committees on Justice and Human Rights to jointly conduct an inquiry into the implementation of the Anti-Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance Act of 2012) was filed in Congress and is pending the first reading. The Committee takes due note of the above and encourages the Government to continue to support legislative efforts that could have a positive impact on the exercise of civil liberties and trade union rights in the country.

Anti-Terrorism Act. In its previous comment, in view of the concerns expressed by the ITUC, the Committee requested the Government to take any necessary measures to ensure that the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2020 does not have the effect of restricting legitimate trade union activities. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Act has been submitted to judicial scrutiny so as to determine whether or not it is inconsistent with the constitution and that in its judgment from December 2021, the Supreme Court declared that the law was not, as a whole, unconstitutional but nullified two of its provisions. In particular, the Committee observes from the text of the judgment that the Supreme Court considered as unconstitutional a part of the proviso in section 4 which allows for an overly vague interpretation of what constitutes terrorism and the second paragraph of section 25, allowing the Anti-Terrorist Council appointed by the President to adopt requests by other jurisdictions or supranational organizations to designate individuals, groups of persons, organizations or associations as terrorist. The Committee understands that following the Supreme Court decision, terrorism as defined in section 4 does not include advocacy, protest, dissent, stoppage of work, industrial or mass action, and other similar exercises of civil and political rights, and welcomes this development. The Government adds that in April 2022, the Supreme Court denied appeals to reverse its decision upholding the constitutionality of the law as a whole but clarifies that the decision does not preclude subsequent challenges on other provisions if an actual case or controversy arises. The Committee trusts that, in line with the above developments, the Government will ensure that the Anti-Terrorism Act or its implementation, do not have the effect of restricting legitimate trade union activities and related civil liberties.

Legislative issues

Labour Code. In its previous comments, the Committee had been noting the numerous amendment bills pending before Congress over many years and in various forms with a view to bringing the national legislation into conformity with the Convention. Noting the Government’s indication that no recent amendments have been made on the pending matters, even though a number of measures had been filed with the Senate and the House of Representatives over the years, theCommittee reiterates all of its previous comments and requests in this respect, and expects concrete measures to be taken to pursue the revision of the Labour Code without additional delay so as to bring the national legislation into conformity with the Convention.

The Committee further reiterates its comments contained in the 2020 request addressed directly to the Government.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 20 and 29 September 2021, referring to matters addressed below, denouncing a deteriorating situation in the country and requesting the Committee to consider an out-of-cycle review of the application of the Convention by the Philippines. The Committee requests the Government to provide its reply thereto.

Given the urgency of the matters and the questions of life, personal safety and fundamental human rights raised therein, as well as up-dated information on the Committee’s previous observations submitted by the Government in June 2021, the Committee decided to proceed to an examination of the application of the Convention by the Philippines outside of the regular reporting cycle.

Action plan to implement the 2019 Conference Committee conclusions and achieve full compliance with the Convention. High-level tripartite mission. In its previous comment, the Committee noted the discussion that took place in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards (Conference Committee) in June 2019 concerning the application of the Convention and observed that the Conference Committee called upon the Government to: (i) take effective measures to prevent violence in relation to the exercise of workers’ and employers’ organizations’ legitimate activities; (ii) immediately and effectively undertake investigations into the allegations of violence in relation to members of workers’ organizations with a view to establishing the facts, determining culpability and punishing the perpetrators; (iii) operationalize the monitoring bodies, including by providing adequate resources, and provide regular information on these mechanisms and on progress on the cases assigned to them; and (iv) ensure that all workers without distinction are able to form and join organizations of their choosing in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee further noted the Government’s request for guidance on giving effect to these conclusions, expressed trust that, as soon as the situation so permitted, the Government would receive a high-level tripartite mission, as requested by the Conference Committee, and reminded the Government that, in the meantime, it could avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office, including in order to elaborate a plan of action, detailing progressive steps to be taken to achieve full compliance with the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that in an April 2021 communication to the ILO the Government expressed its intention to accept a high-level mission as a sincere gesture of its continuing commitment under international instruments and of its enduring partnership with the ILO in upholding the fundamental rights of workers. However, due to the ongoing global health crisis, the Government was not yet inclined to accept an in-person mission and considered conducting a virtual one. The Committee observes that due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the high-level tripartite mission has not yet taken place but that, in view of the Government’s request for guidance in respect of the application of the 2019 Conference Committee’s conclusions, a virtual exchange was organized by the Office in September 2021 between the Government, national social partners and designated representatives from the workers’ and the employers’ groups of the Conference Committee, in order to clarify any outstanding confusion in respect of the Conference Committee’s conclusions and to assist the Government and the social partners to take effective action for their implementation. The Committee notes that the report of the virtual exchange was circulated to all the parties that met and was submitted to the Committee by the ITUC, as additional observations to its earlier submission requesting an out-of-cycle examination of the application of the Convention, and was also transmitted to the Government. The Committee observes that the report of the virtual exchange concluded that despite measures undertaken and further commitments by the Government, as well as the existence of a number of institutions and strong support from the ILO and other partners, the discussion failed to bring forward evidence of tangible progress on the four areas of concern highlighted by the Conference Committee and that the Government should therefore adopt a time-bound plan of action in consultation with the social partners and with support from the ITUC and the International Organization of Employers (IOE) to address each of the four areas of concern. The report also emphasized that the virtual exchange was not a replacement for a mission, that there continued to be a pressing need for a high-level tripartite mission to travel to the Philippines and that it would be critical for the mission to take place before the 2022 International Labour Conference, taking into account the sanitary conditions prevailing in the country. In these circumstances and given the continuing urgency of the matters raised, as denounced by the trade unions below, the Committee calls on the Government to elaborate a plan of action, in consultation with the social partners, detailing progressive steps to be taken to implement the conclusions of the 2019 Conference Committee and to achieve full compliance with the Convention. The Committee reminds the Government of the possibility to avail itself of ILO technical assistance in this regard. The Committee also expects that the high-level tripartite mission will be able to visit the country before the next International Labour Conference, taking into account the sanitary conditions in the country.

Civil liberties and trade union rights

2019 and 2020 ITUC observations and 2019 Education International (EI) observations. In its previous comment, the Committee noted with deep concern the grave allegations of violence and intimidation of trade unionists communicated by the ITUC in 2019 and 2020 and EI in 2019, as well as the Government’s detailed reply thereto, and expressed trust that all of these allegations would be duly investigated and perpetrators punished to effectively prevent and combat impunity. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates previously provided information on the measures taken to address the above allegations and on the domestic remedies available to victims of human rights violations and adds minor updates on the status of the investigations in some of the cases. With regard to the allegations of red-tagging, it indicates that Senate Bill No. 2121 (seeking to fix legal gaps and institutionalize a system of accountability by criminalizing red-tagging and providing penalties as deterrence thereto) was filed in March 2021. The Committee welcomes this initiative and requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in the adoption of Senate Bill No. 2121. It expects that the grave allegations of violence and intimidation referred to above will be duly investigated and perpetrators punished to effectively prevent and combat impunity and requests the Government to provide updated information in this respect.

2020 joint observations of EI, the Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) and the National Alliance of Teachers and Office Workers (SMP-NATOW). In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to provide its reply to the 2020 joint EI, ACT and NATOW observations, denouncing extra-judicial killings of eight trade unionists in the education sector and other serious violations of civil liberties, as well as challenges in the application and implementation of the right to freedom of association. The Committee takes due note of the Government’s reply in this regard and regrets to observe that, while quite extensive, it is limited to general statements on the domestic remedies available against violations of human and trade union rights, to refuting the allegations that unionism is equated to communism and to indicating in general that the cases were subjected to monitoring by the Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies (RTMBs) and proceed under the regular process of criminal investigation, prosecution and litigation. In view of the lack of details on the progress made in investigating the concrete and serious allegations of violence set out in detail in the 2020 joint EI, ACT and NATOW observations, the Committee expects the Government to ensure that all measures are being taken to address these specific incidents, in particular that they are properly investigated, so as to establish the facts, determine culpability and punish the perpetrators. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken in this respect and on the progress in investigations.

New allegations of violence and intimidation. 2021 ITUC observations. The Committee notes that, in its latest communication, the ITUC denounces a severely deteriorating situation in the country since 2019, characterized by increased repression against the independent trade union movement and extreme violence against and persecution of unionists, including extra-judicial killings, physical attacks, red-tagging, threats, intimidation, harassment, stigmatization, illegal arrests, arbitrary detention and raiding of homes and union offices, as well as the Government’s institutional failure to address these issues, exacerbating the culture of impunity. The ITUC also alludes to the adoption of additional measures, allegedly worsening the situation of trade unions in the country, including: the establishment of the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC); the creation of the Joint Industrial Peace and Concern Office (now referred to as the Alliance for Industrial Peace and Program Office (AIPPO)) in export-processing zones; the adoption of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2020; and abuse in the use of judicial search warrants. According to the ITUC, the above situation leads to a climate of pressure and fear, exposing workers engaged in trade union activities to imminent danger and undermining the ability of workers to exercise the rights guaranteed by the Convention.

The Committee notes with deep concern these grave allegations, as well as the following concrete incidents denounced and described in great detail by the ITUC: (i) the extra-judicial killing of 10 trade unionists (some of whom were mentioned in previous observations of the trade unions); (ii) at least 17 cases of arrests and detention, in particular following police dispersal of a protest and police raids on union offices and unionists’ homes (November-December 2020 and March 2021), as well as additional incidents of arrests and detention since 2019; (iii) 17 cases of red-tagging, intimidation and harassment, including against leaders and members of the ACT, the Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU), the Philippines National Police Non-Uniformed Personnel Association Inc. (PNP-NUPAI) and other workers’ organizations; and (iv) 12 cases of forced disaffiliation campaigns and seminars, including for public school teachers, workers at a beverage producing company and palm oil plantation workers. The Committee observes in this regard that, when examining Case No. 3185 concerning the Philippines, the Committee on Freedom of Association also expressed deep concern at the gravity of similar allegations, as well as their repeated and prolonged nature, resulting in a climate of violence and impunity with an extremely damaging effect on the legitimate exercise of trade union rights in the country, and expressed trust that the Government would prioritize investigation into these serious incidents (see 396th Report, November 2021, Case No. 3185, paragraphs 524–525 and 528(b)). In these circumstances, given the extreme seriousness of the allegations and their repeated nature, the Committee urges the Government to take all necessary measures to address the issues of violence and intimidation raised and, in particular, to conduct prompt and effective investigations into all allegations of extra-judicial killings of and assaults against trade unionists, so as to determine the circumstances of the incidents, including any links to trade union activities, determine culpability and punish the perpetrators. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information in this respect.

Pending cases of alleged killings of trade union leaders. For several years, the Committee has been requesting the Government to ensure that the investigations into the killings of trade unionists Rolando Pango, Florencio “Bong” Romano and Victoriano Embang are completed to shed full light on the facts and the circumstances in which such actions occurred and, to the extent possible, determine responsibilities, punish the perpetrators and prevent the repetition of similar events. Observing with regret that the Government simply reiterates that the cases are being handled through the regular course of criminal investigation and prosecution, without providing details as to any progress made, the Committee reiterates its previous request and expects the Government to be in a position to report substantial progress in this regard.

Monitoring mechanisms. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all of the existing monitoring mechanisms can function properly and efficiently, so as to contribute to effective and timely monitoring and investigation of allegations of extra-judicial killings and other forms of violence against trade union leaders and members. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) to help ensure that the RTMBs are able to carry out their mandate, mediator-arbiters from the Department of Labour and Employment (DOLE) regional offices were designated to act as focal persons in their respective RTMBs and are tasked to assist in the processing of cases so as to provide more responsive and inclusive reports; (ii) as for the Tripartite Validating Teams, their establishment is case-based when there is a need for further validation or review, but in addition to the previously mentioned challenges concerning security of its members, it is currently not advisable to create such teams given the health risks relating to the COVID-19 pandemic; (iii) the operationalization of the Administrative Order No. 35 Inter-Agency Committee (AO35 IAC) was affected by leadership and administrative changes within the Department of Justice and the secretariat has also undergone leadership changes, as a result of which it is now more active in engaging with tripartite monitoring bodies and the concerned groups and organizations in the deliberation of cases; (iv) the Secretary of Labour and Employment is an observer in AO35 IAC meetings, as well as its technical working group (TWG) meetings; (v) the AO35 secretariat welcomes ILO training programmes which aim at incorporating a labour perspective into the work of the AO35 secretariat and the TWG and at showing the relevance of the principles of freedom of association and collective bargaining for their work; (vi) one of the trainings resulted in the identification of strategies for better handling of cases involving workers and trade unions, which may be considered as policy recommendations in the ongoing review of the AO35 operational guidelines; and (vii) the investigation into the case of Dennis Sequeña, previously referred to by the Government and the social partners, was closed due to difficulties in convincing the family of the victims to cooperate but the AO35 task force will look into other avenues to continue its investigation. While taking due note of the Government’s information, the Committee regrets that despite a number of initiatives undertaken, trade unions continue to raise concerns as to numerous allegations of violence perpetrated against trade union members for which the presumed perpetrators have not yet been identified and the guilty parties punished. In view of the above, the Committee trusts that the review of the operational guidelines of the monitoring mechanisms will be completed without delay and, together with the above adjustments, will contribute to ensuring the full operationalization of all existing monitoring mechanisms so that they can function properly and efficiently. Further noting the call of the trade unions for full operationalization and strengthening of the existing monitoring and investigative mechanisms, the Committee requests the Government to continue to take all necessary measures to this effect, including allocating sufficient resources and staff and providing all necessary security to these personnel, in order to ensure effective and timely monitoring and investigation of all pending labour-related cases of extra-judicial killings and other violations against trade union leaders and members. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the progress made by the existing monitoring mechanisms in ensuring the collection of the necessary information to bring the pending cases of violence to the courts.

Measures to combat impunity. Training. The Committee previously encouraged the Government to continue to provide regular and comprehensive training to all concerned State actors in relation to human and trade union rights, as well as on the collection of evidence and the conduct of forensic investigation. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that several ongoing projects, including the EU-GSP Trade for Decent Work Project, allow for participation of various government offices, aim at strengthening social dialogue and better application of international labour standards and focus on the principles of freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining, as well as occupational safety and health in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the Government, these projects involve activities that will help improve the monitoring and investigative mechanisms for resolution of labour-related cases and improve national laws and policies on freedom of association and collective bargaining based on ILO Conventions. Welcoming the above information, the Committee encourages the Government to continue to pursue its efforts in terms of training and capacity-building of State actors, with the aim of increasing the investigative capacity of the concerned officials and providing sufficient witness protection, and ultimately contributing to combating impunity.

Measures to combat impunity. Pending legislative matters. The Committee previously noted that the Committee on Freedom of Association referred a number of legislative aspects to this Committee and requested the Government to provide information on the progress made in: (i) the adoption of the Bill concerning enforced and involuntary disappearances; and (ii) the previously announced review by the Supreme Court and the Commission on Human Rights of the witness protection programme on the writ of amparo adopted in 2007, as well as of the application of the Anti-Torture Act No. 9745 and of Act No. 9851 on crimes against international humanitarian law, genocide and other crimes against humanity. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that to date, House Resolution No. 392 (calling for justice for the victims and to urge the House Committee on Human Rights to investigate, in aid of legislation, the spate of enforced disappearances in the country) was filed in October 2019 and is currently pending with the Committee on Rules. The Government adds that in March 2021, the Supreme Court announced a five-week information gathering on the extent of threats against lawyers, after which it will decide on the next course of action. Taking due note of the above, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any developments with respect to all pending legislative matters referenced above.

Anti-Terrorism Act. In its previous comment, having noted the concerns expressed by the ITUC over the adoption of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2020, which it alleged aimed at silencing dissenting voices and further entrenched State repression and hostility against workers and trade unionists, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on any aspects of implementation of the Act that affect trade unionists or trade union activities. Observing with concern that, according to the information contained in the ITUC communication, the law has been used to label trade unions, such as COURAGE and ACT, as terrorist organizations, the Committee reiterates its previous request in this regard and requests the Government to take any necessary measures to ensure that the Act does not have the effect of restricting legitimate trade union activities.

Legislative issues

Labour Code. In its previous comments, the Committee had been noting the numerous amendment bills pending before Congress over many years and in various forms with a view to bringing the national legislation into conformity with the Convention. Considering that the Government does not provide any updated information and fails to show any substantial progress in the adoption of the numerous amendment bills, the Committee reiterates all of its previous comments and requests in this respect and expects the Government to be in a position to report progress on this matter.

The Committee further reiterates its comments contained in the 2020 request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes without interference by the public authorities. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide statistics on the number and nature of cases dealt with by the Single Entry Approach Program (SEnA) institutionalized to de-judicialize the dispute-settlement procedures and foster fair, speedy and inexpensive labour justice. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government to the Committee on Freedom of Association (see 391st Report, October 2019, Case No. 2745, paragraph 44), indicating that the SEnA, which provides for an institutionalized 30-day mandatory conciliation-mediation service on all individual and collective labour and employment disputes as the first approach, resulted in a decline in the number of assumption of jurisdiction cases and cases certified for compulsory arbitration, because it accorded workers and employers an option for less conflictual, speedy, inexpensive and efficient settlement or resolution of money claims and labour issues. According to the Government, the SEnA has been instrumental in resolving issues arising from labour and employment disputes and in disencumbering the case dockets of compulsory arbitration, as well as inspection cases at the Department of Labour and Employment (DOLE) Offices. The Government provides statistics in this regard, showing that as the number of settled requests for assistance under the SEnA increased, the number of cases referred to compulsory arbitration generally decreased. The supplementary statistics provided by the Government for 2019 and 2020 further show that the requests for assistance under the programme concerned the following labour issues: violations of labour standards (non-payment of wages, overtime pay, holiday pay, etc.), money claims (non-payment of disability allowance, reimbursement of medical expenses, prohibited transfer or demotion, etc.), illegal dismissal claims (non-payment of separation pay, forced resignation, illegal lock-out, etc.), other grievances (contract violations, non-implementation of a collective bargaining agreement, etc.) and unfair labour practices (anti-union discrimination, union busting, formation of a company-dominated union, etc.). While recalling that, as previously indicated by the Government, notices of strike and lockout are exempt from its coverage, the Committee takes note of the above information regarding rapid and cost-effective resolution of specific labour-related disputes and requests the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the SEnA, including information on requests for assistance during the COVID-19 pandemic and results obtained in response to those requests.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020). The Committee proceeded with the examination of the application of the Convention on the basis of the supplementary information received from the Government and the social partners this year, as well as on the basis of the information at its disposal in 2019.

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 1 September 2019 and 15 September 2020, of the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) received on 3 September 2019 and of Education International (EI) received on 20 September 2019, referring to matters addressed below, as well as the Government’s detailed reply thereto. The Committee also notes the joint observations of EI, the Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) and the National Alliance of Teachers and Office Workers (SMP-NATOW) received on 1 October 2020, denouncing extra-judicial killings of trade unionists and other serious violations of civil liberties, as well as challenges in the application and implementation of the right to freedom of association. The Committee requests the Government to provide its reply thereto.

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 108th Session, June 2019)

The Committee noted the discussion that took place in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards (Conference Committee) in June 2019 concerning the application of the Convention. The Committee observed that the Conference Committee called upon the Government to: (i) take effective measures to prevent violence in relation to the exercise of workers’ and employers’ organizations legitimate activities; (ii) immediately and effectively undertake investigations into the allegations of violence in relation to members of workers’ organizations with a view to establishing the facts, determining culpability and punishing the perpetrators; (iii) operationalize the monitoring bodies, including by providing adequate resources, and provide regular information on these mechanisms and on progress on the cases assigned to them; and (iv) ensure that all workers without distinction are able to form and join organizations of their choosing in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention. The Conference Committee also called on the Government to accept a high-level tripartite mission before the next International Labour Conference. While noting the Government’s request to defer the high-level tripartite mission, the Committee expressed the hope that the Government would take the necessary arrangements to enable the high-level tripartite mission requested by the Conference Committee to take place before the next International Labour Conference. The Committee notes that, in its supplementary report, the Government indicates that it addressed the points raised by the Conference Committee in its 2019 report, that it continues to make reforms and to take measures with the social partners to ensure conformity with ratified labour standards and that it stands ready to accept an ILO mission in the coming years but requires further clarification as to what constitutes “effective measures” to prevent violence against workers; what constitutes “immediate and effective investigation” that would ensure compliance with the Convention; and what measures the Government should take to satisfy the Conference Committee’s request to ensure workers’ right to self-organization. The Committee notes the Government’s request for guidance on giving effect to the conclusions of the Conference Committee. The Committee trusts that its past and present detailed comments will provide useful guidance, in consultation with the social partners, in determining appropriate and effective measures to ensure compliance with the Convention; and that the high-level tripartite mission requested by the Conference Committee will be able to provide specific guidance on giving effect to the Conference Committee’s conclusions. The Committee therefore trusts that, as soon as the situation so permits, the Government will receive a high-level tripartite mission, as requested by the 2019 Conference Committee. The Committee also reminds the Government that, in the meantime, it can avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office, including in order to elaborate a plan of action, detailing progressive steps to be taken to achieve full compliance with the Convention.

Civil liberties and trade union rights

2016 ITUC observations. The Committee notes the Government’s reply to earlier observations from the ITUC, providing an update on the status of the investigations into the alleged assassination of two trade union leaders in 2016 and clarifying that the activities conducted in Compostela Valley, Mindanao were visits under the Community Support Programme of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP). The Committee further notes the Government’s general statement that the policy and programme reforms on freedom of association and collective bargaining implemented by the Government contributed to reduced incidence of labour disputes and labour related violence since 2011 and that this decline can also be attributed to the continuous efforts towards raising awareness and strengthening the capacity of all relevant Government institutions.

New allegations of violence and intimidation. The Committee notes, however, with deep concern the grave allegations of violence and intimidation of trade unionists communicated by the ITUC and EI in 2019, including: (i) assassination of 23 trade union leaders in 2018 and 2019, as well as several attempted assassinations documented by the Center for Trade Union and Human Rights (CTUHR); (ii) death threats targeting trade union leaders in the education sector in January and February 2019, as well as profiling, surveillance, harassment and red-tagging by the Philippine National Police (PNP) and AFP officials; (iii) violent dispersal of a number of workers’ strikes and protests in Marilao, Bulacan in June and July 2018, resulting in serious injuries, arrests, multiple charges (later dropped) and a week-long detention; (iv) violent dispersal of a strike by workers of a fruit-exporting company in Compostela Town in Compostela Valley in October 2018 and the murder of a trade union activist; (v) assassination of nine sugar cane workers during a protest at Hacienda Nene in Sagay, Negros Occidental; and (vi) suspected arson attack of a labour leader’s home during a strike in a banana-packing plant in December 2018. The Committee further notes with deep concern the serious allegations of violence reported by the ITUC in its latest communication, including: (i) extra-judicial killings of two trade unionists in November 2019 and August 2020; (ii) joint military and police raids against trade unions, civil society groups, human rights activists and women's groups in Manila and Bacolod City in October 2019, the arrest of 57 people and the filing of false criminal charges against many of them; (iii) deaths threats, persecution, fabricated charges and profiling of ACT members, as well as an attempted murder against a trade unionist in October 2019 and harassment of two union leaders by the military in July 2020; and (iv) union busting and dispersal of a peaceful demonstration at Coca Cola company in San Fernando, Pampanga province in April 2020, as well as red-tagging of the union at the plant in Bacolod City and threats against a union leader in October 2019. The Committee notes that, in its supplementary report, the Government provides information on the measures taken to address the above allegations from 2019 and 2020, including on any issuing of guidelines, investigating, monitoring or judicial proceedings initiated in relation thereto. The Committee trusts that all of the above allegations will be duly investigated and that any pending proceedings will be concluded without delay, so as to establish the facts, determine culpability and punish the perpetrators, with the aim of effectively preventing and combating impunity.

The Committee further observes with deep concern the serious allegations of violence reported by EI, the ACT and the SMP-NATOW in their 2020 observations, in particular: (i) intimidation of NATOW leaders, as well as arrests and branding of unionists as part of the communist movement; (ii) extra-judicial killings of eight unionists in the education sector and two attempted murders between July 2019 and August 2020; (iii) 18 incidents of death threats, red-tagging, intimidation and harassment of ACT leaders; (iv) 36 documented cases of illegal police profiling; and (v) false criminal charges and four cases of long-term detention of ACT members. While noting that some aspects of these allegations have been incorporated in the 2020 ITUC communication and thus briefly addressed by the Government in its reply thereto, the Committee observes that the joint observations of EI, the SMP-NATOW and the ACT contain more specifics as to the concrete incidents, allowing the Government to provide detailed replies in this regard. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide a detailed reply to these serious allegations, including on any investigating or other procedures initiated, so as to establish the facts, determine culpability, and punish the perpetrators, and trusts that it will continue to take appropriate measures, adapted to national circumstances, to prevent and promptly address any future allegations of violence and intimidation of trade unionists.

Pending cases of alleged killings of trade union leaders. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide detailed information on the progress achieved on the prosecution and judicial investigations relating to three cases of alleged killings of trade union leaders previously reported by the ITUC. The Committee notes the update provided by the Government that the case of Rolando Pango should be reviewed by regional police for possible refiling, that the case of Florencio “Bong” Romano has not yet been deliberated on due to the non-reactivation of the Administrative Order (AO) 35 Inter-Agency Committee (IAC) and that in the case of Victoriano Embang, a case of murder was filed and an arrest warrant issued against suspects who are at large. In its supplementary report, the Government reiterates that the three cases are currently being handled and investigated through the regular process of criminal investigation and prosecution but clarifies that progress in this regard may be affected by a number of circumstances, such as the lack of material witnesses and evidence. While taking due note of the Government’s indication, the Committee regrets to observe that even after numerous years, none of these cases have yet been fully concluded and expresses the firm hope that the investigations into the serious allegations of killings of the above trade union leaders, as well as the ongoing judicial proceedings in this regard, will be completed in the very near future with a view to shedding full light, at the earliest date, on the facts and the circumstances in which such actions occurred and, to the extent possible, determining responsibilities, punishing the perpetrators and preventing the repetition of similar events.

Monitoring mechanisms. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to provide detailed information on the progress made by the Tripartite Validating Teams, the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council Monitoring Body (NTIPC-MB) and other relevant bodies in ensuring the collection of the necessary information to bring the pending cases of violence to the courts and the outcome in this regard. The Committee notes the Government’s assertion that: (i) the existing mechanisms remain steadfast in ensuring expeditious investigation, prosecution and resolution of pending cases concerning alleged harassment and assassination of labour leaders; (ii) for example, after the alleged extra-judicial killing (EJK) of a trade unionist Dennis Sequeña was endorsed by the IAC, the Department of Justice ordered the set-up of a special investigating team to conduct the investigation and case build-up; (iii) a notable advancement with regard to the IAC was the appointment of labour representatives nominated and selected from the NTIPC as observers in its proceedings; and (iv) the existing mechanisms monitor 72 cases of EJK and attempted murders and have also been mobilized to validate and gather information on the 43 cases of alleged murders of unionists and union leaders, as identified by the CTUHR and discussed at the Conference Committee. The Committee welcomes the information provided by the Government to the Conference Committee that, in the spirit of social dialogue and tripartite engagement, trade unions’ and employers’ representatives were enlisted as deputized labour inspectors (as of January 2019, there were 241 deputized social partners) and that 16 Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies (RTMBs) across the country were ready to be mobilized in case of need, bringing about an immediate response and concrete appropriate action.

The Committee observes, however, that the Government representative at the Conference Committee recognized that the mandates, structures and internal rules of the monitoring mechanisms need to be further revisited. According to the Government representative, the IAC, for instance, needed strengthening by ensuring openness and transparency on the prosecution and movement of EJK cases, adopting inclusive criteria in the screening of these cases, relatedness to the exercise of freedom of association, capacity-building on freedom of association and on the collection of physical and vital forensic evidence to reduce heavy reliance on testimonial evidence. The Committee regrets to observe that the IAC has not yet reconvened and that even though members of the Tripartite Validating Teams may request security assistance from the PNP and the AFP, due to the risks and dangers involved for them, this initiative has not yet been put into practice. The Committee further observes the concerns raised by the ITUC and the ITF with regard to the criteria used by the IAC to determine extra-judicial killings, the lack of effective monitoring mechanisms and of resources to investigate and prosecute all complaints of EJK of trade unionists and the need to rapidly identify perpetrators of violence and bring them to justice to combat impunity.

The Committee regrets that despite a number of initiatives undertaken, there continue to be numerous allegations of violence perpetrated against trade union members for which the presumed perpetrators have not yet been identified and the guilty parties punished. It notes in this regard the Government’s acknowledgment that conviction has indeed been the recurring and imposing challenge due to the amount of evidence required to convict perpetrators of a crime and that there is a need for major support on this aspect. The Committee observes that the Conference Committee also noted with concern the numerous allegations of murders of trade unionists and anti-union violence, as well as the allegations regarding the lack of investigation in relation to these allegations. In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all of the existing monitoring mechanisms can function properly and efficiently, including by allocating sufficient resources and staff, so as to contribute to effective and timely monitoring and investigation of allegations of EJK and other forms of violence against trade union leaders and members. In particular, the Committee expects that, despite the challenges faced, the Tripartite Validating Teams will be established in practice and the IAC will reconvene in the near future. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the progress made by the existing monitoring mechanisms in ensuring the collection of the necessary information to bring the pending cases of violence to the courts.

Measures to combat impunity. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide detailed information on the steps taken to combat impunity, provide sufficient witness protection and build the capacity of the relevant State actors in the conduct of forensic investigation. The Committee welcomes the detailed information provided by the Government to the Conference Committee relating to numerous trainings, capacity-building activities, seminars and lectures conducted to enhance the knowledge and capacities of various State and non-State actors, including the police, military, prosecutors, enforcers, relevant actors in criminal investigation, local chief executives and social partners on international labour standards, the principles and application of the Convention, as well as on criminal investigation. The Committee also welcomes additional steps taken by the Government in this regard: elaboration of a workers’ training manual and of an e-learning module on freedom of association as part of the Labour and Employment Education Services (LEES); call by the Department of Labour and Employment (DOLE) on the PNP and AFP to ensure the observance of the guidelines on the conduct to be observed during the exercise of workers’ rights and activities; AFP and PNP commitment to integrating the Labour Code and the guidelines in their education programme; and review of the guidelines for amendment and updating. Finally, the Committee observes the Government’s explanation that reliance on testimonial evidence in the prosecution of criminal cases remains indispensable, that forensic evidence is supplemental in character and that programmes should be conducted, together with the ILO, to enhance the capacity of the concerned agencies in gathering and handling forensic evidence. The Government representatives also informed the Conference Committee about a strategic planning conducted in March 2019 regarding the provision of adequate assistance and protection to witnesses under the Witness Protection Programme. The Committee further notes the supplementary information provided by the Government, indicating that exploratory talks were ongoing with the ILO Country Office on possible collaboration for future projects and capacity-building on human and trade union rights for all concerned State actors but due to the immense impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, such initiatives have been stalled. It states that, in view of the precautionary health and safety measures and protocols that must now be observed, the Government together with the Country Office will have to reconsider, review and re-design previous training and capacity-building programmes to incorporate the health and safety standards. Welcoming the above initiatives and measures undertaken, and duly noting the need to ensure pertinent health and safety measures in the context of the current pandemic, the Committee encourages the Government to continue to provide regular and comprehensive training to all concerned State actors in relation to human and trade union rights, as well as on the collection of evidence and the conduct of forensic investigation, with the aim of combating impunity, increasing the investigative capacity of the concerned officials and providing sufficient witness protection. The Committee invites the Office to provide any technical assistance required in this regard.

Review of operational guidelines of monitoring mechanisms. The Committee previously requested the Government to inform it of developments with regard to the review and updating of the operational guidelines of the investigating and monitoring bodies, as part of the National Action Plan under the DOLE-ILO-EU-GSP+ Development Cooperation Project. The Government indicated to the Conference Committee that one of the outcomes of the project is the review of the existing mechanisms to address cases of violations of workers’ civil liberties and trade union rights. Following the review of the operational guidelines and process structures of the NTIPC-MB, the RTMBs, the IAC and the National Monitoring Mechanisms (NMM), gaps and issues in the operationalization of these mechanisms have been identified, as well as problem areas encountered by investigative agencies, such as the PNP, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) and the AFP Human Rights Officer. According to the Government, recommendations issued to help address the identified gaps and blockages will be taken up by the concerned agencies for consideration and possible implementation. Welcoming this information, the Committee trusts that the recommendations addressing the current gaps and blockages will be rapidly implemented so as to contribute to swift and efficient investigation of pending labour-related cases of EJK and other violations.

Trade union rights and civil liberties. Anti-Terrorism Act. The Committee notes the concerns expressed by the ITUC over the adoption of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2020 which it alleges contains a broad definition of terrorism, aims at silencing dissenting voices and further entrenches State repression and hostility against workers and trade unionists. The Committee notes that in reply, the Government states that the Anti-Terrorism Act does not, in any way, seek to curtail workers’ right to freedom of association but aims to address the root causes of terrorism through a comprehensive approach and by all legal means, while safeguarding and upholding basic rights and fundamental liberties enshrined in the Constitution, including the right to freedom of association. In view of the Government’s indication, the Committee expects that the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2020 will not be used in any way to curtail legitimate trade union activities or to justify repression against trade unionists, and requests the Government to provide information on any aspects of implementation of the Act that affect trade unionists or trade union activities.

Legislative issues

Labour Code. In its previous comments, the Committee had been noting the numerous amendment bills pending before Congress over many years and in various forms with a view to bringing the national legislation into conformity with the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s assertion that, in coordination with the social partners, it has sought to address emerging labour, economic and social concerns affecting workers’ rights and exercise thereof and has achieved substantial progress in its commitments towards the promotion and protection of freedom of association rights, including a multitude of actions and reforms undertaken. On the other hand, the Committee notes that, according to the ITUC, there appears to be an absence of good faith by the Government to adopt the necessary measures that would bring the legislation into compliance with the Convention. The Committee further observes that the Conference Committee regretted that the reforms introduced to address some of the issues were not adopted and urged the Government to bring the law into compliance with the Convention. The Committee on Freedom of Association also trusted that the Government would make serious efforts to bring the Labour Code into conformity with the principles of freedom of association and referred these legislative aspects to this Committee (see 391st Report, October 2019, Case No. 2745, paragraph 50 and 392nd Report, October 2020, Case No. 2716, paragraph 153). The Committee expects that the Government will make serious efforts to align the Labour Code and other pieces of national legislation with the Convention on the following matters.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing, without previous authorization. Foreign nationals. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on the progress made in relation to amendments to sections 284 and 287(b) of the Labour Code so as to grant the right to organize to all workers residing in the Philippines. The Committee notes, from the supplementary information provided by the Government that House Bill No. 2629 (allowing foreign nationals to exercise their right to self-organization) was filed in July 2019 and is pending with the House of Representatives Committee on Labour and Employment for consideration. While taking note of the pending bill, the Committee regrets the absence of any substantial progress in the adoption of the pertinent legislation and expects that the necessary amendments will be adopted in the near future and that they will ensure that any individuals residing in the country, whether or not they have a residence or a working permit, can benefit from the trade union rights provided by the Convention. The Committee requests the Government once again to provide information on progress made in this respect and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

Other categories of workers excluded from the guarantees of the Convention. The Committee had previously pointed to the lack of trade union rights for certain categories of workers, including workers in managerial positions or with access to confidential information, firefighters, prison guards and other public sector workers, as well as temporary or outsourced workers and workers without employment contract (sections 253 and 255 of the Labour Code, Rule I Section 4 of Executive Order No. 180, 1987 and Rule II Section 2 of the Amended Rules and Regulations Governing the Exercise of the Right to Government Employees to Organize, 2004). The Committee notes the Government’s indication, from the supplemental information provided, that the right to self-organization may be exercised by all employees in commercial, industrial and agricultural enterprises, as well as in religious, charitable, medical and educational institutions and that the coverage extends to ambulant, intermittent, itinerant, self-employed and rural workers, as well as those without any definite employer. The Government reiterates that for the purposes of exercising the right to organize, the first parameter to take into account is whether or not a worker is covered by an employer–employee relationship. It states that under section 253 of the Labour Code, only employees may join trade unions for purposes of collective bargaining, whereas ambulant, intermittent, itinerant, self-employed and rural workers, as well as those without any definite employer may only form labour organizations for their mutual aid and protection. In its supplementary report, the Government reiterates this distinction and asserts that nothing in the law or jurisprudence prevents temporary or outsourced workers and workers without an employment contract from exercising the right to form and join trade unions. Concerning workers in managerial positions, the Committee notes that under section 255 of the Labour Code, they are not eligible to join, assist or form any labour organization but observes that, according to the Government, while workers in managerial positions may not form or join labour organizations so as to avoid any conflict of interest or company-dominated unions, they may form and join any organizations for mutual aid and protection or for any legitimate purpose other than collective bargaining. Finally, the Committee observes that firefighters and prison guards are excluded from the scope of application of the Executive Order No. 180 (Rule I, section 4), which provides guidelines for the exercise of the right to organize of government employees but notes the Government’s indication that firefighters and prison guards may exercise the right to freedom of association but not to the extent of forming, joining or assisting labour organizations for purposes of collective bargaining. While taking due note of the above information, in particular on the right to organize for purposes other than collective bargaining and to form or join organizations other than labour organizations for mutual aid and protection, the Committee observes that it remains unclear whether or to what extent this form of organization provides to all of the above categories of workers, both in law and in practice, the full guarantees of freedom of association as set out in the Convention and also observes the concerns expressed by the ITUC in this regard.

As to the pending legislative amendments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication, in its supplementary report, that House Bill No. 2621, which seeks to address the gaps in public sector labour relations, particularly on the protection of the right to organize, and House Bill No. 2846, which aims at codifying all laws and relevant issuances governing the civil service into a single, comprehensive statute, were filed in the 18th Congress in July 2019 and are currently with the House Committee on Civil Service and Professional Regulation. The Government also informs that House Bill No. 7036 (strengthening the security of tenure of workers) was further consolidated and submitted to the House Committee on Labour and Employment for consideration. This bill seeks to: (i) protect workers from labour-only contracting by allowing the labour sector to express concerns on contracting certain jobs and the employers to present the realities of their business operations; and (ii) simplify the classification of workers to regular and probationary, with project and seasonal employees being classified as regular workers for the duration of their employment, while all other forms of employment are strictly prohibited. Taking due note of the above information and the pending legislative bills and recalling that the legislative reform addressing any potential gaps in the right to organize of the above-mentioned categories of workers has been pending for a number of years, the Committee urges that any legislative amendments currently pending on the issue be adopted without delay so as to ensure that, should this not yet be the case, all workers, with the sole exception of the armed forces and the police, including those in managerial positions or with access to confidential information, firefighters, prison guards and other public sector workers, as well as temporary or outsourced workers and workers without employment contracts, are able to form and join the organizations of their own choosing to defend their occupational interests, and thus benefit from the full guarantees provided by the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted and reminds the Government that it can avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office, if it so desires.

Registration requirements. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend section 240(c) of the Labour Code so as to lower the excessive minimum membership requirement for forming an independent union (20 per cent of all the employees in the bargaining unit where the union seeks to operate). The Committee notes, from the supplementary information that, according to the Government, while the current 20 per cent requirement is required for an independent union to acquire legal personality and to be entitled to the rights and privileges granted by the law to legitimate labour organizations, there is no required number of workers in an establishment before a union can be formed. It also clarifies that section 241 of the Labour Code makes registration easier through “chartering”, where any duly registered federation or national union can, by issuing a charter certificate, directly create a local chapter entitled to all the rights and privileges of a legitimate labour organization without the need to comply with the registration requirements in section 240(c) of the Labour Code. The Committee understands from the Government’s indication that although a union may be formed by any number of workers at an enterprise, it will not be considered as a legitimate organization and will thus not have a legal personality or benefit from any other rights stemming from the law (right to own property, sue in court, etc.), unless it represents 20 per cent of the workforce at the unit where it is active and obtains a certificate of registration. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that House Bill No. 6023, which seeks to reduce the minimum membership requirement for registration of independent unions from 20 to 5 per cent, institutionalize online registration, decentralize the registration process and ensure a one-day process cycle time, was filed in January 2020 and is pending consideration with the House of Representatives Committee on Labour and Employment. Observing that the Government has been referring to amending legislation for several years now, the Committee firmly expects that the necessary amendments will be adopted in the very near future, reducing the minimum membership requirement for registration to a reasonable level so that the establishment of independent legitimate organizations is not hindered. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on progress made in this respect and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes without interference by the public authorities. Essential services. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide information on the legislative progress made to ensure that Government intervention leading to compulsory arbitration is limited to essential services in the strict sense of the term (amendments to section 278(g) of the Labour Code). The Committee notes from the supplementary information provided by the Government that House Bill No. 2632 (aimed at limiting Government intervention leading to compulsory arbitration to essential services in the strict sense of the term, and even to prohibiting the issuance of injunctions in labour cases) was filed in July 2019 and is pending consideration with the House of Representatives Committee on Labour and Employment. The Committee also notes that the Government reiterates information provided previously on the issuance in 2013 of Order No. 40-H-13 (an implementing guideline for section 278(g) of the Labour Code), which harmonizes the list of industries indispensable to the national interest with the essential services criteria of the Convention in the exercise of assumptive power of the Secretary of Labour and Employment over labour disputes, strikes and lockouts, and which should help facilitate the passage in Congress of the respective bill. The Committee recalls that the industries referred to in Order No. 40-H-13 include the hospital sector, electric power industry, water supply services (except small water supply services, such as bottling and refilling stations) and air traffic control; and that other industries may be included upon recommendation of the NTIPC. It observes in this regard that, according to the ITUC, the Government still retains an expansive instead of a strict and limited definition of essential services. Observing that the Committee on Freedom of Association has also previously addressed this issue (see 390th Report, June 2019, Case No. 2716, paragraph 78; 391st Report, October 2019, Case No. 2745, paragraph 51 and 392nd Report, October 2020, Case No. 2716, paragraph 153) and recalling that the Government has been referring to legislative amendments to section 278(g) for numerous years, the Committee expects that these legislative amendments will be adopted in the very near future and that they will ensure that Government intervention leading to compulsory arbitration is limited to essential services in the strict sense of the term. The Committee requests the Government to report progress in this regard and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

Penal sanctions for participation in a peaceful strike. In its previous comments, the Committee firmly trusted that sections 279 and 287 of the Labour Code would be amended in the very near future to ensure that no penal sanctions are imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike, even if non-compliant with bargaining or notice requirements. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, current sections 279 and 287 of the Labour Code do not impose penal sanctions on workers for participating in or carrying out a peaceful strike but merely list and penalize activities which are prohibited during a strike or lockout. In its supplementary report, the Government also informs that House Bill No. 2631 (strengthening the workers’ right to strike) was filed in July 2019 and is pending with the House of Representatives Committee on Labour and Employment for consideration. The bill aims to: (i) authorize a group or representatives of workers to file the notice of, and to go on, strike; and (ii) remove dismissal and imprisonment as penalty for violation of orders, prohibitions or injunctions issued by the Secretary of Labour and for direct participation by union officers in an illegal strike. The Committee further observes the allegations raised by the ITF, indicating that in addition to sections 279 and 287 of the Labour Code, the 1946 Commonwealth Act has also been used to impose penal sanctions against an organizer of a peaceful strike. Regretting the absence of any substantial progress in the adoption of the previously announced amendments to sections 279 and 287 of the Labour Code, the Committee expects the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that these amendments are adopted in the near future and that any other necessary changes are made in national laws or regulations to ensure that no penal sanctions are imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike, even if non-compliant with bargaining or notice requirements. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made, as well as its reply to the ITF allegations.

Foreign assistance to trade unions. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend section 285 of the Labour Code, which subjected the receipt of foreign assistance to trade unions to prior permission of the Secretary of Labour. The Committee notes the Government’s clarification that while section 285 of the Labour Code regulates foreign assistance to trade unions, the burden of obtaining an authorization is not on the union but on the foreign entity which provides the assistance. The Committee further observes, from the supplementary information provided by the Government, that House Bill No. 2629 was filed in July 2019 and is pending with the House of Representatives Committee on Labour and Employment for consideration. The bill aims to lift the regulation on foreign assistance by allowing foreign individuals or entities to give any donation, grant or other assistance to any labour organization, group of workers or auxiliary thereof without prior approval of the Secretary of Labour. Recalling that the Government has been referring to amending legislation for several years now, the Committee firmly expects that the proposed legislative amendments removing the need for Government permission for foreign assistance to trade unions will be adopted in the very near future. It requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

Article 5. Right of organizations to establish federations and confederations. The Committee previously referred to the need to lower the excessively high requirement of ten union locals or chapters duly recognized as collective bargaining agents for the registration of federations or national unions set out in section 244 of the Labour Code. The Committee notes from the supplementary information provided by the Government that House Bill No. 6023, which seeks to lower the requirement for registration of federations and confederations from 10 to 5 local chapters was filed in January 2020 and is pending consideration with the House of Representatives Committee on Labour and Employment. Observing that the revision of the Labour Code on this point has been pending for several years, the Committee firmly expects that the legislative amendments lowering the excessively high requirement for registration will be adopted in the very near future and requests the Government to provide information on the progress achieved.

Other legislative matters. The Committee notes that the Committee on Freedom of Association referred a number of legislative aspects to this Committee, in particular relating to: (i) the progress made in the adoption of the Bill concerning enforced and involuntary disappearances, which the Committee had considered could represent an important step in acknowledging the existence of enforced disappearances and ensuring significant and dissuasive sanctions (see 392nd Report, October 2020, Case No. 2528, paragraph 136); and (ii) the progress made with regard to the previously announced review by the Supreme Court and the Commission on Human Rights of the witness protection programme on the writ of amparo adopted in 2007, the application of the Anti-Torture Act No. 9745 and of Act No. 9851 on crimes against international humanitarian law, genocide and other crimes against humanity (see 392nd Report, October 2020, Case No. 2528, paragraph 138). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress made on the above matters.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee welcomes the statistics provided by the Government on the number of workers’ organizations and the number of workers covered in both the private and public sectors, as well as the introduction of a prohibition to contract or subcontract when undertaken to circumvent the workers’ right to security of tenure, self-organization, collective bargaining and peaceful concerted activities (Executive Order No. 51, series of 2018).

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes without interference by the public authorities. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide statistics on the number and nature of cases dealt with by the Single Entry Approach Program (SEnA) institutionalized to de-judicialize the dispute-settlement procedures and foster fair, speedy and inexpensive labour justice. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government to the Committee on Freedom of Association (see 391st Report, October 2019, Case No. 2745, paragraph 44), indicating that the SEnA, which provides for an institutionalized 30-day mandatory conciliation-mediation service on all individual and collective labour and employment disputes as the first approach, resulted in a decline in the number of assumption of jurisdiction cases and cases certified for compulsory arbitration, because it accorded workers and employers an option for less conflictual, speedy, inexpensive and efficient settlement or resolution of money claims and labour issues. The Government provides statistics in this regard, showing that as the number of settled requests for assistance under the SEnA increased, the number of cases referred to compulsory arbitration generally decreased. Taking due note of this information and recalling that, as previously indicated by the Government, notices of strike and lockout are exempt from its coverage, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide statistics on the number and nature of cases dealt with by the SEnA.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 1 September 2019, of the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) received on 3 September 2019 and of Education International (EI) received on 20 September 2019, referring to matters addressed below. The Committee requests the Government to provide its reply thereto.

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 108th Session, June 2019)

The Committee notes the discussion that took place in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards (Conference Committee) in June 2019 concerning the application of the Convention. The Committee observes that the Conference Committee called upon the Government to: (i) take effective measures to prevent violence in relation to the exercise of workers’ and employers’ organizations legitimate activities; (ii) immediately and effectively undertake investigations into the allegations of violence in relation to members of workers’ organizations with a view to establishing the facts, determining culpability and punishing the perpetrators; (iii) operationalize the monitoring bodies, including by providing adequate resources, and provide regular information on these mechanisms and on progress on the cases assigned to them; and (iv) ensure that all workers without distinction are able to form and join organizations of their choosing in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee also called on the Government to accept a high-level tripartite mission before the next International Labour Conference, and to elaborate in consultation with the most representative workers’ and employers’ organizations, a report on progress made for the transmission to this Committee by 1 September 2019. While noting the Government’s request to defer the high-level tripartite mission due to the thorough administrative and technical preparations that have to be undertaken in order to ensure attainment of responsive and substantive outcomes, the Committee expresses the hope that the Government will take the necessary arrangements to enable the high-level tripartite mission requested by the Conference Committee to take place before the next International Labour Conference.

Civil liberties and trade union rights

2016 ITUC observations. The Committee notes the Government’s reply to earlier observations from the ITUC, providing an update on the status of the investigations into the alleged assassination of two trade union leaders in 2016 and clarifying that the activities conducted in Compostela Valley, Mindanao were visits under the Community Support Programme of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), a peace and development effort aimed at establishing, developing and protecting conflict-resilient communities. The Committee further notes the Government’s general statement that the policy and programme reforms on freedom of association and collective bargaining implemented by the Government contributed to reduced incidence of labour disputes and labour related violence since 2011 and that this decline can also be attributed to the continuous efforts towards raising awareness and strengthening the capacity of all relevant Government institutions.

New allegations of violence and intimidation. The Committee notes, however, with deep concern the grave allegations of violence and intimidation of trade unionists communicated by the ITUC and EI, including: (i) assassination of 23 trade union leaders in 2018 and 2019, as well as several attempted assassinations documented by the Center for Trade Union and Human Rights (CTUHR); (ii) death threats targeting trade union leaders in the education sector in January and February 2019, as well as profiling, surveillance, harassment and red-tagging by the Philippine National Police (PNP) and AFP officials; (iii) violent dispersal of a number of workers’ strikes and protests in Marilao, Bulacan in June and July 2018, resulting in serious injuries, arrests, multiple charges (later dropped) and a week-long detention; (iv) violent dispersal of a strike by workers of a fruit-exporting company in Compostela Town in Compostela Valley in October 2018 and the murder of a trade union activist; (v) assassination of nine sugar cane workers during a protest at Hacienda Nene in Sagay, Negros Occidental; and (vi) suspected arson attack of a labour leader’s home during a strike in a banana-packing plant in December 2018. The Committee requests the Government to provide a detailed reply to these allegations.

Pending cases of alleged killings of trade union leaders. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide detailed information on the progress achieved on the prosecution and judicial investigations relating to three cases of alleged killings of trade union leaders previously reported by the ITUC. While taking due note of the update provided by the Government that the case of Rolando Pango should be reviewed by regional police for possible refiling, that the case of Florencio “Bong” Romano has not yet been deliberated on due to the non-reactivation of the Administrative Order (AO) 35 Inter-Agency Committee (IAC) and that in the case of Victoriano Embang, a case of murder was filed and an arrest warrant issued against suspects who are at large, the Committee regrets to observe that even after numerous years, none of these cases have yet been fully concluded. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the investigations into the serious allegations of killings of the above trade union leaders, as well as the ongoing judicial proceedings in this regard, will be completed in the very near future with a view to shedding full light, at the earliest date, on the facts and the circumstances in which such actions occurred and, to the extent possible, determining responsibilities, punishing the perpetrators and preventing the repetition of similar events.

Monitoring mechanisms. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to provide detailed information on the progress made by the Tripartite Validating Teams, the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council Monitoring Body (NTIPC-MB) and other relevant bodies in ensuring the collection of the necessary information to bring the pending cases of violence to the courts and the outcome in this regard. The Committee notes the Government’s assertion that: (i) the existing mechanisms remain steadfast in ensuring expeditious investigation, prosecution and resolution of pending cases concerning alleged harassment and assassination of labour leaders; (ii) for example, after the alleged extra-judicial killing (EJK) of a trade unionist Dennis Sequeña was endorsed by the IAC, the Department of Justice ordered the set-up of a special investigating team to conduct the investigation and case build-up; and (iii) the existing mechanisms monitor 72 cases of EJK and attempted murders and have also been mobilized to validate and gather information on the 43 cases of alleged murders of unionists and union leaders, as identified by the CTUHR and discussed at the Conference Committee. The Committee welcomes the information provided by the Government to the Conference Committee that, in the spirit of social dialogue and tripartite engagement, trade unions’ and employers’ representatives were enlisted as deputized labour inspectors (as of January 2019, there were 241 deputized social partners) and that 16 Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies (RTMBs) across the country were ready to be mobilized in case of need, bringing about an immediate response and concrete appropriate action.

The Committee observes, however, that the Government representative at the Conference Committee recognized that the mandates, structures and internal rules of the monitoring mechanisms need to be further revisited. According to the Government representative, the IAC, for instance, needed strengthening by ensuring openness and transparency on the prosecution and movement of EJK cases, adopting inclusive criteria in the screening of these cases, relatedness to the exercise of freedom of association, capacity-building on freedom of association and on the collection of physical and vital forensic evidence to reduce heavy reliance on testimonial evidence. The Committee regrets to observe that the IAC has not yet reconvened and that due to the risks and dangers involved for the members of the Tripartite Validating Teams, this initiative has not yet been put into practice. The Committee further observes the concerns raised by the ITUC and the ITF with regard to the criteria used by the IAC to determine extra-judicial killings, the lack of effective monitoring mechanisms and of resources to investigate and prosecute all complaints of EJK of trade unionists and the need to rapidly identify perpetrators of violence and bring them to justice to combat impunity.

The Committee regrets that despite a number of initiatives undertaken, there continue to be numerous allegations of violence perpetrated against trade union members for which the presumed perpetrators have not yet been identified and the guilty parties punished. It notes in this regard the Government’s acknowledgment that conviction has indeed been the recurring and imposing challenge due to the amount of evidence required to convict perpetrators of a crime and that there is a need for major support on this aspect. The Committee observes that the Conference Committee also noted with concern the numerous allegations of murders of trade unionists and anti-union violence, as well as the allegations regarding the lack of investigation in relation to these allegations. In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all of the existing monitoring mechanisms can function properly and efficiently, including by allocating sufficient resources and staff, so as to contribute to effective and timely monitoring and investigation of allegations of EJK and other forms of violence against trade union leaders and members. In particular, the Committee expects that, despite the challenges faced, the Tripartite Validating Teams will be established in practice and the IAC will reconvene in the near future. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the progress made by the existing monitoring mechanisms in ensuring the collection of the necessary information to bring the pending cases of violence to the courts.

Measures to combat impunity. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide detailed information on the steps taken to combat impunity, provide sufficient witness protection and build the capacity of the relevant State actors in the conduct of forensic investigation. The Committee welcomes the detailed information provided by the Government to the Conference Committee relating to numerous trainings, capacity-building activities, seminars and lectures conducted to enhance the knowledge and capacities of various State and non-State actors, including the police, military, prosecutors, enforcers, relevant actors in criminal investigation, local chief executives and social partners on international labour standards, the principles and application of the Convention, as well as on criminal investigation. The Committee also welcomes additional steps taken by the Government in this regard: elaboration of a workers’ training manual and of an e-learning module on freedom of association as part of the Labour and Employment Education Services (LEES); call by the Department of Labour and Employment (DOLE) on the PNP and AFP to ensure the observance of the guidelines on the conduct to be observed during the exercise of workers’ rights and activities; AFP and PNP commitment to integrating the Labour Code and the guidelines in their education programme; and review of the guidelines for amendment and updating. Finally, the Committee observes the Government’s explanation that reliance on testimonial evidence in the prosecution of criminal cases remains indispensable and that forensic evidence is supplemental in character and in addition that programmes should be conducted, together with the ILO, to enhance the capacity of the concerned agencies in gathering and handling forensic evidence. The Government representatives also informed the Conference Committee about a strategic planning conducted in March 2019 regarding the provision of adequate assistance and protection to witnesses under the Witness Protection Programme. Welcoming the above initiatives and measures undertaken, the Committee encourages the Government to continue to provide regular and comprehensive training to all concerned State actors in relation to human and trade union rights, as well as on the collection of evidence and the conduct of forensic investigation, with the aim of combating impunity, increasing the investigative capacity of the concerned officials and providing sufficient witness protection. The Committee invites the Office to provide any technical assistance required in this regard.

Review of operational guidelines of monitoring mechanisms. The Committee previously requested the Government to inform it of developments with regard to the review and updating of the operational guidelines of the investigating and monitoring bodies, as part of the National Action Plan under the DOLE-ILO-EU-GSP+ Development Cooperation Project. The Government indicated to the Conference Committee that one of the outcomes of the project is the review of the existing mechanisms to address cases of violations of workers’ civil liberties and trade union rights. Following the review of the operational guidelines and process structures of the NTIPC-MB, the RTMBs, the IAC and the National Monitoring Mechanisms (NMM), gaps and issues in the operationalization of these mechanisms have been identified, as well as problem areas encountered by investigative agencies, such as the PNP, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) and the AFP Human Rights Officer. According to the Government, recommendations issued to help address the identified gaps and blockages will be taken up by the concerned agencies for consideration and possible implementation. Welcoming this information, the Committee trusts that the recommendations addressing the current gaps and blockages will be rapidly implemented so as to contribute to swift and efficient investigation of pending labour-related cases of EJK and other violations.

Legislative issues

Labour Code. In its previous comments, the Committee had been noting the numerous amendment bills pending before Congress over many years and in various forms with a view to bringing the national legislation into conformity with the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s assertion that, in coordination with the social partners, it has sought to address emerging labour, economic and social concerns affecting workers’ rights and exercise thereof and has achieved substantial progress in its commitments towards the promotion and protection of freedom of association rights, including a multitude of actions and reforms undertaken. On the other hand, the Committee notes that, according to the ITUC, there appears to be an absence of good faith by the Government to adopt the necessary measures that would bring the legislation into compliance with the Convention. The Committee further observes that the Conference Committee regretted that the reforms introduced to address some of the issues were not adopted and urged the Government to bring the law into compliance with the Convention. The Committee on Freedom of Association also trusted that the Government would make serious efforts to bring the Labour Code into conformity with the principles of freedom of association and referred these legislative aspects to this Committee (see 391st Report, October 2019, Case No. 2745, paragraph 50). The Committee expects that the Government will make serious efforts to align the Labour Code and other pieces of national legislation with the Convention on the following matters.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing, without previous authorization. Aliens. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on the progress made in relation to amendments to sections 284 and 287(b) of the Labour Code so as to grant the right to organize to all workers residing in the Philippines. The Committee notes, from the information provided by the Government to the Conference Committee that House Bill No. 4448 (extending the right to self-organization to aliens in the Philippines and withdrawing the prohibition of foreign trade union organizations to engage in trade union activities) and House Bill No. 1354 (allowing foreign individuals and foreign organizations to engage in trade union activities) are expected to be refiled in the 18th Congress. The Committee regrets the absence of any progress in this regard and expects that the necessary amendments will be adopted in the near future and that they will ensure that any individuals residing in the country, whether or not they have a residence or a working permit, can benefit from the trade union rights provided by the Convention. The Committee requests the Government once again to provide information on progress made in this respect and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

Other categories of workers excluded from the guarantees of the Convention. The Committee had previously pointed to the lack of trade union rights for certain categories of workers, including workers in managerial positions or with access to confidential information, firefighters, prison guards and other public sector workers, as well as temporary or outsourced workers and workers without employment contract (sections 253 and 255 of the Labour Code, Rule II Section 2 of the Amended Rules and Regulations Governing the Exercise of the Right to Government Employees to Organize, 2004). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that for the purposes of exercising the right to organize, the first parameter to take into account is whether or not a worker is covered by an employer–employee relationship. It states that under section 253 of the Labour Code, only employees may join trade unions for purposes of collective bargaining, whereas ambulant, intermittent, itinerant, self-employed and rural workers, as well as those without any definite employer may only form labour organizations for their mutual aid and protection. The Committee understands from this information that several categories of workers continue to be excluded from the full guarantees set out in the Convention and that no legislative changes have yet been made in this regard. It also observes the concerns expressed by the ITUC in this regard. In its previous comment, the Committee also noted the Government’s reference to House Bills Nos 4553 and 5477 and Senate Bill No. 641 (seeking to address concerns regarding Government employees’ right to self-organization) and House Bill No. 8767 (filed in December 2018 and aimed at addressing the gaps in public sector labour relations, particularly on the protection of the right to organize). The Committee observes, from the information provided by the Government to the Conference Committee, that the above Bills are expected to be refiled in the 18th Congress. Recalling that the legislative reform addressing the right to organize of the above-mentioned categories of workers has been pending for a number of years, the Committee firmly expects any legislative amendments currently pending on the issue to be adopted without delay so as to ensure that all workers, other than the armed forces and the police, including those in managerial positions or with access to confidential information, firefighters, prison guards and other public sector workers, as well as temporary or outsourced workers and workers without employment contracts are able to form and join the organizations of their own choosing to defend their occupational interests, and requests the Government to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted. The Committee reminds the Government that it can avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office, if it so desires.

Registration requirements. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend section 240(c) of the Labour Code so as to lower the excessive minimum membership requirement for forming an independent union (20 per cent of all the employees in the bargaining unit where the union seeks to operate). The Committee notes, from the information provided by the Government to the Conference Committee that House Bill No. 1355 (seeking to lower the minimum membership requirement for registration of an independent union from 20 to 10 per cent and to develop an online system for trade union registration), House Bill No. 4446 (promoting “employee free choice” by making it easier for workers to join and establish unions through “majority sign-up”) and Senate Bill No. 1169 (seeking to reduce the minimum membership requirement from 20 to 5 per cent and to institutionalize online registration) are expected to be refiled in the 18th Congress. Observing that the Government has been referring to amending legislation for several years now, the Committee firmly expects that the necessary amendments will be adopted in the very near future, reducing the minimum membership requirement to a reasonable level so that the establishment of organizations is not hindered. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on progress made in this respect and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes without interference by the public authorities. Essential services. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide information on the legislative progress made to ensure that Government intervention leading to compulsory arbitration is limited to essential services in the strict sense of the term (amendments to section 278(g) of the Labour Code). The Committee notes from the information provided to the Conference Committee that the previously mentioned House Bills Nos 175, 711, 1908 and 4447 and Senate Bill No. 1221 (aimed at rationalizing Government intervention in labour disputes by adopting the essential services criteria in the exercise of the assumption of jurisdiction power of the Secretary of Labour and Employment) are expected to be refiled in the 18th Congress and observes that no significant progress has thus been achieved in this regard. The Committee also notes that the Government simply reiterates information provided previously on the issuance in 2013 of Order No. 40-H-13 (an implementing guideline for section 278(g) of the Labour Code), which harmonizes the list of industries indispensable to the national interest with the essential services criteria of the Convention in the exercise of assumptive power of the Secretary of Labour and Employment over labour disputes, strikes and lockouts, and which should help facilitate the passage in Congress of the respective bill. The Committee recalls that the industries referred to in Order No. 40-H-13 include the hospital sector, electric power industry, water supply services (except small water supply services, such as bottling and refilling stations) and air traffic control; and that other industries may be included upon recommendation of the NTIPC. It observes in this regard that, according to the ITUC, the Government still retains an expansive instead of a strict and limited definition of essential services. Observing that the Committee on Freedom of Association has also previously addressed this issue (see 390th Report, June 2019, Case No. 2716, paragraph 78 and 391st Report, October 2019, Case No. 2745, paragraph 51) and recalling that the Government has been referring to legislative amendments to section 278(g) for numerous years, the Committee expects that these legislative amendments will be adopted in the very near future and that they will ensure that Government intervention leading to compulsory arbitration is limited to essential services in the strict sense of the term. The Committee requests the Government to report progress in this regard and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

Penal sanctions for participation in a peaceful strike. In its previous comments, the Committee firmly trusted that sections 279 and 287 of the Labour Code would be amended in the very near future to ensure that no penal sanctions are imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike, even if non compliant with bargaining or notice requirements. The Committee notes that, as indicated above, House Bills Nos 175, 711, 1908 and 4447 and Senate Bill No. 1221 decriminalizing violations related to the assumption of jurisdiction and modifying the penalty for direct participation in illegal strike from dismissal or imprisonment to disciplinary measures or payment of a fine, are expected to be refiled in the 18th Congress. The Committee further observes the allegations raised by the ITF, indicating that in addition to sections 279 and 287 of the Labour Code, the 1946 Commonwealth Act has also been used to impose penal sanctions against an organizer of a peaceful strike. Regretting the absence of any substantial progress on the adoption of the previously announced amendments to sections 279 and 287 of the Labour Code, the Committee expects the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that these amendments are adopted in the near future and that any other necessary changes are made in national laws or regulations to ensure that no penal sanctions are imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike, even if non-compliant with bargaining or notice requirements. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made, as well as its reply to the ITF allegations.

Foreign assistance to trade unions. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend section 285 of the Labour Code, which subjected the receipt of foreign assistance to trade unions to prior permission of the Secretary of Labour. The Committee notes, from the information provided by the Government to the Conference Committee, that the previously mentioned House Bill No. 4448 (regulating foreign assistance to Philippine trade unions), House Bill No. 1354 (allowing the extension of foreign assistance to labour organizations and workers’ groups) and Senate Bill No. 1169 (removing the prior authority requirement on foreign assistance to local trade union activities) will be refiled in the 18th Congress. Recalling that the Government has been referring to amending legislation for several years now, the Committee firmly expects that the previously reported proposed legislative amendments removing the need for Government permission for foreign assistance to trade unions will be adopted in the very near future. It requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

Article 5. Right of organizations to establish federations and confederations. The Committee previously referred to the need to lower the excessively high requirement of ten union locals or chapters duly recognized as collective bargaining agents for the registration of federations or national unions set out in section 244 of the Labour Code. The Committee notes from the information provided to the Conference Committee that House Bill No. 1355 and Senate Bill No. 1169 reducing the number of affiliate local chapters required to register a federation from ten to five are expected to be refiled in the 18th Congress. Observing that the revision of the Labour Code on this point has been pending for several years, the Committee firmly expects that the legislative amendments lowering the excessively high requirement for registration will be adopted in the very near future and requests the Government to provide information on the progress achieved.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee welcomes the statistics provided by the Government on the number of workers’ organizations and the number of workers covered in both the private and public sectors, as well as the introduction of a prohibition to contract or subcontract when undertaken to circumvent the workers’ right to security of tenure, self-organization, collective bargaining and peaceful concerted activities (Executive Order No. 51, series of 2018).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Article 2 of the Convention. Registration requirements for trade unions in the public sector. With regard to the allegations of the Center for United and Progressive Labor (SENTRO) that the requirements for union registration in the public sector are overly stringent, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on any developments regarding the review of registration requirements for trade unions in the public sector, in particular the extent to which the requirements viewed as onerous by the SENTRO are being streamlined, and to provide a copy of any new regulations adopted. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the proposed amendment to the Implementing Rules and Regulations of Executive Order No. 180, while being prioritized, has been held in abeyance pending further consultation with the stakeholders, election of the sectoral representatives and reconstitution of the tripartite Public Sector Labor–Management Council (PSLMC). The Government adds that a 10 per cent signature support requirement is in its view not onerous and this can be further seen in the general increase in registered public sector unions from 2010–16. Additionally, the Government has been flexible in its practices in order to respond to the needs and peculiarities of organizational units in the public sector. The Committee requests the Government to inform of the progress made in amending the Implementing Rules and Regulations of Executive Order No. 180 and to provide a copy once issued.

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes without interference by the public authorities. The Committee previously noted that, under section 232 of the Labor Code, the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR) and the Labor Divisions in the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) regional offices, have the authority to act, either at their own initiative or upon request of either or both parties, on all inter-union and intra-union conflicts, and all disputes, grievances or problems arising from or affecting labour–management relations in all workplaces, except those arising from the implementation or interpretation of collective bargaining agreements. The Committee requested the Government to provide further details in relation to the procedure followed in the event that a dispute has not been settled during the 30-day mandatory conciliation-mediation, in order for the Committee to be able to assess the circumstances in which recourse to this mechanism might result in compulsory arbitration. The Committee notes the detailed procedure for the use of mediator-arbiters described by the Government and the intention to institutionalize a Single Entry Approach Program (SEnA) in order to de-judicialize the dispute-settlement procedures, thus fostering fair, speedy and inexpensive labour justice. The Committee notes that under Department Order No. 151-16 of 2016, notices of strike and lockout are exempt from its coverage. The Committee requests the Government to provide statistics on the number and nature of cases dealt with by the SEnA.

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2020.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

The Committee notes the observations received on 1 September 2018 from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and requests the Government to provide its comments thereon.

The Committee notes that, at the request of the 2016 Conference Committee on the Application of Standards, a direct contacts mission (DCM) was carried out in the country from 6 to 10 February 2017. The Committee welcomes the constructive engagement of all parties noted by the DCM and takes due note of its conclusions and recommendations which covered: (i) civil liberties and trade union rights; (ii) legislative issues; and (iii) the promotion of a climate conducive to freedom of association.

Civil liberties and trade union rights

The Committee notes the Government’s detailed reply in relation to the earlier observations from the ITUC referring in particular to the efforts of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) to conciliate in cases of tense industrial action, as well as interventions by the police to investigate alleged cases of violence and the settlement of certain disputes through the creation of a tripartite technical working group. The Government also refers to the on-going investigation by the Commission on Human Rights of a case of alleged harassment of several union officials and Confederation for Unity, Recognition and Advancement of Government Employees (COURAGE) union activists.

The Committee notes with deep concern however the new and grave allegations of the assassination of two trade union leaders in 2016, one of whom was gunned down in front of the National Labor Relations Commission in Quezon City, and the ITUC’s concern that the recently declared war by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) against so-called “reds” is reminiscent of earlier years when union and labour organizers were harassed, arrested, jailed, abducted and murdered after being tagged as “reds” by the military. The ITUC provides examples of targeted arrests of KMU labour organizers in 2017 and several allegations of police violence and arrests during peaceful strike action. The Committee requests the Government to provide a detailed reply to these allegations.

Monitoring mechanisms. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to continue to provide information on the functioning of the monitoring bodies in practice, the progress on cases addressed by them and further steps taken or contemplated to ensure a climate of justice and security for trade unionists in the Philippines.

The Committee notes that the Government recalls the establishment of the Administrative Order (AO) 35 Inter-Agency Committee (IAC) on extra-legal killings, enforced disappearances, torture and other grave violations of the right to life, liberty and security of persons, which as of 2016 had reviewed 335 cases, including 65 cases of extra-judicial killings (EJK) and attempted murders that were endorsed by the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council – Monitoring Body (NTIPC-MB). Of these 65 cases, only 11 were verified by the Committee as EJK cases. The Committee regrets however to note from the Government’s report that AO35 IAC has yet to reconvene due to the transition in the leadership of the Department of Justice and trusts that it will begin meeting again in the very near future. The Government indicates in the meantime that the DOLE issued AO32 on 25 January 2018 setting forth guidelines governing the mechanisms and functions of the NTIPC-MB and the Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies relative to cases involving EJK, harassment and abduction of trade union officers and members in the exercise of their right to freedom of association and collective bargaining. AO32 also institutionalized the creation of Tripartite Validating Teams. While noting the recent initiatives taken by the Government, including the creation of Tripartite Validating Teams, the Committee is nevertheless obliged to note with regret that several years later there remain numerous cases of trade union murders and other acts of violence for which the presumed perpetrators have yet to have been identified and the guilty parties punished. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the progress made by the Tripartite Validating Teams, the NTIPC-MB and other relevant bodies in ensuring the collection of the necessary information to bring the pending cases of violence to the courts and the outcome in this regard.

The Committee notes in this regard the conclusions of the DCM on steps to combat impunity and the Government’s indication that recommendations were made for reforms towards providing sufficient witness protection and building the capacity of prosecutors, enforcers and other relevant actors, especially in the conduct of forensic investigations. The Committee requests the Government to provide further detailed information on the steps taken in this regard.

The Committee notes the Government’s information in relation to the progress made on the prosecution of the three cases of killings of trade union leaders that had been raised in the ITUC previous observations but regrets to observe that the murder case of Rolando Pango, a farmworker leader, was dismissed due to insufficient evidence, the case of Florencio “Bong” Romano has not yet been deliberated on due to the non-reactivation of AO35 IAC, while the murder case of Victoriano Embang has been docketed but not yet concluded. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the investigations into the serious allegations of killings of trade union leaders as well as the ongoing judicial proceedings in this regard, will be completed in the very near future with a view to shedding full light, at the earliest date, on the facts and the circumstances in which such actions occurred and, to the extent possible, determining responsibilities, punishing the perpetrators and preventing the repetition of similar events. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on any progress achieved in this regard.

The Committee firmly hopes that all remaining alleged cases of violations of trade union rights will be the subject of appropriate investigations which will be vigorously pursued and that effective measures to ensure accountability will be taken by the Government. Recalling the DCM emphasis on the need for enforced implementation at national, regional and local levels via inclusive, responsive, transparent and accountable quality law enforcement, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Legislative issues

Labour Code. In its previous comments, the Committee has been noting the numerous amendment bills pending before Congress over many years and in various forms with a view to bringing the national legislation into conformity with the following Articles of the Convention.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing, without previous authorization. Aliens. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend sections 284 and 287(b) of the Labor Code so as to grant the right to organize to all workers residing in the Philippines. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that House Bill No. 1354 allowing foreign individuals to engage in trade union activities and House Bill No. 4488 allowing aliens to exercise their right to self-organization are ongoing deliberation at the House Committee level. While observing that the Government has been referring to amending legislation for several years now, and that the legislation has been introduced but not approved in prior sessions of the Congress, the Committee trusts that the necessary amendments will be adopted in the very near future and that they will ensure that any individual residing in the territory of a State, whether or not they have a residence or a working permit, benefit from the trade union rights provided by the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on progress made in this respect and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

Other categories of workers excluded from the rights of the Convention. The Committee recalls that its previous comments expressed the hope that proposed legislative amendments would ensure in the near future that all workers (other than the armed forces and the police as determined by national law), including those in managerial positions or with access to confidential information, firefighters, prison guards and other public sector workers, as well as temporary or outsourced workers and workers without employment contract, enjoy the right to establish and join organizations to defend their occupational interests. The Committee notes that the Government refers in its report to House Bill Nos 4533 and 5477 and Senate Bill No. 641 establishing a Civil Service Code that are pending with the relevant committees and recalls that it ratified the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151), in October 2017. The Committee, welcoming the Government’s recent ratification of Convention No. 151, requests it to indicate the measures taken to ensure that all workers, without distinction whatsoever, including those mentioned above, are able to form and join the organizations of their own choosing and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

Registration requirements. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend section 240(c) of the Labor Code so as to lower the excessive minimum membership requirement for forming an independent union (20 per cent of all the employees in the bargaining unit where the union seeks to operate). The Committee notes that the Government refers to a number of bills for the reduction of the minimum membership requirement: (i) House Bill No. 1355 seeking to reduce minimum membership requirement for registration of unions from 20 to 10 per cent has already been approved and is pending second reading; (ii) Senate Bill No. 1169 seeking to reduce the minimum membership requirement for registration of unions from 20 to 5 per cent and removing the priority authority requirement on foreign assistance; and (iii) House Bill No. 4446 removing the requirements for the registration of local chapters and promoting “employee free choice” by making it easier for workers to join and/or establish unions through “majority sign-up”. While observing that the Government has been referring to amending legislation for several years now, the Committee expects that the necessary amendments will be adopted in the very near future reducing the minimum membership requirements so that the establishment of organizations is not hindered. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on progress made in this respect and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes without interference by the public authorities. The Committee previously referred to the need to amend section 278(g) of the Labor Code to restrict government intervention leading to compulsory arbitration to essential services. Welcoming the issuance of Order No. 40-H-13, which harmonizes the list of industries indispensable to the national interest with the essential services criteria of the Convention, the Committee expected that the pending draft legislative amendments would ensure that government intervention leading to compulsory arbitration was limited to industries which can be considered as essential services in the strict sense of the term. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that there are four bills filed at the House of Representatives seeking to amend section 278 (House Bills Nos 175, 711, 1908 and 4447), while one Bill was ongoing deliberation in the Senate (Senate Bill No. 1221). The Committee trusts that the legislative amendments to section 278(g) to which the Government has been referring for numerous years will be adopted in the very near future and that they will ensure that government intervention leading to compulsory arbitration is limited to essential services in the strict sense of the term. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

In its previous comments, the Committee trusted that sections 279 and 287 of the Labor Code would be amended to ensure that no penal sanctions are imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike. The Committee notes the Government’s reiteration that House Bills Nos 175, 711, 1908 and 4447 are pending with the House Committee on Labor and Employment, while Senate Bill No. 1221 is ongoing deliberation in the Senate Committee on Labor, Employment and Human Resources Development. While observing that the Government has been referring to amending legislation for several years now, the Committee firmly trusts that sections 279 and 287 of the Labor Code will be amended in the very near future, thus ensuring that no penal sanctions are imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike, even if non-compliant with bargaining or notice requirements. It requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend section 285 of the Labor Code, which subjected the receipt of foreign assistance to trade unions, to prior permission of the Secretary of Labor. The Committee notes that the Government reports that House Bill No. 1354 also provides for the extension of foreign assistance to labour organizations and workers’ groups, while House Bill No. 4448 withdraws the prohibition of foreign trade union organizations to engage in trade union activities and the regulation of foreign assistance to Philippine trade unions. Both Bills are pending with the Committee on Labor and Employment. While observing that the Government has been referring to amending legislation for several years now, the Committee expects that the proposed legislative amendments removing the need for government permission for foreign assistance to trade unions will be adopted in the very near future. It requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

Article 5. Right of organizations to establish federations and confederations. The Committee previously referred to the need to lower the excessively high requirement of ten union locals or chapters duly recognized as collective bargaining agents for the registration of federations or national unions set out in section 244 of the Labor Code. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that House Bill No. 1355 reducing the minimum membership requirement for registration of unions or federations has already been approved at the House Committee level and is pending for second reading, while Senate Bill 1169 reducing the membership requirement for federations from ten to five duly recognized bargaining agents or local chapters is ongoing deliberation in the Senate Committee. While observing that the Government has been referring to amending legislation for several years now, the Committee expects that the proposed legislative amendments will lower the excessively high requirement for registration and will be adopted in the very near future. It requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard and to transmit copies of the amending legislation once adopted.

The Committee further notes with interest the information concerning the progress made within the framework of the DOLE-ILO-EU-GSP+ Development Cooperation Project aimed at further improving the capacity of labour, employers and government toward the better implementation of freedom of association and collective bargaining. The project launch in 2017 resulted in the signing of a Tripartite Manifesto of Commitment and Collective Effort to Sustain Observance and Further Improvement on the Application of the Principles of Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining. Noting that part of the National Action Plan under the project is the review and updating of the operational guidelines of the investigating and monitoring bodies in order to further strengthen and improve their operationalization as well as coordination and interplay, the Committee requests the Government to inform of all further developments in this regard.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Committee requests the Government to reply in full to the present comments in 2020.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Article 2 of the Convention. Registration requirements for trade unions in the public sector. With regard to the allegations of the Center for United and Progressive Labor (SENTRO) that the requirements for union registration in the public sector are overly stringent, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on any developments with regard to their review. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the technical working group of the tripartite Public Sector Labour-Management Council (PSLMC) is finalizing the proposed amendment to the Implementing Rules and Regulations of Executive Order No. 180, which reduces the signature support requirement to 10 per cent of the rank-and-file employees in the organizational unit, and will then submit it to the PSLMC for its approval. Considering that a 10 per cent requirement may still obstruct the right of workers to form trade unions, in particular in large organizational units, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments regarding the review of registration requirements for trade unions in the public sector, in particular the extent to which the requirements viewed as onerous by the SENTRO are being streamlined, and to provide a copy of any new regulations adopted.

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes without interference by the public authorities. The Committee previously noted that, under section 226 (now renumbered to section 232) of the Labour Code, the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR) and the Labor Divisions in the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) regional offices, have the authority to act, either at their own initiative or upon request of either or both parties, on all inter-union and intra-union conflicts, and all disputes, grievances or problems arising from or affecting labour-management relations in all workplaces, except those arising from the implementation or interpretation of collective bargaining agreements. The Committee requested the Government to provide further information on the application of the above provision of the Labour Code in practice. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) section 232 is subject to the provisions of Act No. 10396, which institutionalizes the Single Entry Approach Program [SEnA] in all DOLE offices to de-judicialize the dispute settlement procedures and requires that all issues arising from labour and employment, including inter union and intra-union disputes (examples provided by the Government), be subject to 30-day mandatory conciliation-mediation; (ii) as of 31 March 2016, all filed inter- or intra-union disputes are initiated by union officers, members or employees, and there is no recorded inter- or intra-union dispute initiated by the BLR or the DOLE regional offices; and (iii) if the inter- and intra-union disputes are not settled, the cases shall be resolved by the BLR or the mediator arbiter in the regional offices. The Committee requests the Government to provide further details in relation to the procedure followed in the event that a dispute has not been settled during the 30-day mandatory conciliation-mediation, in order for the Committee to be able to assess the circumstances in which recourse to this mechanism might result in compulsory arbitration.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2016, which are of a general nature. The Committee also notes the observations from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 31 August 2016 referring to matters already being addressed by the Committee, matters to be considered in the framework of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), as well as new allegations concerning violations of the Convention in practice, including violent suppression of strikes and acts of anti-union harassment. Noting the Government’s reply thereto, the Committee requests the Government to supply details concerning the allegation of anti-union violence against striking distillery workers, and to continue providing information on the developments or outcome of the investigations being pursued concerning the alleged shooting at agricultural workers preparing for a strike and the allegations of harassment of several union officials and COURAGE union activists.

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 105th Session, May–June 2016)

The Committee takes due note of the debate which took place within the Conference Committee in June 2016 and the ensuing conclusions, according to which the Conference Committee noted with concern the numerous allegations of anti-union violence and the lack of progress in the investigation of many such cases and, regretting that the legislative reforms introduced to address some of the Committee of Experts’ concerns had not been adopted, urged the Government to bring the law into compliance with the Convention. Furthermore, the Conference Committee requested the Government to: (i) undertake appropriate investigations on the alleged cases of violation of trade union rights in the near future with a view to establishing the facts, determining responsibilities and punishing the perpetrators; (ii) ensure that sufficient funds and staff are available to effectively carry out this work expeditiously so as to avoid a situation of impunity; (iii) establish monitoring bodies and provide regular information on these mechanisms and progress on the cases assigned to them; (iv) institute adequate measures to prevent the repetition of crimes against trade unionists, including the institution of protection schemes for trade unionists that are determined to be at risk by an impartial body; (v) bring national legislation into conformity with the Convention with regard to the requirement of government permission for foreign assistance to trade unions and to reduce the registration requirement from ten to five duly recognized bargaining agents or local chapters; (vi) amend the legislation to allow currently excluded classes of public servants to associate freely; (vii) take effective measures to prohibit the intentional misclassification of employees so as to deprive them of the right to freedom of association under the Convention; and (viii) accept a direct contacts mission in 2016 in order to follow up on the foregoing conclusions.

Civil liberties and trade union rights

Monitoring mechanisms. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide further information on the functioning of the monitoring bodies in practice, including on the participation of social partners as well as on the number and types of cases addressed by these mechanisms.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the National Monitoring Mechanism (NMM), a component of the EPJUST Programme, in particular: (i) its Operational Guidelines, which inter alia provide the coordinative mechanism among its members for the immediate provision of services, which include but are not limited, to legal services, in promoting, protecting and addressing the rights of the victims and/or members of their families, and establish a local monitoring mechanism in the regions; (ii) its composition, including the Commission on Human Rights (CHR), government agencies (such as the Presidential Human Rights Committee, the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG), the Department of National Defense (DND), the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), the Philippine National Police (PNP), the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), the Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process) and civil society organizations; and (iii) its functioning, notably its regular meetings and the present conduct of an audit or investigation into the human rights situation on Semirara Island following the accident at the open-cast coal mine.

Furthermore, the Committee notes the following information provided by the Government: (i) the DOJ Special Task Force and the Inter-Agency Committee on Extra-Legal Killings, Enforced Disappearances, Torture and Other Grave Violations of the Right to Life, Liberty and Security of Persons (IAC) continue to perform their functions: inventory of cases, investigation of unsolved cases, monitoring and reporting cases under investigation, preliminary investigation, and trial; investigation and prosecution of new cases; and submission of report to the President; (ii) due to the transition in the DOJ leadership, the IAC has not yet convened as of the reporting date (26 August 2016); (iii) DOLE Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies (RTMBs) in coordination with the regional counterpart of the IAC members such as the DOJ, CHR, PNP and AFP continue to function in the monitoring, investigation and prosecution of reported cases; and (iv) capacity-building activities were conducted to aid the tripartite monitoring bodies in the delivery of their functions such as case profiling and reporting, and to strengthen the inter-agency coordination between and among the IAC government agencies in charge of investigation and prosecution of cases and the labour and employer representatives of the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council – Monitoring Body (NTIPC–MB) and RTMBs tasked to monitor, document and process reported violations of international labour standards, particularly freedom of association and collective bargaining. The Committee also notes from the Government’s reply to the 2016 ITUC observations that, on 25 May 2016, TIPC Resolution No. 1, s. 2016, was adopted setting up independent and capacitated case-based NTIPC–MB Tripartite Validating Teams (one DOLE representative, one representative from the labour sector and one representative from the employers’ sector) for cases of extrajudicial killings (EJK), enforced disappearances, torture, harassment and other grave violations committed against trade unionists, which require further validation or review of gathered information for it to serve as significant support to case build-up and resolution; the DOLE approved for the present year a budget allocation in support of the functioning of the Tripartite Validating Teams, one for each of the identified ILO cases.

Welcoming the detailed information provided by the Government, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the working of the above monitoring mechanisms in practice, the progress on cases addressed by them and further steps taken or contemplated to ensure a climate of justice and security for trade unionists in the Philippines.

Allegations of violations of trade union rights

ITUC observations of 2011 and 2012. The Committee had firmly hoped that the investigations of the serious allegations contained in the 2011 ITUC observations concerning the alleged killings of three trade union leaders and seven cases of alleged trade union rights violations including arrests and false criminal charges filed against trade union leaders and physical assaults of striking workers, and in the 2012 ITUC observations concerning inter alia the alleged killings of four trade union leaders, would be finalized in the near future with a view to establishing the facts, determining responsibilities and punishing the perpetrators, and requested the Government to provide details on any developments in this regard.

The Committee notes that, regarding the 2011 ITUC observations: (i) in relation to the killing of Eduard Panganiban, elected Secretary of the United Strength of Workers in Takata, the Government reiterates that the victim’s mother executed a sworn affidavit on 5 April 2014 stating her lack of interest to pursue the case; (ii) regarding the killing of Benjamin Bayles, organizer of the National Federation of Sugar Workers, the Government again states that the case is still under trial with the prosecution presenting its 19th witness and closely monitored by the IAC which had identified it as an extra-judicial killing; (iii) concerning the killing of Carlo “Caloy” Rodriguez, President of the Calamba Water District Union, the Government reiterates that the victim’s wife remains uncooperative and adds that, to date, efforts are still being made to look for possible witnesses to identify the suspect(s) that may lead to the closure of the case; (iv) out of the five remaining cases of alleged violations of trade union rights, in two cases the parties have reached an amicable settlement, in one case (alleged union busting) it was ruled that no violation of trade union rights had been committed, in one case (violent suppression of picket lines), the DOLE engaged the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority in awareness-raising activities as recommended by the NTIPC–MB, and one case is still pending resolution before the Supreme Court.

Concerning the 2012 ITUC observations, the Committee notes that the Government, recalling that the case of the killing of Santos V. Manrique had been dismissed as not related to his trade union activities, indicates that: (i) as regards the killing of Celito Baccay, board member of the Maeno-Giken Workers’ Organization, PNP investigators could not yet determine the perpetrators and the motive for lack of trace evidence at the crime scene and potential eyewitnesses which could provide investigative leads; his wife did not pursue the case; and the prosecutor was adamant about not filing the case because of weak evidence against the suspected perpetrator; (ii) as to the killing of Noriel Salazar, President of the Union of COCOCHEM, after preliminary investigation, a case for murder was filed against a suspect on 4 August 2011 and is still under trial; (iii) concerning the killing of Elpidio Malinao, Vice-President of the University of the Philippines (UP) Los Banos Chapter of the Organization of Non-Academic Personnel of UP, an alias warrant of arrest was issued on 12 December 2011 against a suspect for the crime of murder, and a continuous search operation is being conducted; and (iv) regarding the abduction and arbitrary detention of Elizar Nabas, member of the National Federation of Sugar Workers, he was detained in jail and discharged on 23 January 2013 after a surety bond, the case of arson filed against him was dismissed due to insufficient evidence on 5 September 2013, and he was arrested for the crime of murder on 2 October 2013 and released on 28 July 2014 after a cash bond.

The Committee observes that, out of the six remaining cases of killings of trade union leaders, two are still under trial, in one an alias warrant has been issued and in three one of the reasons or the only reason given for the lack of progress in the investigation is the lack of cooperation or interest of the victim’s family. The Committee considers that cases of alleged extrajudicial killings of trade union leaders should, due to their seriousness, be investigated and, where evidence (not necessarily in the form of witnesses) exists, prosecuted ex officio without delay, regardless of desistance or disinterest of the parties to pursue the case, and even in the absence of a formal criminal complaint being lodged by a relative. The Committee further recalls that justice delayed is justice denied and that it is important to avoid any situation of impunity. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the investigations into the serious allegations of killings of trade union leaders as well as the ongoing judicial proceedings in this regard, will be completed in the very near future with a view to shedding full light, at the earliest date, on the facts and the circumstances in which such actions occurred and, to the extent possible, determining responsibilities, punishing the perpetrators and preventing the repetition of similar events. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress achieved in this regard, as well as on any developments in relation to the aforementioned case pending resolution before the Supreme Court.

2015 and 2016 ITUC and Center of United and Progressive Workers (SENTRO) observations. The Committee previously hoped that all alleged cases of violations of trade union rights reported by the ITUC and by the SENTRO in 2015 would be the subject of appropriate investigations which would be vigorously pursued, and requested the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

The Committee notes with regret that the Government provides no information concerning developments in relation to: (i) the killing of trade union leader Victorio Embang alleged by the SENTRO in 2015; and (ii) certain violations of trade union rights alleged by the ITUC in 2015, especially the enforced disappearance of trade union leader Benjamen Villeno and the arbitrary detention of trade unionists Randy Vegas and Raul Camposano.

The Committee notes that, as regards the killing of trade union leader Florencio “Bong” Romano, the Government indicates that: (i) the case has been endorsed to the RTMB of DOLE Region IV-A and is still pending investigation by the PNP-Task Force Usig; (ii) the IAC will deliberate on this case at its next meeting; (iii) no conclusion has yet been made as to whether the killing is labour-related; (iv) a final report will be elevated to NTIPC–MB upon completion of the RTMB Region IV-A, PNP-Task Force Usig and IAC reports; and (v) livelihood assistance from DOLE for the victim’s family is being explored. The Committee notes the Government’s reply concerning the remaining SENTRO allegations, including the killing by gunshots on 29 November 2014 of Rolando Pango, a farmworker leader, in particular that: (i) Mr Pango was involved in the agrarian and labour disputes in Hacienda Salud, a sugar plantation in Barangay Rumirang, Isabela; he was instrumental in organizing the plantation workers and had filed a case before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) against management for unlawful termination of 41 workers; (ii) he was advised in June 2014 to desist from assisting and organizing people at the plantation and subsequently received death threats; (iii) the case was considered by the IAC as an extrajudicial killing and endorsed to the RTMB of DOLE Region VI; and (iv) on 17 April 2015, a murder case against alias Andres Gumban and alias Gante has been filed but dismissed on 10 November 2015 due to insufficient evidence.

The Committee observes that some ITUC allegations (false criminal charges brought against trade union leaders Artemio Robilla and Danilo Delegencia, and shooting at picketing workers) and SENTRO allegations (killing of trade union leader Antonio Petalcorin) are already being dealt with by the Committee on Freedom of Association in the framework of Cases Nos 3119 and 3185, respectively.

The Committee firmly hopes that all remaining alleged cases of violations of trade union rights reported by the ITUC and by the SENTRO in 2015 will be the subject of appropriate investigations which will be vigorously pursued, and requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this respect. With particular regard to the killings of Rolando Pango, Florencio “Bong” Romano as well as Victorio Embang, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the relevant resolutions issued by the NTIPC, to indicate whether the killings of these trade union leaders have benefited or are benefiting from the resources and powers of the high-level IAC in order to ensure effective steps to combat impunity, and to provide details on the outcome of the investigations conducted in that framework or on the negative outcome of the second IAC review, as the case may be.

Human Security Act. The Committee notes that, similarly to the SENTRO in 2015, the ITUC expresses concern in its 2016 observations about the possible negative implications of the Human Security Act on the exercise of trade union rights. In view of the Government’s previous assurances referring to the 2012 AFP Guidelines, the Committee continues to trust that the Government will take all necessary steps to ensure that the Human Security Act will not be misused to suppress legitimate trade union activities.

Legislative issues

Labour Code. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that there were several bills seeking to amend the Labour Code, and that the NTIPC constituted a Tripartite Labour Code Review Team as an external partner in the drafting process. The Committee recalls the need to bring the national legislation into conformity with the following Articles of the Convention.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing, without previous authorization. Aliens. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend sections 269 and 272(b) (now renumbered to sections 284 and 287(b)) of the Labour Code so as to grant the right to organize to all workers residing in the Philippines. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that House Bill No. 5886 was approved by the House on 16 December 2015 and received by the Senate on 6 January 2016; and that it did not pass into law in the 16th Congress but may possibly be pursued in the next Congress as refiled House Bill No. 1354. Having previously noted that House Bill No. 5886, while recognizing a degree of participation in trade union activities to all aliens, only recognizes the right to self-organization and the right to join and assist labour organizations, to aliens with a valid working permit, the Committee wishes to recall that the right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing implies that anyone residing in the territory of a State, whether or not they have a residence or a working permit, benefits from the trade union rights provided by the Convention. The Committee expects that any relevant draft legislation will accurately reflect the Convention in this regard and will be adopted in the very near future. It requests the Government to provide information on progress achieved in this respect.

Other categories of workers excluded from the rights of the Convention. The Committee previously noted the observations of the ITUC, SENTRO, Education International (EI) and the SMP–NATOW alleging the lack of trade union rights of certain public servants and managerial employees, as well as the widespread denial by employers of employees’ employment status, the misclassification of employees and the use of contract and temporary workers who do not have the right to join trade unions. The Committee had hoped that the various initiatives to amend the provisions of the Labour Code and the proposed Civil Service Reform Code (House Bill No. 2400 and Senate Bill No. 1174) pending before the Congress would ensure that all workers, except the armed forces and the police, fully benefit from the right to organize. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that House Bill No. 2400 and Senate Bill No. 1174 have been pending with the relevant parliamentary committees since August 2013, and that they did not pass into law in the 16th Congress, but may possibly be pursued in the next Congress. The Committee also notes the Government’s commitment to eliminate illegitimate forms of contractualization obscuring the existence of an employment relationship and eroding the right to security of tenure, including in the public sector. The Committee firmly hopes that the proposed legislative amendments and any other relevant legislative measures will ensure in the near future that all workers (other than the armed forces and the police as determined by national law), including those in managerial positions or with access to confidential information, firefighters, prison guards and other public sector workers, as well as temporary or outsourced workers and workers without employment contract, without distinction or discrimination of any kind, enjoy the right to establish and join organizations to defend their occupational interests. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Registration requirements. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend section 234(c) (now renumbered section 240(c)) of the Labour Code so as to lower the excessive minimum membership requirement for forming an independent union (20 per cent of all the employees in the bargaining unit where the union seeks to operate). The Committee notes that the Government reports that: (i) House Bill No. 6238 seeking to reduce the minimum membership requirement for registration of unions from 20 to 10 per cent, was approved by the House on 16 December 2015 and received by the Senate on 6 January 2016; (ii) House Bill No. 2540 aiming at establishing an efficient system to strengthen workers’ right to self-organization and collective bargaining, has remained pending with the Committee on Labor and Employment since 2 September 2013; (iii) given that these bills did not pass into law in the 16th Congress, the same may possibly be pursued in the next Congress; and (iv) House Bill No. 6238 has been refiled as House Bill No. 1355. Reiterating that a 10 per cent requirement may still obstruct the right of workers to form trade unions, the Committee expects that in the near future legislative measures will be taken to lower the minimum membership requirements in consultation with the social partners to a reasonable number so that the establishment of organizations is not hindered, and requests the Government to provide information on progress achieved in this respect.

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes without interference by the public authorities. The Committee previously referred to the need to amend section 263(g) (now renumbered section 278(g)) of the Labour Code and Department Order No. 40 G 03 to restrict government intervention leading to compulsory arbitration, to essential services. Welcoming the issuance of Order No. 40-H-13, which harmonizes the list of industries indispensable to the national interest with the essential services criteria of the Convention, the Committee expressed the firm hope that House Bill No. 5471, which sought to install further necessary amendments, would be adopted in the near future. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that House Bill No. 5471, aiming at rationalizing government interventions in labour disputes by adopting the essential services criteria in the exercise of the assumption or certification power of the Secretary of Labor and Employment, and decriminalizing violations thereof, as substituted by House Bill No. 6431, was approved on second reading on 2 February 2016 but failed to pass during the remaining sessions of the 16th Congress; it may possibly be pursued in the next Congress and was refiled as House Bills Nos 175, 711 and 1908. The Committee expects that the proposed legislative amendments will ensure in the near future that government intervention leading to compulsory arbitration is limited to industries which can be considered as essential services in the strict sense of the term, and requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this respect.

In its previous comments, the Committee trusted that sections 264 and 272 (now renumbered sections 279 and 287) of the Labour Code would be amended to ensure that no penal sanctions are imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that House Bill No. 5471, as substituted by House Bill No. 6431, failed to pass during the 16th Congress; and that, subject to the discretion of the new administration, such a bill, refiled as House Bills Nos 175, 711 and 1908, shall be part of DOLE Legislative Priority Measures for the 17th Congress. Having previously noted that the Bill, once a final judgment declares the illegality of a strike, allows for criminal prosecution under section 279, which prohibits labour organizations from declaring a strike without having complied with the bargaining and notice requirements, the Committee wishes to recall that measures of imprisonment or fines should not be imposed on any account, unless, during a strike, violence against persons or property, or other serious infringements of penal law have been committed, and that these sanctions can be imposed exclusively pursuant to legislation punishing such acts. The Committee firmly trusts that sections 279 and 287 of the Labour Code will be amended in the very near future, thus ensuring that no penal sanctions are imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike, even if non-compliant with bargaining or notice requirements. It requests the Government to provide information on any progress achieved in this regard.

The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend section 270 (now renumbered section 285) of the Labour Code, which subjected the receipt of foreign assistance to trade unions, to prior permission of the Secretary of Labour. The Committee notes that the Government reports that House Bill No. 5886, aiming at allowing foreign individuals or organizations to engage in trade union activities and to provide assistance to labour organizations or groups of workers, was approved by the House on 16 December 2015 and received by the Senate on 6 January 2016; and that, given that it did not pass into law in the 16th Congress, it may possibly be pursued in the next Congress as refiled House Bill No. 1354. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that House Bill No. 5927, which sought to repeal section 285 of the Labour Code, also failed to pass in the Congress but may possibly be pursued in the next Congress. The Committee expects that the proposed legislative amendments removing the need for government permission for foreign assistance to trade unions will be adopted in the near future, and requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Article 5. Right of organizations to establish federations and confederations. The Committee previously referred to the need to lower the excessively high requirement of ten union members for the registration of federations or national unions set out in section 237(1) (now renumbered section 244) of the Labour Code. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that: (i) House Bill No. 6238, which reduces the registration requirement for federations from ten to five duly recognized bargaining agents or local chapters, was approved by the House on 16 December 2015 and received by the Senate on 6 January 2016, but did not pass into law in the 16th Congress and may possibly be pursued in the next Congress as refiled House Bill No. 1355; and (ii) House Bill No. 2540, which also addresses the issue, has remained pending with the Committee on Labor and Employment since 2 September 2013. Welcoming the above initiative to reduce the registration requirement for federations or national unions from ten to five duly recognized bargaining agents or local chapters, the Committee expects that the proposed legislative amendments will lower the excessively high requirement for registration and will be adopted in the very near future. It requests the Government to provide information on any progress achieved in this regard.

Direct contacts mission. The Committee notes that the Government accepted the direct contacts mission requested by the Conference Committee in order to follow up on its conclusions. The Committee understands that the mission will take place in the near future and trusts that it will be able to assist the Government and the social partners in finding appropriate solutions to the outstanding matters raised by the ILO supervisory bodies concerning the application of the Convention in law and in practice.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

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

Article 2 of the Convention. Registration requirements for trade unions in the public sector. The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the observations of the Center for United and Progressive Labor (SENTRO) that the requirements for registration in the public sector are overly stringent, indicating that the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of Executive Order No. 180, the governing legislation on labour relations in the public sector, are being reviewed by the technical working group of the tripartite Public Sector Labour-Management Council (PSLMC), which streamlines the requirements for the establishment of public sector unions to promote self-organization in the sector. The Government also emphasizes that the unionization rate in the public sector peaked in 2014. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments with regard to the review of registration requirements for trade unions in the public sector and to provide a copy of any new regulations adopted.

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes without interference by the public authorities. The Committee observes that in accordance with section 226 of the Labour Code, the Bureau of Labour Relations and the Labour Divisions in the Department of Labour and Employment (DOLE) regional offices, have the original and exclusive authority to act, either at their own initiative or upon request of either or both parties, on all inter-union and intra-union conflicts, and all disputes, grievances or problems arising from or affecting labour-management relations in all workplaces, except those arising from the implementation or interpretation of collective bargaining agreements. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the application of section 226 of the Labour Code in practice, including examples of disputes referred to the Bureau of Labour Relations, and any circumstances in which recourse to this mechanism may result in compulsory arbitration.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 105th Session and to reply in detail to the present comments in 2016.]

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

The Committee takes note of the observations received from the following workers’ organizations: (i) the Trade Union Confederation Congress of the Philippines (TUCP) (25 June 2013) referring to matters before the Committee on Freedom of Association (Case No. 3037); (ii) the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) (1 September 2015); (iii) Education International (EI) and the National Alliance of Teachers and Office Workers (SMP-NATOW) (28 September 2015); and (iv) the Center of United and Progressive Workers (SENTRO) (1 October 2015). The Committee notes the comments received from the Government in reply to the observations received from the ITUC, EI and the SMP-NATOW, and the SENTRO. The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2015, which are of a general nature.

Civil liberties and trade union rights

Monitoring mechanisms. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the information provided by the Government on the establishment of several monitoring entities. The Committee notes that the Government provides additional information on these mechanisms: (i) regarding the National Monitoring Mechanism (NMM), its mandate is to monitor the nation’s progress on the resolution of human rights violations, prioritizing, in the short term, cases of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and torture, and to provide legal and other services; (ii) the participation of the Department of Labour and Employment (DOLE) in the NMM consists in referring cases to it, disseminating information, capacity building, allocating the budget and recommending rehabilitation plans for the victims and their relatives, including union leaders and members; (iii) the Department of Justice (DOJ) Special Task Force secured several convictions, including for the killings of a Bayan Muna Secretary General, a Young Officers Union Spokesperson and two media professionals; (iv) the Inter-Agency Committee on Extra-Legal Killings, Enforced Disappearances, Torture and Other Grave Violations of the Right to Life, Liberty and Security of Persons (IAC) was created in November 2012 by Administrative Order No. 35 (AO 35) and is charged with the mandate to investigate cases of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture and other grave human rights violations perpetrated by state and non-state forces, to prioritize unsolved cases, and to create special investigation teams; (v) the IAC operational guidelines define extrajudicial killings so as to include cases where the victim was a member of or was affiliated with a labour organization, or was apparently mistaken or identified to be so and the victim was targeted and killed because of the actual or perceived membership; and (vi) in order to ensure expeditious investigation, prosecution and resolution of cases involving labour leaders and union members, the social partners were offered to actively participate in the investigations while members of the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council – Monitoring Body (NTIPC–MB) were given observer status in the IAC. The Committee welcomes these developments and requests the Government to provide further information on the functioning of the NMM, the DOJ Special Task Force and the IAC in practice, including on the participation of social partners in IAC investigations as well as on the number and types of cases addressed by these mechanisms.

Allegations of violations of trade union rights. The Committee had previously noted the Government’s reply to the ITUC’s 2011 observations referring to certain violations of trade union rights in 2010, including the alleged killing of three trade union leaders, arrests and false criminal charges filed against trade union leaders and physical assaults of striking workers. The Committee notes that the Government has provided information about the developments in these cases: (i) in relation to the killing of Eduard Panganiban, elected Secretary of the United Strength of Workers in Takata, the main update provided is that the victim’s mother decided not to pursue the case; (ii) the case regarding the killing of Benjamin Bayles, organizer of the National Federation of Sugar Workers, is still at trial and is monitored by the IAC; (iii) regarding the killing of Carlo “Caloy” Rodriguez, President of the Calamba Water District Union, the main update provided is that assistance by the victim’s wife could not be obtained; and (iv) out of the seven remaining cases of alleged violations of trade union rights, in two cases the parties had reached a settlement, one was declared not to be linked to trade union rights, and the others are in the process of amicable settlement or pending resolution. The Committee had also previously requested the Government to provide its comments on the grave allegations made by the ITUC in 2012: (i) killings of four trade union leaders (Celito Baccay, board member of the Maeno-Giken Workers’ Organization; Noriel Salazar, President of the Union of COCOCHEM; Santos V. Manrique, President of the Boringot Small-scale Miners’ Cooperative and Chairperson of the Federation of Miners Aggrupation; and Elpidio Malinao, Vice-President of the University of the Philippines (UP) Los Banos Chapter of the Organization of Non-Academic Personnel of UP); (ii) abduction and arbitrary detention of Elizar Nabas, member of the National Federation of Sugar Workers; and (iii) continuing harassment of Remigio Saladero Jr, chief legal counsel of the Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU). The Committee notes that the Government provides the following updates: (i) the cases of Celito Baccay, Noriel Salazar and Elpidio Malinao are still ongoing; (ii) the case of Santos V. Manrique was dismissed as not related to his trade union activities and the case of Alizar Nabas was dismissed due to insufficient evidence; and (iii) the charges against Remigio Saladero Jr and 71 other activists were dismissed due to insufficient evidence and lack of probable cause. Recalling the importance of avoiding any situation of impunity, the Committee firmly hopes that the investigations of all these serious allegations will be finalized in the near future with a view to establishing the facts, determining responsibilities and punishing the perpetrators, and requests the Government to provide detailed information on any developments in this regard.

The Committee notes with deep concern the ITUC’s 2015 observations alleging numerous violations of trade union rights, in particular: (i) the killing of Florencio “Bong” Romano, trade union leader from the KMU; (ii) harassment of Ed Cubelo, leader of the Toyota Motor Philippines Corporate Workers Association as well as the interrogation and harassment of KMU labour leaders in southern Midano; (iii) a shooting on employees of the banana company Sumifru by the company’s owner during a picket; (iv) the enforced disappearance of Benajmin Villeno, Southern Tagalog labour leader, as well as arbitrary detention of Randy Vegas and Raul Camposano, organizers of the public sector union centre Confederation for the Unity, Recognition and Advancement of Government Employees (COURAGE); and (v) a dramatic rise in false criminal charges brought against trade unionists, such as Artemio Robilla and Danilo Delegencia, leaders of the Margusan DOLE Stanfilco Workers’ Union–NAFLU–KMU.

The Committee notes the Government’s reply that: (i) the case of Florencio Romano was referred to the Regional Tripartite Monitoring Body (RTMB), the Philippine National Police Task Force Usig, as well as the IAC; (ii) the specific allegations of harassment of KMU members were brought to the attention of RTMB, the AFP Human Rights Office and the IAC, and concerning other allegations of harassment by the police and the armed forces, the RTMB has been mobilized in gathering relevant information and the cases were brought to the attention of the IAC; (iii) in relation to the shooting on Sumifru employees, the company’s leader Jesus Jamero was subjected to a complaint before the local authorities but the dispute was later settled by agreement between the parties; (iv) the allegations of enforced disappearance of Benajmin Villeno and arbitrary detention of Randy Vegas and Raul Camposano will be referred to the RTMB; and (v) the criminal charges brought against Artemio Robilla and Danilo Delegencia are under a new investigation. The Government also indicates that it conducted awareness-raising campaigns on observance of freedom of assembly, conducted capacity building for monitoring focal persons, and took measures to strengthen the existing monitoring structures. The Government further notes that to provide safeguards against false criminal charges against trade union members and to avoid detention of workers on the basis of their union activities, the DOLE and the Department of Justice issued Joint Clarificatory Memorandum Circular No. 1-15 to clarify the provisions of the DOLE–DILG–PNP–DND–AFP Joint Guidelines on the Conduct of the AFP/PNP Relative to the Exercise of Workers’ Right to Freedom of Association, Collective Bargaining, Concerted Actions and Other Trade Union Activities (AFP Guidelines). The Circular makes clear that before filing information in court on cases arising out of or related to labour disputes, prosecutors must secure clearance from the DOLE or the Office of the President, and that this requirement for clearance applies to cases arising out of the exercise of workers’ freedom of association, collective bargaining and other trade union activities.

The Committee further notes with deep concern the SENTRO’s observations concerning serious violations of trade union rights, in particular: (i) killings of Antonio Petalcorin, President of the Davao-based Network of Transport Organization; Rolando Pango, a farmworker leader; and Victorio Embang, president of the Maria Cecilia Farm Workers Association; (ii) assassination attempt on Anterio Embang, leader of the Maria Cecilia Farm Workers Association; (iii) violent suppression of strikes and other collective actions by the police and the armed forces; (iv) harassment of unionists and prevention from joining trade unions in export processing zones (EPZs) as well as breach of the Memorandum of Agreement between the DOLE and the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA); and (v) bankruptcy falsification to deny workers trade union rights. The Committee notes the Government’s reply indicating that: the case of Antonio Petalcorin was referred to the RTMB, the Philippine National Police (PNP) and the IAC but was declared not to be an incident of extrajudicial killing by reason of trade union activities or other advocacy under AO 35 while the case of Rolando Pango is considered as a case of extrajudicial killings and a special team will be created to investigate, file and prosecute the case. The Government further indicates that the DOLE conducts capacity-building activities and advocacies to ensure the implementation of the AFP Guidelines which aim to prevent the police and the armed forces from unduly suppressing strikes, demonstrations and other collective actions. The Committee hopes that all alleged cases of violations of trade union rights reported by the ITUC and the SENTRO will be the subject of appropriate investigations which will be vigorously pursued. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Human Security Act. In its previous comments, the Committee trusted that the Government would take all necessary steps to ensure that the Human Security Act would not be misused to suppress legitimate trade union activities. In this regard, the Committee notes that, in its observations, the SENTRO expressed concern about the possible negative implications of the Human Security Act on the exercise of trade union rights. The Committee notes that the Government repeats that this Act cannot be used against the exercise of trade union rights, especially legitimate trade union activities, and that the AFP Guidelines from 2012 provide that the armed forces and the police may only intervene in trade union activities if expressly requested to do so by the DOLE, if a criminal act has been, is or is about to be committed, or in case of actual violence arising out of a labour dispute. The Government further indicates that it has started, in cooperation with the ILO Manila, a Technical Cooperation Programme (TCP) on training and capacity building of all relevant stakeholders on international labour standards, including freedom of association and collective bargaining. The Committee takes note of this information.

Legislative issues

Labour Code. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that there were three bills seeking to amend the Labour Code and that the NTIPC constituted a Tripartite Labour Code Review Team as an external partner in the drafting process. The Committee recalls the need to bring the national legislation into conformity with the following Articles of the Convention.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing, without previous authorization. Aliens. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend sections 269 and 272(b) of the Labour Code so as to grant the right to organize to all workers lawfully residing within the Philippines (and not just those with valid permits if the same rights are guaranteed to Filipino workers in the country of the alien workers, or if the country in question has ratified this Convention and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98)). The Committee notes the Government’s statement that House Bill No. 894, which aimed to extend the right to self-organization to aliens in the Philippines failed to pass in the Congress, has been re-filed as House Bill No. 2543 and is now again pending before the Congress. The Committee also observes that in June 2015, House Bill No. 2543 was substituted by House Bill No. 5886 but that this Bill, while recognizing a degree of participation in trade union activities to all aliens, it only recognizes the right to self-organization and the right to join and assist labour organizations, to aliens with a valid working permit. Recalling that the right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing implies that anyone residing in the territory of a State, whether or not they have a residence or a working permit, benefits from the trade union rights provided by the Convention, the Committee firmly hopes that any relevant legislation will accurately reflect the Convention in this regard and will be adopted in the near future. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this respect.

Other categories of workers excluded from the rights of the Convention. The Committee notes the observations of the SENTRO: (i) concerning the lack of trade union rights of certain public servants (firefighters, prison guards, persons outside the armed forces and the police who by the nature of their function are authorized to carry firearms and public sector employees in policy-making positions or with access to confidential information); and (ii) that section 245 of the Labour Code excludes managerial employees from forming or joining any labour organizations. The Committee also notes the observations of the SENTRO, EI and the SMP-NATOW alleging widespread denial by employers of employees’ employment status, misclassification of employees, and the use of contract and temporary workers, who do not have employment status, which hinders them from joining trade unions, particularly in the public sector, electrical cooperatives, banks, and broadcasting services. The Government replies that: (i) a working group was created to address the issue of proliferation of contract and temporary workers in the public sector; and (ii) the DOLE developed and implemented administrative measures and proposed legislation that seek to address these issues, including a resolution urging the executive branch to cease from engaging temporary and contract personnel. In this respect, the Committee observes various initiatives to amend the provisions of the Labour Code and the proposed Civil Service Reform Code (House Bill No. 2400 and Senate Bill No. 1174) which are pending before the Congress. The Committee recalls that: (i) the right to organize should be guaranteed to all workers without distinction or discrimination of any kind, with the sole possible exception of the armed forces and the police; and (ii) it is not necessarily incompatible with the Convention to deny managerial and executive staff the right to join trade unions which represent other workers in the sector, provided they have the right to establish their own organizations to defend their interests. Accordingly, the Committee hopes that the proposed legislative amendments and any other relevant legislative measures will, in accordance with the abovementioned principles, ensure that all workers (including those in managerial positions or with access to confidential information, firefighters, prison guards and other public sector workers, temporary and outsourced workers, as well as workers without employment contract) fully benefit from the right to establish and join organizations to defend their occupational interests. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Registration requirements. The Committee had previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 234(c) of the Labour Code so as to lower the excessive minimum membership requirement for forming an independent union (20 per cent of all the employees in the bargaining unit where the union seeks to operate) and expressed hope that House Bill No. 5927, seeking to remove the 20 per cent minimum membership requirement, would be adopted. The Committee notes that the Government reports that House Bill No. 5927 failed to pass in the Congress, that the removal of the 20 per cent requirement was reconsidered and lowered to 10 per cent in order to prevent proliferation of short-term unions and intra-union disputes, and that the new amendment is supported by the NTIPC. The Government also indicates that House Bill No. 2540, which also seeks to lower the minimum membership requirements for establishing trade unions, is pending before the Congress. The Committee observes that the 10 per cent requirement may still obstruct the right of workers to establish trade unions, in particular in large bargaining units, and recalls that while a minimum membership requirement is not in itself incompatible with the Convention, the number should be fixed in a reasonable manner so that the establishment of organizations is not hindered, and that what constitutes a reasonable number may vary according to the particular conditions in which a restriction is imposed. Accordingly, the Committee firmly hopes that the above legislative measures will lower the minimum membership requirements to a reasonable number in light of the abovementioned principle and in consultation with the social partners, and requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this respect.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes without interference by the public authorities. The Committee had previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 263(g) of the Labour Code and Department Order No. 40-G-03 so as to restrict governmental intervention leading to compulsory arbitration to essential services in the strict sense. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that House Bill No. 5933, which sought to install the necessary amendments, failed to pass in the Congress but that: (i) the Bill was re-filed as House Bill No. 5471; and (ii) the Secretary of Labour and Employment issued DOLE Department Order No. 40 H 13, which harmonizes the list of industries indispensable to the national interest, in which governmental intervention is possible, with the essential services criteria of the Convention. These industries include the hospital sector, electric power industry, water supply and air traffic control, and other industries may be included upon recommendation of the tripartite NTIPC. The Committee welcomes the Government’s initiative to limit governmental intervention leading to compulsory arbitration to industries which can be defined as essential services in the strict sense of the term. The Committee firmly hopes that the re-filed Bill will be adopted in the near future, and requests the Government to provide information on any relevant developments in this regard.

In its previous comments, the Committee expressed the firm hope that sections 264 and 272 of the Labour Code would be amended, taking into account the principle according to which no penal sanctions should be imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that House Bill No. 5933 failed to pass in the Congress but is now pending before the Congress as House Bill No. 5471, and aims to remove penal sanctions for the exercise of the right to strike. The Committee understands, however, that once a final judgment declares the illegality of a strike, the Bill allows for criminal prosecution under section 264, which prohibits labour organizations to declare a strike without having complied with the bargaining and notice requirements provided for in the Labour Code. In this regard, the Bill does not appear to give full effect to the principle according to which measures of imprisonment or fines should not be imposed on any account, unless, during a strike, violence against persons or property, or other serious infringements of penal law have been committed, and these sanctions can be imposed exclusively pursuant to legislation punishing such acts. The Committee trusts that sections 264 and 272 of the Labour Code will be amended in the near future, giving full effect to the abovementioned principles, and requests the Government to provide information on any relevant developments in this regard.

The Committee had previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 270 of the Labour Code, which subjected the receipt of foreign assistance to trade unions to prior permission of the Secretary of Labour. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, on the one hand, the amended House Bill No. 5927, which is pending before the Congress, repeals section 270 of the Labour Code, and on the other hand, House Bill No. 2543 (previously House Bill No. 894), seeks to remove the requirement of Government permission for foreign assistance to trade unions. The Committee observes that in June 2015, House Bill No. 2543 was substituted by House Bill No. 5886. The Committee firmly hopes that the Bills removing the need for Government permission for foreign assistance to trade unions will be adopted in the near future, and requests the Government to provide information on any relevant developments in this regard.

Article 5. Right of organizations to establish federations and confederations. The Committee previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures in order to lower the excessively high requirement of ten union members for the registration of federations or national unions set out in section 237(1) of the Labour Code. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that House Bill No. 5927, which sought to address the issue, failed to pass in the Congress but the NTIPC endorsed an amended legislative proposal, which is pending before the Congress and which reduces the registration requirement for federations from ten to five duly recognized bargaining agents or local chapters. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that House Bill No. 2540 also addresses this issue. The Committee firmly hopes that legislative provisions will be adopted in the near future to lower the excessively high requirement of ten affiliated unions for the registration of federations or national unions, and requests the Government to provide information on any relevant developments in this regard.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 105th Session and to reply in detail to the present comments in 2016.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2009 and 2010. In particular, it notes with interest from the Government’s report the following measures taken by the Government to strengthen the operational capacity of the Philippines National Police (PNP) and Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), with the objective of fostering an enabling environment for the enjoyment of constitutionally guaranteed civil liberties and trade union rights:

• (i) the issuance on 23 May 2011 of the Joint DOLE-PNP-PEZA Guidelines in the Conduct of PNP Personnel, Economic Zone Police and Security Guards, Company Security Guards and Similar Personnel during Labor Disputes (PNP Guidelines);
• (ii) the conduct jointly by the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), PNP and the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA) of four area-wide orientation seminars for the Regional Coordinating Council and Regional Tripartite Industrial Peace Council (RTIPC) members, to foster common understanding among stakeholders on the PNP Guidelines and the respective functions and jurisdictions of the agencies and to ensure close coordination among DOLE, PNP and PEZA in resolving labour disputes;
• (iii) conduct from February to July 2012 of a total of 17 orientation seminars on the PNP Guidelines (including 13 for human resources personnel and security agencies under PEZA from various economic zones);
• (iv) issuance on 27 February 2012 of a DOLE Internal Operational Guidelines outlining the DOs and DON’Ts in the implementation of the PNP Guidelines to all the Regional Offices of the DOLE;
• (v) adoption by the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council (NTIPC) on 17 April 2012 of the DOLE-DILG-PNP-DND-AFP Joint Guidelines on the Conduct of the AFP/PNP Relative to the Exercise of Workers’ Right to Freedom of Association, Collective Bargaining, Concerted Actions and Other Trade Union Activities (AFP Guidelines), as an offshoot of the Manifesto of Commitment signed by the participants to the DOLE–Labor Sector–AFP Summit on the Protection and Promotion of Workers’ Rights held on 21 July 2011, and after the input of three area-wide DOLE–Labor Sector–AFP–PNP summits and regional consultations conducted by the different RTIPCs from January to mid-March of 2012 as well as expanded sittings of the Tripartite Executive Committee of the NTIPC in late March 2012; the AFP Guidelines were signed and issued with ILO technical assistance on 7 May 2012 and are applicable to the involvement or mobilization of the members of the AFP, including Citizen Armed Force Geographical Units (CAFGUs), the PNP, the Local Chief Executive, and the Barangay Tanod in all cases of exercise of workers’ rights to freedom of association, collective bargaining, concerted actions and other trade union activities; they set out the rights of workers relative to the exercise of freedom of association; prohibit the deployment of all military personnel to address labour-related mass actions and disputes, except if support to the PNP is needed due to a security situation and at the written request of the DOLE; prohibit the intervention of local chief executives in any labour disputes, except when requested in writing by the DOLE; set out the protocol for the set-up of PNP or AFP detachments if near or proximate to a workplace where there is a potential or actual labour dispute or an ongoing trade union organizing or campaigning for certification as sole and exclusive bargaining agent; prohibit the conduct by the PNP and the AFP of anti-insurgency campaigns vis-à-vis the exercise of trade union rights and civil liberties; and set out remedies in case of violations;
• (vi) the steps planned to ensure the implementation and compliance with the AFP Guidelines, such as: letter–directive of the AFP Chief of Staff to the ground troops; simplified Q&A materials to be issued by the DOLE by July–September 2012 for nationwide dissemination; initial round of nationwide advocacy on the subject by the DOLE, AFP, PNP, Department of the Interior and Local Government, Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of National Defense and the labour sector to be conducted from July to December 2012; inclusion of the labour rights module developed by the ILO into the training programme on human rights of the AFP and the PNP; requirement of PNP/AFP ILO enhanced training module for application or renewal of licence for private security personnel and security guards; and engagement of NTIPC members in the Bantay Bayanihan, a civil society-led oversight initiative on the implementation of the Internal Peace and Security Plan aiming at the reform of security sector institutions and thus extension of its oversight function to include monitoring of respect of labour rights; and
• (vii) the national plan of action 2012–13 towards full freedom of association and collective bargaining rights in the export processing sector concluded by the Government (including DOLE and PEZA) and representatives of national federations of workers’ organizations, which seeks to take steps to achieve improved compliance with the relevant ILO Conventions.

The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government concerning: (1) the NTIPC activity since its establishment and the issuance of NTIPC Resolution No. 3, Series of 2011, recognizing the need to create for the TIPC Monitoring Body a corresponding structure in the RTIPCs and providing that the RTIPCs shall create regional monitoring bodies which shall operate in accordance with the Operational Guidelines of the NTIPC Monitoring Body and ensure observance of international labour standards in the regions, monitor and evaluate complaints and prepare case profiles; (2) the forthcoming establishment of the National Monitoring Mechanism (NMM) led by the Commission on Human Rights, to bring together relevant state agencies and civil society organizations in a credible and inclusive forum for monitoring the nation’s progress in resolving extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances; (3) the forthcoming establishment of the Presidential Committee for the Prevention and Investigation of Extralegal Killings, Harassments, Intimidation, Torture and Enforced Disappearances, a “super body” intended to replace Task Force 211 and serve as the major government component in the NMM; and (4) the creation of the Special Task Force of the DOJ, which has already started its work, with the mandate to review all unresolved cases of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the operation of this monitoring mechanism.

The Committee further notes the Government’s reply to the ITUC’s 2011 comments referring to certain violations of trade union rights in 2010, including the alleged killing of three trade union leaders (Eduard Panganiban, elected Secretary of the United Strength of Workers in Takata; Benjamin Bayles, organizer of the National Federation of Sugar Workers; and Carlo “Caloy” Rodriguez, President of the Calamba Water District Union), as well as arrests and false criminal charges filed against trade union leaders and physical assaults of striking workers. In particular, the Committee notes the Government’s observations that, according to the NTIPC Monitoring Body, the three cases of alleged extrajudicial killings are being monitored by the Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies and the other seven cases of alleged violation of trade union rights were all classified as possibly labour-related and taken cognizance of by the NTIPC Monitoring Body. The Committee hopes that the investigations of these serious allegations will be finalized in the near future with a view to establishing the facts, determining responsibilities and punishing the perpetrators, and requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

The Committee notes a communication from the ITUC dated 31 July 2012, in which it provides its comments on the application of the Convention in law and in practice. The Committee also notes that the ITUC refers to legislative issues already raised by the Committee, and alleges continuing violations of trade union rights in 2011, including alleged killings of four trade union leaders (Celito Baccay, board member of the Maeno-Giken Workers’ Organization; Noriel Salazar, President of the Union of COCOCHEM; Santos V. Manrique, President of the Boringot Small-scale Miners’ Cooperative and Chairperson of the Federation of Miners Aggrupation; and Elpidio Malinao, Vice-President of the University of the Philippines (UP) Los Banos Chapter of the Organization of Non-Academic Personnel of UP); abduction and arbitrary detention of Elizar Nabas, member of the National Federation of Sugar Workers; and continuing harassment of Remigio Saladero Jr., chief legal counsel of the Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU). The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on these serious allegations.

Civil liberties and trade union rights

Human Security Act. The Committee had previously requested the Government to provide information concerning the impact of the Human Security Act on the application of the provisions of the Convention and to indicate the safeguards which ensure that this Act cannot be used under any circumstances as a basis for suppressing legitimate trade union activities or result in any extrajudicial killing for the exercise of trade union rights. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates that the exercise of trade union rights (right to self-organization, peaceful concerted activities, collective bargaining, etc.) is not within its scope, and that legitimate trade union activities could not be included in the rigid definition of crimes provided for in the Act. Moreover, based on the inventory of cases of the NTIPC Monitoring Body, there appears to be no case involving trade union leaders or members where such abuse has been raised with respect to its implementation. The Committee also notes the concern expressed by the ITUC that the broad language of the Act leaves it open to abuse against trade unionists by local police and judicial authorities. The Committee trusts that the Government will take all necessary steps to ensure that this Act will not be misused to suppress legitimate trade union activities.

Legislative issues

Labor Code. The Committee recalls that for a number of years it has been commenting on certain discrepancies between the provisions of the Labor Code and the Convention. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that there are currently three bills being prioritized, which seek to amend the Labor Code, and that the NTIPC agreed to constitute the Tripartite Labor Code Review Team (two sector-nominated experts each), which was formed on 12 September 2011 as the external partner in the drafting process. The Committee recalls that its previous comments referred to the need to bring the national legislation into conformity with the following Articles of the Convention.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing, without previous authorization. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend sections 269 and 272(b) of the Labor Code so as to grant the right to organize to all workers lawfully residing within the Philippines (and not just those with valid permits if the same rights are guaranteed to Filipino workers in the country of the alien workers, or if the country in question has ratified either ILO Convention No. 87 or Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98). The Committee notes with interest that, while again invoking the principle of reciprocity, the Government refers to House Bill No. 894, which is currently pending with the Committee on Labor and Employment of the House of Congress and is entitled: An Act Allowing Aliens to Exercise Their Right to Self-Organization and Withdrawing Regulation of Foreign Assistance to Trade Unions, Amending for the Purpose Presidential Decree No. 442, as Amended, Otherwise Known as the Labor Code of the Philippines. The said Bill aims, inter alia, to extend the right to self-organization to aliens in the Philippines. The Government states that this issue is also a subject for consultation relative to the proposed amendments to Department Order No. 40-03. The Committee hopes that the above Bill and any other provisions enabling all workers legally residing in the country to enjoy the trade union rights provided by the Convention will be adopted in the near future. It requests the Government to provide information in its next report on any progress made in this respect.

The Committee recalls that it had previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 234(c) of the Labor Code so as to lower the excessive minimum membership requirement for forming an independent union. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that one of the labour bills that is presently being prioritized is an NTIPC-endorsed legislative proposal, entitled: Union Registration Bill or An Act Further Strengthening Workers’ Right to Self-Organization (House Bill No. 5927), which seeks to amend, inter alia, section 234 of the Labor Code, by removing the 20 per cent minimum membership requirement for registration of independent labour organizations, consistent with the Convention. The Bill is now pending with the Committee on Rules of the House of Congress and was reported out for a second reading, whereas its counterpart Bill (Senate Bill No. 2838) is now pending with the Senate Committee on Labor. The Committee hopes that the above Bill removing the 20 per cent minimum membership requirement for establishing an independent workers’ organization will be adopted in the near future. It requests the Government to provide information in its next report on any developments in this regard.

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes without interference by the public authorities. The Committee had previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 263(g) of the Labor Code and Department Order No. 40-G-03 so as to limit governmental intervention resulting in compulsory arbitration to essential services in the strict sense of the term. The Committee notes that the Government states in its report that: (1) under Department Order No. 40-G-03, the Secretary of Labor initiates, at the first instance, motu proprio or upon request by either party to the labour dispute, an intensive conciliation–mediation before the Conciliation and Mediation Office under the Office of the Secretary (created to operationalize the conciliation–mediation at the level of the Secretary of Labor in case the conciliation–mediation before the National Conciliation and Mediation Board failed); (2) the limited recourse to section 263(g) (statistics provided by the Government) is a result of the extensive use of alternative dispute resolution through conciliation–mediation before and after the filing of petition for assumption of jurisdiction by either or both parties, thus indicating the strong political will of the Secretary of Labor not to use the power arbitrarily; (3) in an effort to align the country’s labour laws to the provisions of the Convention, the Assumption of Jurisdiction Bill (An Act Strengthening Workers’ Rights to Peaceful Concerted Activities) seeks to amend, inter alia, section 263 of the Labor Code, so as to limit the automatic issuance of assumption of jurisdiction order by using the “essential services” criterion as a guidepost, whereby the list of industries to be classified as “essential services” shall be determined through tripartite consultation; and (4) the said legislative measure (House Bill No. 5933) is now pending with the House of Congress Committee on Labor and Employment. Its counterpart Bill in the Senate is Senate Bill No. 3210 which is pending for a second reading. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the adopted Bill will be in full conformity with freedom of association principles related to this matter, and requests the Government to indicate any progress made in this respect.

The Committee had previously requested the Government to amend sections 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labor Code, which provided for penal liability to a maximum prison sentence of three years for participation in illegal strikes, so as to ensure that workers may effectively exercise their right to strike without the risk of being penally sanctioned. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, in an effort to align the country’s labour laws to the provisions of the Convention, the Assumption of Jurisdiction Bill (An Act Strengthening Workers’ Rights to Peaceful Concerted Activities), seeks to amend sections 264 and 272 of the Labor Code by providing that no criminal prosecution under section 264 may be instituted without a final judgment that an illegal strike or lockout has been committed. The Bill (House Bill No. 5933) is now pending with the House Committee on Labor and Employment. The Committee recalls that no penal sanctions should be imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike, and therefore that measures of imprisonment or fines should not be imposed on any account. Such sanctions could be envisaged only where, during a strike, violence against persons or property, or other serious infringements of penal law have been committed, and can be imposed exclusively pursuant to legislation punishing such acts. The Committee expresses the firm hope that sections 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labor Code will be amended in the near future taking into account the mentioned principles.

Right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration. The Committee had previously requested the Government to amend section 270 of the Labor Code, which subjected the receipt of foreign assistance to trade unions to the prior permission of the Secretary of Labor, and noted the Government’s indication that a Bill was currently in preparation that repealed that requirement. The Committee notes that the Government again refers to a Bill (House Bill No. 894), which is currently pending with the House Committee on Labor and Employment and is entitled: An Act Allowing Aliens to Exercise Their Right to Self-Organization and Withdrawing Regulation of Foreign Assistance to Trade Unions, Amending for the Purpose Presidential Decree No. 442, as Amended, Otherwise Known as the Labor Code of the Philippines. The said Bill aims, inter alia, to withdraw both the prohibition of foreign trade union organizations to engage in trade union activities and the regulation of foreign assistance to Philippine trade unions. The Committee hopes that the Bill removing the need for Government permission for foreign assistance to trade unions will be adopted in the near future. It requests the Government to provide information in its next report on any progress made in this regard.

Article 5. Right of organizations to establish federations and confederations. The Committee previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures in order to lower the excessively high requirement of ten union members for the registration of federations or national unions set out in section 237(a) of the Labor Code. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that the NTIPC-endorsed legislative proposal entitled: Union Registration Bill or An Act Further Strengthening Workers’ Right to Self-Organization, also seeks to amend section 237 of the Labor Code, by reducing the required ten local unions to five for the registration of federations, consistent with the Convention, and that House Bill No. 5927 is now pending with the House Committee on Rules and was reported out for a second reading. The Committee hopes that the above Bill lowering the excessively high requirement for registration of federations or national unions set out in section 237(a) of the Labor Code will be adopted in the near future. It requests the Government to provide information in its next report on any developments in this respect.

Lastly, the Committee previously hoped that the undertaken legislative reform will soon be completed and that the aforementioned legislative provisions will be brought into full conformity with the Convention. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that the prioritization of relevant labour reform bills is being worked on, and that, pursuant to the Presidential Directive to align the country’s labour policies with international treaties and ILO Conventions in a sound and realistic manner, an orientation on international labour standards and current legislative reforms towards Philippine compliance was conducted on 17 July 2012 for members of the DOLE Technical Committee on Legislative Matters and technical assistants of legislators. The Committee once again expresses the firm hope that the undertaken legislative reform will bring the aforementioned legislative provisions into full conformity with the Convention. It requests the Government to provide in its next report information on the outcome of this reform and copies of the relevant legislative texts once adopted.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes that, according to section 242-A (d) of the Labour Code, as amended by Act No. 9481 of 2007, legitimate trade union organizations are required to submit their lists of members at least once a year or whenever required by the Bureau. The Committee considers that such a requirement, if used beyond a simple formality for determining representativity, constitutes interference in trade union internal affairs. It encourages the Government to take the necessary measures to repeal this provision and to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

The Committee further notes section 245-A of the Labour Code, as amended in 2007, on effect of inclusion as member of employees outside the bargaining unit and requests the Government to provide information on the application of this provision in practice.

The Committee once again requests the Government to clarify the current status of the Sample Contract for Various Skills as well as any measures taken or envisaged to delete trade union activities from the list of grounds for termination. It further requests the Government to indicate the concrete circumstances under which this Sample Contract is used and provide an estimate of the numbers of workers governed by it.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee recalls that in its previous observation it noted the recommendations of the high-level mission which visited the country in September 2009, and the commitment expressed by the Government to embark upon a comprehensive technical cooperation programme on freedom of association and to create a high-level tripartite monitoring body to review the progress made in investigating and prosecuting the cases of violence brought to the attention of the ILO’s supervisory machinery. The Committee had requested the Government to provide information on the progress made in establishing such a body, on its mandate and functioning. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council (NTIPC) was established on 20 January 2010 as a high-level monitoring body on the application of international labour standards and, in particular, of the Convention. The NTIPC mandate is to: (i) facilitate “out-of-the-box solution” to long‑standing Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA) cases; (ii) monitor and report progress on active CFA cases; (iii) facilitate gathering of relevant information on complaints submitted to the ILO; and (iv) evaluate and recommend appropriate action(s). The Committee notes detailed information provided by the Government on NTIPC activity since its establishment.

The Committee welcomes the measures taken by the Government to strengthen the operational capacity of the Philippines National Police (PNP) and Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) aimed at fostering an enabling environment for the enjoyment of constitutionally guaranteed civil liberties and trade union rights through: (i) inclusion into the PNP Operational Procedures (POP) Manual and the Manual on Rules on Labour Disputes, Rallies and Demonstration of Human Rights Protection to be Provided to Victims and Criminals; (ii) supplementing the POP Manual with a Guidebook on Human Rights-Based Policing to provide police personnel with a basic reference on rights-based policing and to offer practical suggestions on how to mainstream international standards on human rights for law enforcement in police stations; (iii) reinforcement of Human Rights Desks in the police stations; and (iv) the campaign to dismantle all private armies. The Committee further welcomes the Government’s indication that the Revised Joint Guidelines on the conduct of the PNP personnel and private security guards during strikes and lockouts will be signed before the end of 2010 after the final consultation. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the adoption of the Joint Guidelines in its next report.

The Committee also welcomes the activities conducted under the
EU–Philippines Justice Support Program (EPJUST) (police and other investigative bodies, prosecutors and judiciary) aimed, among others, at: (i) enhancing the capacity and effectiveness of the Philippine justice system in the effective and timely investigations, prosecution and bringing to justice perpetrators, ensuring a fair, speedy and impartial trial of those charged with the crimes; (ii) enhancing the capacity and effectiveness of the Commission of Human Rights; and (iii) strengthening the ability of the uniformed services by training their personnel in relevant international human rights standards.

The Committee further welcomes the Government’s commitment to continue working closely with the ILO, social partners and other stakeholders in establishing a technical cooperation programme to raise awareness and strengthen the capacity of all relevant government institutions and the social partners in the promotion and protection of labour rights. In this respect, the Committee notes with interest that two regional seminars were conducted in April 2010 on civil rights, freedom of association, collective bargaining, and labour law implementation and enforcement in the Philippine Economic Zones; and that a capacity-building seminar for labour justice administrators, Supreme Court justices and their legal staff will be conducted before the end of 2010.

The Committee also notes with interest that, following the high-level mission, Republic Act No. 9745 (Anti-Torture Act of 2009) was approved on 10 November 2009. The Government indicates that this reaffirms its commitment to uphold civil liberties, and human and trade rights by penalizing torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment and reinforces the earlier issuances of the Supreme Court on the Writ of Habeas Data and Writ of Amparo, noted by the Committee.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2009 in relation to violence against trade unionists and impunity in the country. The Committee notes that, in addition to the above, with regard to some concrete allegations, the Government undertakes to submit its observations on the relevant pending cases to the CFA, and to continue gathering information on other alleged cases and to provide its reply as soon as possible. The Committee trusts that the Government will submit this information with its next report.

The Committee further notes a communication dated 24 August 2010 from the ITUC in which it provides its comments on the application of the Convention in law and in practice. The Committee notes that some of the ITUC’s comments relate to the legislative issues raised by the Committee below (restriction on foreign nationals’ right to join trade unions, on the registration of trade union organizations and their activities, including the right to strike, as well as the use of the Human Security Act). The ITUC also alleges that, against a background of a high-level ILO mission to the Philippines, the killings, kidnappings, disappearances and anti-union tactics, including harassment and arrests, continued. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on these allegations.

Human Security Act. The Committee had previously requested the Government to provide information on the impact of the Human Security Act upon the application of the provisions of the Convention and to indicate the safeguards which ensure that this Act cannot be used under any circumstances as a basis for suppressing legitimate trade union activities or result in any extrajudicial killing for the exercise of trade union rights. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that this law was enacted in 2007 to address terrorist activities that endanger the population. According to the Government, while the Act classifies various crimes as terrorist acts, the exercise of trade union rights (right to self-organization, peaceful concerted activities, collective bargaining, etc.) is not within its scope and that legitimate trade union activities could not be included in the rigid definition of crimes provided for in the Act. The Government points out that the apprehension of the possible abuse of the Act by the police and judicial authorities to curtail trade union activities is more imagined than real. The Government states that, since the enactment of this legislation, there appears to be no case where such abuse had been raised with respect to its implementation. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the use of the Act, if any, in cases concerning trade unionists.

Labor Code. The Committee recalls that for a number of years it has been commenting on certain discrepancies between the provisions of the Labor Code and the Convention. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that it is currently working on the proposed legislative reforms to further strengthen trade unionism and remove obstacles to the effective exercise of labour rights and that two bills are currently undergoing tripartite consultations for submission to the NTIPC prior to their filing with the appropriate Committees of both Houses of the 15th Congress. The Committee recalls that its previous comments referred to the need to bring the national legislation into conformity with the following Articles of the Convention.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing, without previous authorization. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend sections 269 and 272(b) of the Labor Code so as to grant the right to organize to all nationals lawfully residing within the Philippines (and not just those with valid permits if the same rights are guaranteed to Filipino workers in the country of the alien workers, or if the country in question has ratified either ILO Convention No. 87 or No. 98). Noting that the Government once again refers to the principle of reciprocity, the Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the measures taken to amend the above-noted sections in a manner which enables anyone legally residing in the country to benefit from the trade union rights provided by the Convention.

The Committee recalls that it had previously requested the Government to communicate the relevant legislation which had lifted the 20 per cent requirement and the requirement to reveal the names of the officers and members, for legitimate federations and national unions. The Committee notes, in this respect, Republic Act No. 9481, which, among others, amended section 234(c) of the Labor Code. The Committee notes, however, that according to this section, as amended, the above-noted requirement is still applicable to unions seeking independent registration. The Committee recalls that the requirement of a high minimum proportion of workers before a union may be formed is contrary to the right of workers to form organizations of their own choosing (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 81). The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures in order to amend section 234(c) of the Labor Code so as to lower the minimum membership requirement for forming an independent union and to indicate, in its next report, the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

The Committee had previously requested the Government to indicate all measures taken with a view to lowering the 30 per cent minimum membership requirement for registration of public employees’ unions set forth by Executive Order No. 180 of 2004. The Committee notes with satisfaction the adoption, on 29 June 2010, by the Public Sector Labor-Management Council, of resolution No. 4 lowering the percentage of minimum membership requirement for purposes of registration and thus restoring the earlier longstanding practice, in accordance with the requests of the unions.

Article 3. Right to strike. The Committee had previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 263(g) of the Labor Code so as to limit governmental intervention resulting in compulsory arbitration to the essential services in the strict sense of the term only. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, within the context of the abovementioned legislative reform, the first of the abovementioned bills seeks to amend section 263(g) so as to limit the assumption of jurisdiction of the Secretary of Labor (and the President) to the ILO’s concept of “essential services”. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that Department Order No. 40-G-03 providing the implementing rules on the exercise of the assumption of jurisdiction power of the Secretary of Labor was adopted as an interim administrative measure on 29 March 2010. The Committee notes that, according to new section 15 of Rule XXII of the Order, “when a labor dispute causes or is likely to cause a strike in an industry indispensable to the national interest, the Secretary of Labor and Employment may assume jurisdiction over the dispute and decide it or certify the same to the National Labor Relations Commission for compulsory arbitration” either upon a request by both parties to the dispute or “after a conference called by the Office of the Secretary of Labour and Employment … moto proprio or upon a request of petition by either parties to the labor dispute”. The Committee recalls that compulsory arbitration to end a collective labour dispute and a strike is acceptable if it is at the request of both parties involved in a dispute, or if the strike in question may be restricted, even banned, that is in the case of disputes in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely those services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee considers that the term “national interest” is too broad to fall within a strict definition of what may constitute an essential service. The Committee requests the Government to amend Department Order No. 40-G-03 so as to ensure the application of this principle. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the bill referred to by the Government will ensure that governmental interference resulting in compulsory arbitration will be limited solely to the essential services in the strict sense of the term. The Committee requests the Government to indicate all measures taken in this respect and to provide relevant statistics on the recourse had to section 263(g) in the meantime.

The Committee had previously requested the Government to amend sections 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labor Code, which provided for dismissal of trade union officers and penal liability to a maximum prison sentence of three years for participation in illegal strikes, so as to ensure that workers may effectively exercise their right to strike without the risk of being penally sanctioned. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, within the context of the abovementioned legislative reform, the second bill removes the possibility of imposing a criminal sanction for mere participation in an illegal strike on grounds of non-compliance with the administrative requirements. The Committee recalls that no penal sanction should be imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike and on no account should measures of imprisonment be imposed. Such sanctions could be envisaged only where, during a strike, violence against persons or property or other serious infringements of rights has been committed, and can be imposed pursuant to legislation punishing such acts. The Committee expresses the firm hope that any new legislative text will ensure the application of this principle.

Right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration without interference by the public authorities. The Committee recalls that it had previously requested the Government to amend section 270 of the Labor Code, which subjected the receipt of foreign assistance to trade unions to the prior permission of the Secretary of Labor, and notes the Government’s indication that the second bill repeals this requirement.

Article 5. Right of organizations to establish federations and confederations. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures in order to lower the excessively high requirement of ten union members for federations or national unions set out in section 237(a) of the Labor Code.

The Committee expresses the firm hope that the undertaken legislative reform will soon be completed and that the aforementioned legislative provisions will be brought into full conformity with the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide in its next report information on the outcome of this reform and all relevant legislative texts so adopted.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee notes the discussion which took place in the 2009 Conference Committee on the Application of Standards and the Government’s indication therein that it would accept an ILO High-level mission as requested by the Conference Committee in 2007. The Committee notes with interest that the High-level mission took place from 22 to 29 September 2009 and that the Government fully cooperated with the mission and facilitated its access to all relevant parties.

The Committee observes in particular the recommendations by the High-level mission in relation to the need for capacity building, awareness raising and training in relation to freedom of association and collective bargaining throughout the country. In particular, it notes the suggestion that: the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) be trained in the respect of the basic civil liberties of trade unionists; targeted training should be undertaken to focus on freedom of association rights in the special economic zones, including for the officers of the Philippine Economic Zone Authority, employers and workers; training to be carried out of judges and lawyers on international labour standards and their use by the judiciary, with a special focus on freedom of association; and continuing training be provided to the officials of the Department of Labour and Employment, the Civil Service Commission and the Public Service Labour-Management Commission. The Committee notes with interest the commitment expressed by the Government to embark upon a comprehensive technical cooperation programme on freedom of association and the efforts made thus far to concretize the details of such a programme in collaboration with the Office. In this regard, it welcomes the communication just received from the Government in which it reports upon the National Tripartite Conference on Principles of Freedom of Association: Toward Fair Globalization and Decent Work which was held from 2 to 4 December 2009 in order to maintain the momentum created by the ILO High-level Mission.

The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), particularly in relation to violence against trade unionists and impunity in the country, and requests the Government to reply to these comments in its next report. The Committee once again recalls the importance it attaches to the Government making all efforts to ensure that workers may exercise their trade union rights in a climate free from violence, threat and fear. It notes with interest from the Government’s latest report that, in keeping with the High-level Mission’s recommendations, the Executive Secretary, speaking on behalf of the President, confirmed the Government’s commitment to create a high-level tripartite monitoring body to review the progress made in investigating and prosecuting the cases of violence brought to the attention of the ILO supervisory machinery. It further notes the Executive Secretary’s statement that, with the repeal of the anti-subversion law, those opposing the Government are no longer regarded as subversive or targeted in this regard and any such persecution will not be tolerated. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the progress made in establishing the high-level tripartite monitoring body, and on its mandate and functioning.

The Committee will examine all of the outstanding points in relation to the application of the Convention in both law and in practice next year when it will have at its disposal the detailed mission report and any comments which the Government and the workers’ and employers’ organizations may wish to make. It requests the Government to provide a detailed report in reply to its previous comments for examination next year.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. The Committee must therefore repeat its previous comments which read as follows:

The Committee had noted that Executive Order 180 of 2004 appears to have increased the minimum membership requirement for a public employees’ union to gain legal personality, from 10 per cent to 30 per cent of the total rank and file employees. The percentage requirement appears to be calculated on the basis of the entire rank and file workers of the Government all over the country.

The Committee recalls that public employees, like all other workers, have the right to establish and join trade unions of their own choosing without interference from the public authorities and that a 30 per cent requirement throughout the public sector is likely to preclude the establishment of trade unions (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraphs 81–83). The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information in this regard, including on any measures taken or contemplated with a view to lowering this requirement to a reasonable level.

Furthermore, the Committee once again requests the Government to:

–      indicate in its next report the measures taken to ensure that all workers in the Philippines, including managerial employees, prison staff and firefighters, enjoy the right to organize guaranteed under the Convention; and

–      clarify the current status of the sample contract for various skills, posted on the web site of the Department of Labor and Employment with respect to the Philippines Overseas Employment Administration, as well as any measures taken or envisaged to delete trade union activities from the list of grounds for termination. It further requests the Government to indicate the concrete circumstances under which this sample contract is used and provide an estimate of the numbers of workers governed by it.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It also notes the lengthy comments communicated by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in communications dated 29 August and 1 September 2008, the Kilosang Mayo Uno in a communication dated 15 September 2008, and the Public Services Labor Independent Confederation (PSLINK) in a communication dated 15 September 2008. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on these comments.

Civil liberties. In its previous comments, the Committee took note of information provided by the ITUC in 2006 and 2007 with regard to numerous reported violations of trade union rights, including killings, attempted murders, death threats, abductions, disappearances, assaults, torture, military interference in trade union activities, violent police dispersion of marches and pickets, arrests of trade union leaders in connection with their activities and widespread impunity for the perpetration of such acts. The Committee also takes note in this context of the interim conclusions and recommendations reached in November 2008 by the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 2528 (351st Report, paragraphs 1180–1240) which concerns similar allegations. The Committee finally takes note of the recommendations made by the Independent Commission to address media and activist killings created under Administrative Order No. 157 of 2006 by the President of the Philippines (Melo Commission: report issued on 27 January 2007); the UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Summary or Arbitrary Executions on his mission to the Philippines of 12–21 February 2007 (Special Rapporteur: document A/HRC/8/3/Add.2, issued on 16 April 2008); and the National Consultative Summit on Extrajudicial Killings and Enforced Disappearances: Searching for Solutions (National Consultative Summit), which was hosted by the Supreme Court on 16–17 July 2007 in Manila.

The Committee recalls the information previously communicated by the Government emphasizing the steps taken to address this serious situation, i.e. the establishment of the Melo Commission and the subsequent creation of special regional tribunals, the ongoing review of the rules of court, the establishment of the task force USIG of the Philippine National Police and the hosting by the Supreme Court of the National Consultative Summit. It further notes from information provided by the ITUC in 2008, the introduction by the Supreme Court of the new writ of protection of constitutional rights (amparo) procedure since September 2007; this habeas corpus-like procedure compels state agencies to reveal to the court the whereabouts of named persons, disclose documentary evidence, or allow court-authorized searches of premises.

The Committee notes that in its latest communications of 29 August and 1 September 2008, the ITUC provides additional detailed information, accompanied by hundreds of pages of human rights reports and newspaper articles, on the human rights situation more generally and systematic violations of the fundamental human rights and civil liberties of trade unionists. In particular, the Committee notes that, according to the ITUC, despite measures previously announced by the Government to address the issues, few improvements have been observed in practice and there is an “abysmal failure” to investigate or prosecute the perpetrators of such acts, leading to an ongoing climate of impunity and impassivity in the face of continuing violence against trade unionists. The ITUC refers to continuing extrajudicial killings in 2007 and 2008 with a total of 87 unionists killed since 2001. Five trade union leaders and members had been murdered and three trade unionists abducted between July 2007 and August 2008. The ITUC also refers to violent dispersal of workers’ protests, intimidation, threats and blacklisting of trade unionists. It also refers to the militarization of workplaces especially in export processing zones (EPZs) and special economic zones, and constant surveillance and harassment of trade unions opposing the economic development model and their leaders, some of whom have been reportedly forced to constantly move houses to avoid persecution. The Committee further notes that the ITUC cites the findings and detailed recommendations of the UN Special Rapporteur (see document cited above) and expresses concern that the ineffectiveness of the measures taken so far by the Government to address the situation as, out of hundreds of killings and “disappearances” over the past five years, there have been only two successfully prosecuted cases resulting in the conviction of four persons (for acts not directed against trade unionists).

The Committee recalls that the Conference Committee in 2007 requested the Government to accept a high-level ILO mission so as to obtain a greater understanding of all aspects of this case. The Committee notes with regret that the Government has not yet accepted such a mission.

The Committee observes with deep regret that there has been no information on any conviction pronounced against the perpetrators and instigators of acts of extreme gravity against trade unionists and that killings, abductions, enforced disappearances and other violations of fundamental rights of trade unionists continue to take place. The Committee recalls that the absence of judgements against the guilty parties creates, in practice, a situation of impunity which reinforces the climate of violence and insecurity, and which is extremely damaging to the exercise of trade union rights. The Committee emphasizes that the rights of workers’ organizations can only be exercised in a climate that is free from violence, pressure or threats of any kind against the leaders and members of these organizations, and it is for governments to ensure that this principle is respected. The Committee stresses the importance of ensuring that all instances of violence against trade union members and leaders are properly investigated and that any evidence of impunity is firmly combated to ensure the full and free exercise of trade union rights and their accompanying civil liberties. It emphasizes that the Government has the duty to defend a social climate where respect for the law reigns as the only way for guaranteeing respect for and protection of individuals. All appropriate measures should be taken to guarantee that, irrespective of trade union affiliation, trade union rights can be exercised in normal conditions with respect for basic human rights and in a climate free of violence, pressure, fear and threats of any kind.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated with a view to putting an immediate end to the climate of violence and impunity which is extremely damaging to the exercise of trade union rights and ensuring the prompt investigation, prosecution, trial and conviction of those found guilty of murders, enforced disappearances and other violations of fundamental human rights against trade unionists.

Legislative issues. Human Security Act. The Committee notes the comments made by the ITUC on the Act to Secure the State and Protect Our People from Terrorism (No. 9371) otherwise known as the Human Security Act. According to the ITUC, the vague definition of terrorism in this Act as a criminal act that “causes widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace” can serve as a legal umbrella for extrajudicial killings and can lead to categorizing peaceful demonstrations like strikes and protests on social issues as “terrorism”.

The Committee notes that, despite a request by the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in 2007, the Government has not provided any information on the impact of the Human Security Act upon the application of the provisions of the Convention, apart from the text of the Act itself. The Committee requests the Government to provide such information and, in particular, to indicate the safeguards which ensure that the Human Security Act cannot be used under any circumstances as a basis for suppressing legitimate trade union activities or result in any extrajudicial killing for the exercise of trade union rights.

Other legislative issues. In the absence of new information by the Government, the Committee reiterates the requests that it has been making for a number of years on certain discrepancies between the provisions of the national laws and the Convention:

–           The need to amend section 234(c) of the Labor Code, which requires, for registration of a trade union organization, the names of all its members comprising at least 20 per cent of all employees in a bargaining unit where it seeks to operate; the Committee recalls that, according to the statement of the Government representative before the Conference Committee in June 2007, an Act had been adopted in May 2007 which sought to lift the 20 per cent requirement and the requirement to reveal the names of the officers and members, for legitimate federations and national unions; however, the 20 per cent membership requirement was still relevant in the case of unions seeking independent registration. The Committee once again requests the Government to communicate the text of the relevant Act and to indicate in its next report measures taken or contemplated with a view to lowering the minimum membership requirement for registration of independent trade unions.

–           The need to amend sections 269 and 272(b) of the Labor Code, so as to grant the right to organize to all nationals lawfully residing within the Philippines (and not just those with valid permits if the same rights are guaranteed to Filipino workers in the country of the alien workers, or if the country in question has ratified either ILO Convention No. 87 or No. 98). The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information in its next report on measures taken or contemplated so as to amend the above-noted sections in a manner which enables anyone legally residing in the country to benefit from the trade union rights provided by the Convention.

–           The need to amend section 263(g) of the Labor Code so as to limit governmental intervention resulting in compulsory arbitration to the essential services in the strict sense of the term only; amend sections 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labor Code, which provide for dismissal of trade union officers and penal liability to a maximum prison sentence of three years for participation in illegal strikes, so as to ensure that workers may effectively exercise their right to strike without the risk of being sanctioned in a disproportionate manner; lower the excessively high requirement of ten union members for federations or national unions set out in section 237(a) of the Labor Code; and amend section 270, which subjects the receipt of foreign assistance to trade unions by the prior permission of the Secretary of Labor. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or contemplated with a view to amending the aforementioned legislative provisions so as to bring them into full conformity with the Convention.

Furthermore, the Committee reiterates its previous request to the Government to continue to provide information on unionization levels in the EPZs. The Committee takes note of the comments made by the ITUC on this issue, which are examined under Convention No. 98.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report.

The Committee notes that Executive Order 180 of 2004 appears to have increased the minimum membership requirement for a public employees’ union to gain legal personality, from 10 per cent to 30 per cent of the total rank and file employees. The percentage requirement appears to be calculated on the basis of the entire rank and file workers of the Government all over the country.

The Committee recalls that public employees, like all other workers, have the right to establish and join trade unions of their own choosing without interference from the public authorities and that a 30 per cent requirement throughout the public sector is likely to preclude the establishment of trade unions (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraphs 81–83). The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information in this regard, including on any measures taken or contemplated with a view to lowering this requirement to a reasonable level.

The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not provide information on the matters raised in its previous direct request. In these conditions, the Committee once again requests the Government to:

–      indicate in its next report the measures taken to ensure that all workers in the Philippines, including managerial employees, prison staff and firefighters, enjoy the right to organize guaranteed under the Convention; and

–      clarify the current status of the sample contract for various skills, posted on the web site of the Department of Labor and Employment with respect to the Philippines Overseas Employment Administration, as well as any measures taken or envisaged to delete trade union activities from the list of grounds for termination. It further requests the Government to indicate the concrete circumstances under which this sample contract is used and provide an estimate of the numbers of workers governed by it.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report including the text of the Act to Secure the State and Protect Our People from Terrorism (No. 9371). It also notes the discussion that took place at the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2007. Furthermore, the Committee takes note of the interim conclusions and recommendations reached by the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 2528 which concerns allegations of killings, grave threats, continuous harassment and intimidation and other forms of violence inflicted on trade unionists. The Committee further notes the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 27 August 2007 with regard to numerous violations of trade union rights in 2006, including killings, attempted murders, abductions, disappearances, assaults, torture, military intervention in trade union activities, violent police dispersion of International Women’s Day marches, and arrests of trade union leaders in connection with their activities. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations without delay on these very grave and serious allegations as well as on the comments made by the International Confederation of Trade Unions (ICFTU, now ITUC) in 2006 with regard to the murder of four trade union leaders in 2005, anti-union violence in the sugar sector, death threats to discourage union formation in the economic zone in Cavite, and the non-arrest of the authors of the killings of seven strikers in November 2004.

A. Civil liberties. The Committee notes that in its conclusions, the Conference Committee expressed deep concern at the allegations of the murders of trade unionists, and emphasized that respect for basic civil liberties is essential for the exercise of freedom of association. While noting the initial steps taken by the Government to address this serious situation through the establishment of the Melo Commission and the subsequent creation of special regional tribunals, the Conference Committee, concerned at the absence of judgements against the perpetrators and instigators of these crimes, stressed the importance of ensuring that all instances of violence against trade union members are properly investigated and that any evidence of impunity is firmly combated to ensure the full and free exercise of trade union rights and their accompanying civil liberties. The Conference Committee urged the Government to ensure that all necessary measures are taken, including through the creation of independent and impartial investigations, so as to restore a climate of complete freedom and security from violence and threats thus enabling workers and employers to fully exercise their freedom of association rights.

The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that it is relentless and unceasing in its efforts to immediately solve the problem of killings generally and the alleged murder and enforced disappearance of trade unionists. The judiciary, through the Supreme Court, had in fact actively participated in these efforts. The Supreme Court had recently hosted a multi-sector National Summit on Killings and its second immediate concrete contribution – after previously designating special courts to try cases of killings – was the ongoing review of the rules of court to further enhance the protection of constitutional rights in response to the alleged murders and enforced disappearances of activists, trade unionists included. The Task Force Usig of the Philippine National Police (PNP) on the other hand, was continuously pursuing the investigation of the alleged cases and the eventual prosecution of the perpetrators. The Government is approaching the problem at all levels – investigation, prosecution, trial and possible conviction – within the context of the recommendation of the Melo Commission. The Government expresses optimism that definite results shall soon come out from all these efforts.

The Committee emphasizes that workers and employers should be able to exercise their freedom of association rights in a climate of complete freedom and security from violence and threats. Furthermore, the Committee stresses the importance of ensuring that all instances of violence against trade union members, whether these be murders, disappearances or threats, are properly investigated so as to avoid the emergence of a climate of impunity preventing the free exercise of trade union rights. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report further measures taken or contemplated with a view to the prompt investigation, prosecution, trial and conviction of those found guilty of murders and other violations against trade unionists.

B. Legislative issues. With regard to the other matters raised by the Committee in its previous comments, the Committee notes that in its conclusion, the Conference Committee noted with interest the information provided by the Government on certain recently adopted amendments to the Labor Code, and urged the Government to take measures to ensure, in full consultation with the social partners concerned, that further amendments are adopted in the very near future taking into account the comments made by the Committee of Experts for many years. The Committee notes that the Government’s latest report is confined to stating that the concern on the adoption of legislative measures shall be addressed by Congress whose session had just opened in the latter part of July 2007.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing. 1. In previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to consider amending section 234(c) of the Labor Code, which requires, for registration of a trade union organization, the names of all its members comprising at least 20 per cent of all employees in a bargaining unit where it seeks to operate. The Committee notes the statement of the Government representative before the Conference Committee, according to which, an Act had been adopted in May 2007 which sought to expand the capacity of legitimate federations and national unions to organize and to help their local chapters acquire representation status for the purposes of collective bargaining. Any legitimate labour federation or national union could now create a local chapter which could in turn file a petition for the certification of an election without the minimum 20 per cent membership and without revealing the names of the officers and members of the local chapter. However, the 20 per cent membership requirement was still relevant in the case of unions seeking independent registration. The Committee understands from this statement that Senate Bill No. 1049, to which the Government had referred in previous reports, has been adopted. The Committee requests the Government to communicate the text of the relevant Act and to indicate in its next report measures taken or contemplated with a view to lowering the minimum membership requirement for registration of independent trade unions.

2. The Committee had previously requested the Government to amend sections 269 and 272(b) of the Labor Code, so as to grant the right to organize to all nationals lawfully residing within the Philippines (and not just those with valid permits if the same rights are guaranteed to Filipino workers in the country of the alien workers, or if the country in question has ratified either ILO Convention No. 87 or ILO Convention No. 98). The Committee notes that the statement of the Government representative to the Conference Committee does not provide any new information in this regard and recalls once again that Article 2 of the Convention provides for the right of all workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to provide information in its next report on measures taken or contemplated so as to amend the above-noted sections in a manner which enables anyone legally residing in the country to benefit from the trade union rights provided by the Convention.

Articles 3 and 5. The Committee recalls that in previous comments it had requested the Government to:

–      amend section 263(g) of the Labor Code so as to limit governmental intervention resulting in compulsory arbitration to the essential services only;

–      amend sections 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labor Code, which provide for dismissal of trade union officers and penal liability to a maximum prison sentence of three years for participation in illegal strikes, so as to ensure that workers may effectively exercise their right to strike without the risk of being sanctioned in a disproportionate manner;

–      lower the excessively high requirement of ten union members for federations or national unions set out in section 237(a) of the Labor Code, in order to ensure compliance with Article 5 of the Convention;

–      amend section 270, which subjects the receipt of foreign assistance to trade unions to the prior permission of the Secretary of Labor, so as to ensure compliance with Article 5 of the Convention.

The Committee notes that in previous reports, the Government had referred to Senate Bill No. 1049 (formerly Senate Bill No. 2576), entitled “An Act Establishing the New Labor Code of the Philippines and for Other Purposes”, pending before both the Committee on Labor, Employment and Human Resources Development and the Committee on Constitutional Amendments, Revision of Code and Laws, and that the statement of the Government representative to the Conference Committee does not provide any new information in this regard. Recalling that it has been commenting on these provisions for a number of years, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or contemplated with a view to amending the aforementioned legislative provisions so as to bring them into full conformity with the Convention.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government representative to the Conference Committee with regard to the exercise of the right to organize in export processing zones (EPZs), to the effect that trade unions in these zones have increased from 251 in 2000 to 341 as of September 2005 with a membership increase from 23,000 in 2000 to nearly 34,000 in 2005. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information in its next report on unionization levels in the EPZs.

Finally, recalling that the Conference Committee had requested the Government to accept a high-level ILO mission in respect of the serious matters raised relating to the purview of the Convention, the Committee trusts that this mission will take place in the very near future and that it will be able to assist the Government in ensuring full implementation of the Convention in both law and practice.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes with regret that, for the second consecutive time, the Government’s report does not reply to the matters raised in its previous direct request. In these conditions, the Committee requests the Government to:

–         indicate in its next report the measures taken to ensure that all workers in the Philippines, including managerial employees, prison staff and firefighters, enjoy the right to organize guaranteed under the Convention; and

–         clarify the current status of the sample contract for various skills, posted on the web site of the Department of Labour and Employment with respect to the Philippines Overseas Employment Administration, as well as any measures taken or envisaged to delete trade union activities from the list of grounds for termination. It further requests the Government to indicate the concrete circumstances under which this sample contract is used and provide an estimate of the numbers of workers governed by it.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the Government’s report and its reply to the comments of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) dated 31 August 2005, which mainly refer to matters previously raised by the Committee. Furthermore, the Committee also notes the new comments submitted by the ICFTU, in a communication of 10 August 2006, that once again refer to issues raised by the Committee and to serious allegations of murder of four trade union leaders in 2005, anti-union violence in the sugar sector, death threats to discourage union formation in the economic zone in Cavite, and the non-arrest of the authors of the killings of seven strikers in November 2004. Concerning these serious allegations, the Committee wishes to emphasize that respect for civil liberties is essential for the exercise of freedom of association and that workers and employers should be able to exercise their freedom of association rights in a climate of complete freedom and security from violence and threats. Furthermore, the Committee stresses the importance of ensuring that all instances of violence against trade union members, whether these be murders, disappearances or threats, are properly investigated and recalls that a situation, in which a large number of acts of violence against trade union members are not investigated, or that the investigations are not fully carried out, is a clear evidence of impunity preventing the free exercise of trade union rights. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations in its next report on the comments made by the ICFTU.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing. 1. In previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to consider amending section 234(c) of the Labor Code, which requires, for registration of a trade union organization, the names of all its members comprising at least 20 per cent of all employees in a bargaining unit where it seeks to operate. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that: (a) during the tripartite consultations of Department Order No. 40-03 (2003) the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), through the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR), had recommended the removal of the 20 per cent requirement. However the said recommendation failed to garner support from the other sectors; (b) the DOLE also supports House Bill 1351, introduced on 13 July 2001, which seeks to remove the 20 per cent requirement. This bill was approved in second reading on June 8, 2005; and (c) the Congressional Oversight Committee on Labor and Employment (COCLE), sponsor of Senate Bill No. 2576 – actually retitled Bill No. 1049 – proposes the maintenance of the 20 per cent requirement, but only with respect to independent unions.

Under these circumstances the Committee requests the Government, as it had in previous comments, to consider, in the context of these ongoing amendments to the Labor Code (House Bill 1351), revising section 234(c) of the Labor Code so as to lower the minimum membership requirement for registration of a trade union and to indicate in its next report any measures adopted in this respect.

2. The Committee had previously requested the Government to amend sections 269 and 272(b) of the Labor Code, and section 2 of Rule II of Department Order No. 40-03, which prohibit aliens (other than those with valid permits if the same rights are guaranteed to Filipino workers in the country of the alien workers) from engaging in any trade union activity under penalty of deportation. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that Rule II of Department Order No. 40-03 was amended by Department Order No. 40-C-05 of 2005. The latter provides that the right to establish and join organizations may be exercised by aliens with valid permits who are nationals of a country which grants the same or similar rights to Filipino workers, as certified by the Department of Foreign Affairs, or which has ratified either ILO Convention No. 87 or ILO Convention No. 98. The Committee observes that, although these measures imply a positive advance, the legislation still does not grant the right to organize to all nationals lawfully residing within the Philippines. The Committee further notes that sections 269 and 272(b) of the Labor Code have not been amended. In these circumstances, the Committee once again recalls that the right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations implies that anyone legally residing in the territory of a given State benefits from the trade union rights provided by the Convention, without any distinction based on nationality (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 63). The Committee requests the Government to amend the above-noted sections accordingly and to keep it informed in this regard.

Articles 3 and 5. The Committee recalls that in previous comments it had requested the Government to:

–      amend section 263(g) of the Labor Code so as to limit governmental intervention resulting in compulsory arbitration to the essential services only;

–      amend sections 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labor Code, which provide for dismissal of trade union officers and penal liability to a maximum prison sentence of three years for participation in illegal strikes, so as to ensure that workers may effectively exercise their right to strike without the risk of being sanctioned in a disproportionate manner;

–      lower the excessively high requirement of ten union members for federations or national unions set out in section 237(a) of the Labor Code, in order to ensure compliance with Article 5 of the Convention;

–      amend section 270, which subjects the receipt of foreign assistance to trade unions to the prior permission of the Secretary of Labor, so as to ensure compliance with Article 5 of the Convention.

The Committee notes that the Government reiterates the information already provided in previous reports and refers to Senate Bill No. 1049 (formerly Senate Bill No. 2576), entitled “An Act Establishing the New Labor Code of the Philippines and for Other Purposes”, and that this Bill is pending before both the Committee on Labor, Employment and Human Resources Development and the Committee on Constitutional Amendments, Revision of Code and Laws. In these conditions, recalling that it had been commenting on these provisions of the legislation that are not in conformity with the Convention for several years, the Committee expresses the hope that the Government would take the necessary measures to amend the aforementioned legislative provisions and to inform it of the progress made in this respect in its next report.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not reply to the following matters raised in its previous direct request.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing. 1. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that managerial employees, prison staff and firefighters have the right to organize and to keep it informed of developments in this regard, in particular within the context of the current elaboration of the new Labor Code. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the measures taken to ensure that all workers in the Philippines, including managerial employees, prison staff and firefighters, enjoy the right to organize guaranteed under the Convention.

2. The Committee had further invited the Government to take the necessary measures to remedy the inconsistency between the provisions of the Convention and the "sample contract for various skills" posted on the web site of the Department of Labor and Employment with respect to the Philippines Overseas Employment Administration, which provided that an employer may terminate the contract of a worker engaging in trade union activities. The Committee once again requests the Government to clarify the current status of this sample contract, as well as any measures taken or envisaged to delete trade union activities from the list of grounds for termination. It further requests the Government to indicate the concrete circumstances under which this sample contract is used and provide an estimate of the numbers of workers governed by it.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing. 1. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the requirement in section 234(c) of the Labor Code that at least 20 per cent of workers in a bargaining unit are members of a union. The Committee notes the Government’s comment that this point had been tackled during long exhaustive dialogues among representatives from labour, employer and government sectors and, following serious review and analysis within the framework of the Tripartite Industrial Peace Council, it was nonetheless decided that the requirements be retained. The Committee recalls, once again, that the requirement of a high minimum proportion of workers before a union may be formed is contrary to the right of workers to form organizations of their own choosing (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 81). It therefore once again requests the Government to reconsider amending section 234(c) so as to lower the minimum membership requirement for forming a union and to indicate, in its next report, the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

2. The Committee had also requested the Government to amend sections 269 and 272(b) of the Labor Code and section 2 of Rule II of Department Order No.  40-03, which prohibit aliens (other than those with valid permits if the same rights are guaranteed to Filipino workers in the country of the alien workers) from engaging in any trade union activity under penalty of deportation. It notes that the Government has not provided any further information in this regard. Recalling that the right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations implies that anyone legally residing in the territory of a given State benefits from the trade union rights provided by the Convention, without any distinction based on nationality (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 63), the Committee once again asks the Government to take the necessary steps to amend these sections and to keep it informed in this regard.

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate programmes without government interference. Compulsory arbitration. In its previous report, the Committee had expressed the firm hope that a proposal to amend section 263(g) of the Labor Code to limit to the essential services governmental intervention resulting in compulsory arbitration would effectively guarantee to workers their right to strike without interference by the Government, and trusted that in the meantime the Government would limit the exercise of this power in practice.  The Committee notes that the Government referred in this regard to its comments produced in response to Case No. 2195 before the Committee on Freedom of Association, in which it confirmed that the Philippine Department of Labor and Employment has submitted its recommendation to amend section 263 to the labour committees in the Philippine Senate and the House of Representatives, including the exercise of jurisdiction powers only in disputes involving establishments engaged in "essential services". The Committee once again expresses the firm hope that this initiative will result in the amendment of section 263(g) of the Labor Code in the very near future so as to effectively guarantee the right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities free from government interference. It requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the progress made in this regard.

Sanctions for strike action. 1. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted sections 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labor Code, which provide for dismissal of trade union officers and penal liability to a maximum prison sentence of three years for participation in illegal strikes, and noted the Government’s indication that Senate Bill No. 2576 sought to amend the law on strikes which would alter the context of these penal provisions. The Committee had expressed its firm hope that the Government would take the necessary measures to amend sections 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labor Code to ensure that workers are not sanctioned in a disproportionate manner for having participated in an illegal strike and requested to be kept informed of the measures taken or envisaged in this respect, in particular within the context of the drafting of the new Labor Code (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 177). The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate in its next report the progress made in amending the law on strikes, as well as any measures taken or envisaged to amend these sections of the Labor Code.

2. In relation to its previous comments concerning section 146 of the Penal Code, the Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that the penalties should be understood in the context of illegal assemblies such as "a meeting attended by armed persons for the purpose of committing a crime" or "a meeting where the audience is incited to the commission of treason, rebellion, sedition or assault" and apply only in such limited circumstances, and not to the exercise of the right to strike where the applicable sanctions are those provided for in the Labor Code.

Article 5. Right of workers’ organizations to establish and join federations and confederations and their right to affiliate with international organizations. 1. The Committee had, in its previous comments, requested the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged in respect of the excessively high requirement of ten union members for a federation or national union contained in section 237(a) of the Code. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that this requirement had been tackled during long exhaustive dialogues among representatives from labour, employer and government sectors and, following serious review and analysis within the framework of the Tripartite Industrial Peace Council, it was, nonetheless, decided that the requirements be retained. The Committee recalls, once again, that such a requirement is excessive and is incompatible with Article 5 of the Convention (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 191), and requests the Government to take the necessary steps promptly to ensure compliance with the Convention on this point.

2. In its previous comments, the Committee had expressed the hope that Senate Bill No. 2576, referred to in the Government’s previous report, would amend section 270 of the Labor Code in relation to the regulation of  the receipt of foreign assistance by trade unions and had requested to be kept informed in this regard. The Committee once again notes the indication in the Government’s latest report that this provision is no longer being enforced in practice and that the Department of Labor and Employment has indicated to Congress that it should be expressly repealed. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the progress made in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee takes note of the information contained in the Government’s report and wishes to make comments on the following points.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing. In its report, the Government states that in the private sector, managerial employees, including confidential employees with access to labour relations information held by management, are not eligible to form unions. Pursuant to section 1 of rule I of Department Order No. 40-03, managerial employees are defined as: "[employees] vested with powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute management policies or to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, discharge, assign or discipline employees". As for the public sector, employees occupying high-level, policy-determining or primarily confidential positions, as well as jail guards and firemen are not allowed to join unions. The Committee recalls that the only exceptions authorized by the Convention concern the members of the police and armed forces (Article 9), such exceptions being justified on the basis of their responsibility for the external and internal security of the State (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 55). With respect to managerial and executive staff in the private sector and public servants holding managerial or supervisory positions of trust, the Committee considers that provisions which prohibit such workers from joining trade unions in which other workers are represented are not necessarily incompatible with the Convention, but on two conditions, namely, that they have the right to establish their own organizations and that the right to belong to those organizations is restricted to persons performing senior managerial or decision-making functions (see General survey, op. cit., paragraphs 57 and 66). With respect to fire service personnel and prison staff, the Committee is of the opinion that the functions exercised by these two categories of public servants should not justify their exclusion from the right to organize (see General survey, op. cit., paragraph 56). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that managerial employees, prison staff and firemen have the right to organize. It requests the Government to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged in this regard, and in particular within the context of the current elaboration of the new Labor Code.

Furthermore, the Committee notes the information available on the web site of the Department of Labor and Employment with respect to the Philippines Overseas Employment Administration. In particular, the Committee takes note of the "sample employment contract for various skills" concerning the Filipino overseas workers.

The Committee notes that section 14(a) of the sample contract provides that an employer may terminate the contract when a worker is engaging in trade union activities. Trade union activities are thus considered a just cause of termination, under the terms of the sample contract.

The Committee recalls that Article 2 of the Convention guarantees the right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing and that such a right would be undermined if workers could be dismissed on the grounds of their union activities or affiliation. The Committee has duly noted that the document constitutes only a sample contract. The Committee further recalls that the national legislation protects workers against anti-union discrimination (section 246 of the Labor Code). The Committee invites therefore the Government to take the necessary measures to remedy the inconsistency between its practice and the provisions of the Convention and to keep it informed in this respect. The Committee would also be grateful if the Government would specify the concrete circumstances under which such a sample contract is used (occupational activities covered, parties to the contract) and provide an estimate of the number of workers whose working conditions are governed by its terms.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report. The Committee notes the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 2252 (see 332nd Report, paragraphs 848-890). It also notes the entry into force of Department Order No. 40-03 amending the Rules of Implementation of Book V of the Labor Code. Furthermore, the Committee notes that Senate Bill No. 2576, which seeks to establish a new Labor Code, has been filed before the Philippines Senate. The Committee requests the Government to provide with its next report a copy of the Bill or of any final text and to keep it informed of any progress made.

Bearing in mind the points raised in its previous comments over the years on the various discrepancies between the Labor Code and the Convention, the Committee would like to draw attention more specifically to the following points.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing. The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report contains no additional information with regard to certain points raised in its previous comments concerning the following discrepancies between the national legislation and the requirements of the Convention:

-  the requirement that at least 20 per cent of workers in a bargaining unit are members of a union (section 234(c) of the Labor Code);

-  the prohibition of aliens (other than those with valid permits if the same rights are guaranteed to Filipino workers in the country of the alien workers), from engaging in any trade union activity (section 269) under the penalty of deportation (section 272(b)), and section 2 of Rule II of Department Order No. 40-03, which confirms such restrictions.

The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend these provisions and to keep it informed of any developments.

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate programmes without government interference. Compulsory arbitration. The Committee has been referring for a number of years to the need to amend section 263(g) of the Labor Code which permits the Secretary of Labor and Employment to submit a dispute to compulsory arbitration. The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not provide any information on this matter. The Committee must again point out that this provision of the Labor Code is drafted in such general terms that it could be applied in situations extending well beyond those in which strike action may be limited or prohibited in conformity with the Convention. It recalls that such restrictions are permissible only in the following cases: (i) in essential services, i.e. those services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population; (ii) in acute national crises to the extent necessary to meet the requirements of the situation and only for a limited period; and (iii) concerning public servants exercising authority in the name of the State. The Committee recalls that it has been calling upon the Government to amend section 263(g) since 1978. Meanwhile, in practice, this provision is still applied as shown in Cases Nos. 2195 and 2252 pending before the Committee on Freedom of Association (see Case No. 2195, 329th Report, paragraphs 722-739, 332nd Report, paragraphs 131-142, and Case No. 2252, paragraphs 848-890). The Committee notes from the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association that the Department of Labor and Employment has submitted an amendment proposal to the Labor Committees of the House of Representatives and the Senate. The proposal would include the intervention of the Secretary of Labor and Employment only in disputes involving essential services. The Committee expresses the firm hope that this initiative will result in the amendment of section 263(g) and that the new Labor Code will effectively guarantee that workers can exercise their right to strike without interference by the Government. In the meantime, the Committee trusts that the Government will effectively limit the exercise of this power to the considerations made above.

Sanctions for strike action. The Committee notes that its previous comments related to the following penalties in the Labor Code for participation in illegal strikes: the dismissal of trade union officers (section 264(a)), and penal liability to a maximum prison sentence of three years (section 272(a)). The Committee notes that the Government reiterates its previous comments that these provisions only apply in limited circumstances of illegal strikes or commission of illegal acts and that the penal sanctions have never been imposed. The Committee further notes that, according to the Government, Senate Bill No. 2576 seeks to set forth amendments to the law on strikes and that the proposed changes alter the context of sections 264(a) and 272(a). The Committee notes, however, from the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 2252, that criminal charges have been pressed against trade union members and officers for their participation in a strike action considered to be illegal by the national authorities; these criminal charges are currently pending before the competent court. The Committee recalls that sanctions for strike action should be possible only where the prohibitions and restrictions provided for such actions are in conformity with the provisions of the Convention. The Committee further recalls that sanctions should not be disproportionate to the seriousness of the violation (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraphs 177-178). In particular, prison sentences should be avoided in cases of peaceful strike action. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will take the necessary measures to amend sections 264(a) and 272(a) to ensure that workers may exercise effectively their right to strike and without the risk of being sanctioned in a disproportionate manner. It requests the Government to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged in this respect, in particular within the context of the drafting of the new Labor Code.

In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 146 of the Penal Code provides for imprisonment for the organizers or leaders of strikes and for participants in pickets deemed for propaganda purposes against the Government. The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report according to which this provision only applies in limited circumstances, which do not include the exercise of the right to strike, where the applicable sanctions are those provided in the Labor Code. The Committee wishes to recall that paragraph 3 of section 146 refers to participation in "any meeting which is held for propaganda purposes against the Government ..." and that "meeting" is defined to include "picketing of Labor groups and similar group actions". While noting the Government’s indication, the Committee is of the view that the wording of section 146 and the reference it contains to picketing may lead to its application to a legitimate strike action. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend section 146 to ensure that it will not be applied to workers peacefully exercising their right to strike. The Committee further requests the Government to keep it informed of any application in practice of section 146 in the case of strike action.

Article 5. Right of workers’ organizations to establish and join federations and confederations and their right to affiliate with international organizations. The Committee notes with regret that the government’s report contains no information in reply to its previous comment regarding the need to amend section 237(a) of the Labor Code, which sets an excessively high requirement for the number of unions (ten) to establish a federation or a national union. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged in this respect in its next report.

With respect to international affiliation, section 270 of the Labor Code still includes a provision seeking to regulate the receipt of foreign assistance by any trade union. However, the Committee takes note with interest of the information contained in the Government’s report that this provision is no longer enforced in practice and that, the Department of Labor and Employment has indicated to Congress that this provision should be expressly repealed. The Committee trusts that Senate Bill No. 2576 will include such an amendment to the Labor Code and requests the Government to keep it informed of any development in this respect.

The Committee is also addressing a request directly to the Government.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report contains no reply to the points raised in its previous comments. It hopes that the next report will include full information on these matters, and in particular, which concerned the following points.

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention

-  The need to review the requirement that at least 20 per cent of workers in a bargaining unit are members of a union (section 234(c) of the Labor Code).

-  The requirement of too high a number of unions (ten) to establish a federation or a national union (section 237(a)).

-  The prohibition of aliens (other than those with valid permits if the same rights are guaranteed to Filipino workers in the country of the alien workers), from engaging in any trade union activity (section 269) under the penalty of deportation (section 272(b)), and the provisions of the Department Order No. 9 amending the rules implementing Book V of the Labor Code, which confirm such restrictions.

Article 3

-  The following provisions which set forth disproportionate sanctions for participation in an illegal strike: the dismissal of trade union officers and penal liability to a maximum of three years (sections 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labor Code) and the penalty of "reclusion perpetual" to death for organizers or leaders of any meeting held for propaganda purposes against the Government, the word "meeting" being understood to include picketing of labour groups (section 146 of the revised Penal Code).

Noting the Government’s reference in its previous report to the ongoing comprehensive review of the Labor Code, the Committee once again expresses the firm hope that the necessary measures will be taken in the very near future to amend the legislation in respect of the abovementioned points. It once again requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the progress made in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government in its latest report.

The Committee notes with interest that according to the Government’s report, the Congressional Commission on Labor has made recommendations with respect to its comprehensive review of the Labor Code, which would respond to the previous comments made by the Committee in respect of section 263(g) of the Labor Code, by limiting the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Labor on disputes involving national interest to disputes involving essential services only as defined by the supervisory bodies of the ILO. The Government adds that this recommendation will likely be implemented through amendments to the existing Labor Code. The Committee requests that the Government keep it informed of the progress made in this respect and transmit a copy of the amendments as soon as they have been adopted.

Noting that the Government’s report contains no additional information in respect of the other points raised in its last observation, the Committee recalls its previous comments concerning the following discrepancies between the national legislation and the requirements of the Convention:

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention

-  The need to review the requirement that at least 20 per cent of workers in a bargaining unit are members of a union (section 234(c) of the Labor Code).

-  The requirement of too high a number of unions (ten) to establish a federation or a national union (section 237(a)).

-  The prohibition of aliens (other than those with valid permits if the same rights are guaranteed to Filipino workers in the country of the alien workers), from engaging in any trade union activity (section 269) under the penalty of deportation (section 272(b)), and the provisions of the Department Order No. 9 amending the rules implementing Book V of the Labor Code, which confirm such restrictions.

Article 3

-  The following provisions which set forth disproportionate sanctions for participation in an illegal strike: the dismissal of trade union officers and penal liability to a maximum of three years (sections 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labor Code) and the penalty of "reclusion perpetual" to death for organizers or leaders of any meeting held for propaganda purposes against the Government, the word "meeting" being understood to include picketing of labour groups (section 146 of the revised Penal Code).

Noting the Government’s reference to the ongoing comprehensive review of the Labor Code, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the necessary measures will be taken in the near future to amend the legislation in respect of the abovementioned points, and requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the progress made in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the Government’s report and recalls its previous observations regarding the discrepancies between the national legislation and the requirements of the Convention, which are as follows:

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention

-  The need to review the requirement that at least 20 per cent of workers in a bargaining unit are members of a union (section 234(c) of the Labour Code).

-  The requirement of too high a number of unions (ten) to establish a federation or a national union (section 237(a)).

-  The prohibition of aliens, other than those with valid permits, if the same rights are guaranteed to Filipino workers in the country of the alien workers, for engaging in any trade union activity (section 269) under the penalty of deportation (section 272(b)), and the provisions of the Department Order No. 9 amending the rules implementing Book V of the Labour Code, which confirms such restrictions.

Article 3

-  The need to render more flexible Rule 11(3)(f) of Book V implementing the Labour Code which provides that officers of a union operating in an enterprise must be employed in that enterprise.

­-  The need to amend section 263(g) of the Labour Code which allows the Secretary of Labour and Employment to submit a dispute causing or likely to cause a strike or lockout in "an industry indispensable to the national interest" to compulsory arbitration, thus bringing an end to a strike or in an acute national crisis, and which empowers the President to determine the industries indispensable to the national interest.

-  The following provisions which provide disproportionate sanctions for participation in an illegal strike: the dismissal of trade union officers and the penal liability to a maximum of three years (sections 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labour Code) and the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death for organizers or leaders of any meeting held for propaganda purposes against the Government, the word "meeting" being understood to include picketing of labour groups (section 146 of the revised Penal Code).

While the Government practically reiterates the same arguments it has been making for many years in respect of the abovementioned discrepancies, the Committee further notes the Government’s reference to the ongoing comprehensive review of the Labour Code for which a Congressional Commission on Labour has been formed.

The Committee therefore refers to its previous detailed observations and urges the Government to amend its legislation on the abovementioned points upon which it has been commenting for many years.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2001.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government's report. Concerning section 263 of the Labor Code, providing for compulsory arbitration in industries "indispensable to the national interest", the Committee notes that the Government does not refer in its most recent report to Senate Bill No. 1757 which proposed amendments to this section. The Committee requests the Government to provide information concerning the fate of this Bill. The Committee also notes the Government's statement that the proposed Bill on the New Civil Service Code, which would grant government workers the right to strike in certain circumstances, is still pending before the Senate Committee on Civil Service and Government Reorganization. The Government states further that as a matter of procedure, the Bill must be re-filed. The Committee takes note of this information and requests the Government to continue to keep it informed of the status of the Bill.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government's report, including the copy of Department Order No. 09, attached thereto, which took effect on 21 June 1997 and amends the rules implementing Book V of the Labor Code.

The Committee notes that it has previously commented upon the following discrepancies between the national legislation and the requirements of the Convention:

-- compulsory arbitration in industries "indispensable to the national interest" (Labor Code, section 263);

-- disproportionate sanctions for participation in illegal strikes (Labor Code sections 264(a) and 272(a); Penal Code section 146);

-- the registration requirement that at least 20 per cent of workers in a bargaining unit are members of a union (Labor Code section 234(c));

-- the requirement of ten unions to establish a federation (section 237(a));

-- the restriction on the right of aliens to engage in trade union activities (sections 269 and 272(b))

-- the requirement that officers of a union operating in an enterprise be employed in that enterprise (Rule II(3)(f) of Book V implementing the Labor Code).

Compulsory arbitration

In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that section 263(g) of the Labor Code, as amended, permits the Secretary of Labor and Employment to submit a dispute to compulsory arbitration, thus bringing an end to a strike, in situations going beyond essential services or an acute national crisis. The provision endows the Secretary with such authority where he or she is of the opinion that there exists "a labor dispute causing or likely to cause a strike or lockout in an industry indispensable to the national interest". The provision goes on to empower the President to determine "the industries that, in his opinion, are indispensable to the national interest", and allows him to intervene at any time and assume jurisdiction "over any such labor dispute in order to settle or terminate the same". The Government states in reply that the President's power to intervene in strikes is not without limitation since such intervention may only be exercised regarding industries indispensable to the national interest. While noting the Government's statement, the Committee must again point out that this provision of the Labor Code is drafted in such general terms that it could be applied in situations extending well beyond those in which strike action may be limited or prohibited in conformity with the Convention. It recalls that such intervention is permissible only in the following cases: (i) in essential services, i.e. those services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population; (ii) in acute national crises to the extent necessary to meet the requirements of the situation and only for a limited period; and (iii) concerning public servants exercising authority in the name of the State.

Given the importance of the right to strike as one of the essential means available to workers and their organizations for the promotion and protection of their economic and social interests, and that the criteria for restricting strikes in section 263(g) goes beyond the three situations outlined above, the Committee urges the Government to take measures to amend the legislation to bring it into conformity with the requirements of the Convention.

Sanctions for striking

The Committee notes that it has been calling on the Government for a number of years to review and amend sections 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labor Code, and section 146 of the Penal Code which impose sanctions and penalties for participation in a strike. With respect to section 264(a), which permits a union officer to be dismissed for participation in an illegal strike, the Government again indicates that the provision does not apply to a union officer participating in a legal strike, and asserts that the provision is aimed at "improving the conditions of labor and establishing peace". The Government states further that section 272(a), providing for a fine and/or imprisonment of not less than three months and not more than three years, applies only in the limited circumstances set out in section 264. The Committee recalls, however, that sanctions for strike action should be possible only where the prohibitions in question are in conformity with the principles of freedom of association (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 177). As noted by the Committee and acknowledged by the Government in previous reports, some of the limitations on strike action contained in the legislation are not in conformity with the principles arising from the Convention; therefore, any sanctions imposed for the violation of such provisions are equally incompatible with the Convention.

With respect to section 146 of the Penal Code, the Government indicates that it addresses two types of illegal assemblies: (i) a meeting attended by armed persons for the purpose of committing any crime; (ii) a meeting where the audience is incited to the commission of treason, rebellion, sedition or assault. It states further that the reference in the section to "meeting" should not be construed as including picketing unless such picketing is attended by armed persons for the purpose of committing any crime, or it incites the audience to the commission of treason, rebellion, sedition or assault. The Committee is again obliged to point out that paragraph 3 of section 146 refers to participation in "any meeting which is held for propaganda purposes against the Government...", and that "meeting" is defined to include "picketing of labour groups and similar group actions". While noting the point made by the Government in its report that a person punished under section 272 of the Labor Code will not be subject to prosecution under the Penal Code, the Committee nevertheless remains of the view that the sanctions for strike action (including picketing) provided under the Labor Code and the Penal Code are unduly harsh, and not proportionate to the offences, in particular, penalties of imprisonment should not be imposed in the case of peaceful strikes. The Committee, therefore, again requests the Government to amend the provisions of the Penal Code and the Labor Code to ensure that the sanctions imposed for illegal strikes are commensurate with the nature of the offence.

Limitations on the right to join and form organizations

In its previous comments, the Committee noted the following discrepancies between the Labor Code and Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention: (i) the requirement for registration that at least 20 per cent of the workers in a bargaining unit are members of a union (section 234(c)); (ii) the requirement of too high a number of unions (ten) to establish a federation (section 237(a)); and (iii) the prohibition of aliens -- other than those with valid permits if the same rights are granted to Filipino workers in the country of origin of the alien worker -- from engaging in any trade union activity (section 269) under penalty of deportation (section 272(b)). The Committee notes with regret that these restrictions have recently been confirmed by virtue of Department Order No. 09 amending the rules implementing Book V of the Labour Code, in particular Rule III(2)(b), Rules I(1)(m) and III(2)(II), and Rule II(2) respectively. Given the importance of the right of workers to establish and join organizations of their own choosing and of workers' organizations to establish and join federations and confederations without previous authorization, the Committee urges the Government to consider reviewing and amending the provisions of the Labor Code and the Rules implementing the Labor Code, to bring them into conformity with the clear requirements of Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention.

Limitations on the right to elect representatives in full freedom

In its previous comments, the Committee drew attention to Rule II(3)(f) of Book V implementing the Labor Code, which provides that officers of a union operating in an enterprise must be employed in that enterprise. In addition, under the Labour Code, the term "employee" includes "any individual whose work has ceased as a result of or in connection with any current labour dispute or because of any unfair labour practice if he has not obtained any other substantially equivalent and regular employment". The Committee had noted that such legislation entails the risk of interference by the employer through the dismissal of trade union leaders for exercising legitimate trade union activities with the result (or even the intention) of depriving them in the future of holding a position as a trade union officer, and requested the Government to take steps to render the requirement more flexible so as to allow, for example, a reasonable proportion of union officers to come from outside the particular enterprise or to admit as candidates persons who have previously been employed in the occupation or enterprise concerned (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 117). In its report, the Government notes with interest this recommendation and advises that it will inform the Committee of the actions taken in consideration of the recommendation. The Committee takes due note of this statement, and expresses the hope that it implies a desire on the part of the Government to bring this provision into conformity with the requirements of Article 3 of the Convention by allowing organizations to elect their representatives in full freedom.

The Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will, without further delay, take measures to bring the legislation into fuller conformity with the requirements of the Convention, and requests to be kept informed of any measures taken or envisaged in this regard.

The Committee is also addressing a request directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report.

1. Article 3 of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that amendments had been proposed to section 263 of the Labor Code which restricted the right to strike in non-essential services by imposing compulsory arbitration when, in the opinion of the Secretary of Labor and Employment, a planned or current strike affected an industry indispensable to national interest. These amendments had been proposed in Senate Bill No. 1757 which sought to limit this power of the Labor Secretary to disputes affecting industries performing essential services (meaning "medical, water supply, telephone, electric, national mass transport and other similar services, the disruption of which services could endanger the life and safety of the general public"). In its report, the Government indicates that these amendments to section 263(g) under Senate Bill No. 1757 remain pending before the legislature. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any progress made in the adoption of these amendments.

With regard to the inclusion of national mass transport as an essential service, the Government explains that in view of the difficulties faced by the country in mass transportation, it considers that the disruption of both inland and inter-island mass transportation would practically pose a danger to the life, safety or health of the population. As mentioned in its previous observation, while mindful of the difficulties and inconveniences that the population living on islands would be subjected to following a stoppage in transport services, the Committee is of the opinion that such services are not in themselves essential services in the strict sense of the term, that is, those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of whole or part of the population. The Committee would therefore suggest that rather than imposing an outright ban on strikes which should be limited to essential services in the strict sense of the term, the Government consider establishing a minimum service, in consultation with the workers' and employers' organizations concerned, in national mass transport.

Finally, with regard to the amendments proposed in the Bill relating to the powers of the President to intervene in strikes without any limitation, the Government explains that these amendments are less restrictive than the current law which grants this discretion to the Secretary of Labor and Employment. Giving authority to the President would limit interventions to situations of crisis proportions requiring presidential action. If these amendments would, in effect, only allow the President to intervene in situations of acute national crisis, the Committee would then ask the Government to ensure that the amendments mention this point specifically, so as to bring its legislation into conformity with national practice and the Convention.

The Committee's previous comments related to the following penalties in the Labor Code for participation in illegal strikes: the dismissal of trade union officers (section 264(a)); penal liability to a maximum prison sentence of three years (section 272(a)); and imprisonment for the organizers or leaders of strikes and for participants in pickets deemed for propaganda purposes against the Government (section 146 of the revised Penal Code).

First of all, the Government states that under section 264(a), the dismissal of a union officer can only take place for participation in an illegal strike (not a lawful strike) and can only be carried out upon final proper declaration by the appropriate government body, and is subject to final review by the Supreme Court. The Committee considers, however, that sanctions for strike action should be possible only where the prohibitions in question are in conformity with the principles of freedom of association (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 177). As pointed out by the Committee and acknowledged by the Government in previous observations, some prohibitions on strike action contained in current legislation are not in conformity with freedom of association principles.

The Government states, moreover, that the penalty of a maximum prison sentence of three years contained in section 272(a) applies to both workers and employers and does not discriminate against unionists. With regard to section 146 of the revised Penal Code, the Government indicates that this provision, which pertains to participation in illegal assemblies relating to treason, rebellion or insurrection and related crimes, is prescribed for the protection of the State and the society. The Committee notes, however, that this provision also pertains to participation in "Any meeting which is held for propaganda purposes against the Government ... in order to destabilize the Government or undermine its authority by eroding the faith and loyalty of the citizenry thereto ..." (section 146, paragraph 3) and that the word meeting "shall be understood to include a gathering or group such as public rallies, mass demonstrations, picketing of labor groups and similar group actions ...".

The Committee recalls that sanctions for strike action (including picketing) should be proportionate to the offences committed and penalties of imprisonment should not be imposed in the case of peaceful strikes. The Committee would therefore request the Government to take steps to ensure that sections 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labor Code, as well as section 146 of the revised Penal Code are amended in line with its comments made above, and to supply copies of any texts adopted in this regard.

With respect to the requirement that officers of a union operating in an enterprise be employed there by virtue of Rule II(3)(f) of Book V implementing the Labor Code, the Committee had pointed out in its previous observation that such legislation entailed the risk of interference by the employer through the dismissal of trade union leaders for exercising legitimate trade union activities with the result (or even the intention) of depriving them in the future from holding a position as a trade union officer. The Government emphasizes, however, that mere dismissal from employment does not deprive a union member of the right to be elected as union officer. Under the Labor Code, the term "employee" includes "any individual whose work has ceased as a result of or in connection with any current labor dispute or because of any unfair labor practice if he has not obtained any other substantially equivalent and regular employment". As such, he remains an employee and is eligible to run as an officer in the union.

The Committee takes due note of this information, but is of the view that it would be desirable to make its legislation more flexible by admitting as candidates persons who have previously been employed in the occupations concerned.

2. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the following discrepancies between the Labor Code and Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention: (i) the requirement that at least 20 per cent of the workers in a bargaining unit be members of a union for the union to be registered (section 234(c)); (ii) the requirement of a too high number of unions (ten) to establish a federation or a central organization (section 237(a)); (iii) the prohibition of aliens - other than those with valid permits if the same rights are guaranteed to Filipino workers in the country of origin of the alien workers - from engaging in any trade union activity (section 269) under penalty of deportation (section 272(b)).

The Government states that separate bills addressing the concerns aired by the Committee are currently being studied in the legislature. The Committee would request the Government to supply copies of these bills along with its next report.

3. Finally, the Government indicates that a new Civil Service Code which would grant government workers the right to strike in certain circumstances, in accordance with the Filipino Constitution (article XIII(3) grants all workers the right to strike), is still pending in both houses of Congress and has not yet been passed into law.

The Committee requests the Government to supply a copy of this new Code along with its next report.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report.

1. The Committee observes that amendments have been proposed in Senate Bill No. 1757 to section 263 of the Labor Code which restricts the right to strike in non-essential services by imposing compulsory arbitration when, in the opinion of the Secretary of Labor and Employment, a planned or current strike affects an industry indispensable to national interest. Senate Bill No. 1757 limits this power of the Labor Secretary to disputes affecting industries performing essential services. The Government adds that Senate Bill No. 1757, as well as the new Civil Service Code, which would grant government workers the right to strike in certain circumstances, are both pending before the legislature. The Committee takes due note of this information and requests the Government to keep it informed of any progress made in the adoption of the above Bill.

2. The Committee notes from the Government's report that the amendments proposed in Bill No. 1757 would allow the President to intervene in strikes without any limitation. The Committee recalls that the power of the President to intervene should be limited to situations of acute national crisis, or to disputes in essential services in the strict sense of the term, that is those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee would therefore request the Government to take steps to ensure that the amendments proposed in Bill No. 1757 restrict the power of the President to intervene in strikes to the two possible situations mentioned above.

3. Finally, the Committee notes from the Government's report that no changes have been made to the provisions of the Labor Code imposing penalties for participation in illegal strikes: the dismissal of trade union officers (section 264(a)); penal liability to a maximum prison sentence of three years (section 272(a)); and imprisonment for the organizers or leaders of strikes and for participants in pickets deemed for propaganda purposes against the Government (section 146 of the revised Penal Code).

The Committee would remind the Government that sanctions for strike action should be possible only where the prohibitions in question are in conformity with the principles of freedom of association. Furthermore, it recalls that sanctions for strike action should be proportionate to the offences committed. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take steps to ensure that sections 264(a) and 272(a) of the Labor Code, as well as section 146 of the revised Penal Code, are amended in line with the principles enunciated above. It asks the Government to keep it informed of any developments in this regard.

A request regarding certain points is being addressed directly to the Government.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

With reference to its previous observations, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its latest report, as well as the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Cases Nos. 1572, 1615 (292nd Report, approved by the Governing Body in March 1994) and 1718 (295th Report, approved by the Governing Body in November 1994).

I. Article 3 of the Convention. 1. In previous comments, the Committee has noted that sections 263(g) and (i) of the Labor Code restrict the right to strike in non-essential services by imposing compulsory arbitration when, in the opinion of the Secretary of Labor and Employment, a planned or current strike affects an industry indispensable to the national interest. The Committee notes with interest from the Government's report that amendments to this section have been proposed in Senate Bill No. 1757 which seeks to limit this power only to disputes affecting industries performing essential services (meaning "medical, water supply, telephone, electric, national mass transport and other similar services, the disruption of which services could endanger the life and safety of the general public") and that the Bill has recently been filed with the Senate Committee of Labor and Human Resources Development for deliberation and public hearings.

With respect to the inclusion of national mass transport as an essential service, the Committee, like the Committee on Freedom of Association with respect to the question of strikes in transport services, is of the opinion that such services are not in themselves essential services in the strict sense of the term, that is, those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of whole or part of the population. However, the Committee, like the Committee on Freedom of Association, is mindful of the difficulties and inconveniences that the population living on islands could be subjected to following a stoppage in transport services and considers that, in such a situation, the Government might try to conclude an agreement on minimum services to be maintained (291st Report, paragraph 156 (Norway)). The Government might therefore wish to consider establishing a minimum service, in consultation with the workers' and employers' organizations concerned, for national mass transport, similar to the effective skeletal workforce proposed in the Bill with respect to medical institutions.

Furthermore, the Committee notes that the amendments proposed in the Bill with respect to the powers of the President would, if adopted, permit intervention in strikes without limitation, whereas such power should be restricted to situations of acute national crisis, and in such cases, limited in duration, to interventions with respect to essential services in the strict sense of the term, and to public servants exercising authority in the name of the State.

2. The Committee notes with regret that the Government has not replied to the comments it has been raising for several years concerning penalties in the Labor Code for participation in illegal strikes: the dismissal of trade union officers (section 264(a)); penal liability to a maximum prison sentence of three years (section 272(a)); or imprisonment for the organizers or leaders of strikes and participants in pickets deemed to be for propaganda purposes against the Government (section 146 of the revised Penal Code).

Furthermore, while noting the Government's reiteration that the limitation of the right to elect workers' representatives freely by virtue of Rule II(3)(f) of Book V implementing the Labor Code (officers of a union operating in an enterprise must be employed there) was intended to ensure democratic representation of the workers in the establishment and that no complaints have arisen in this regard from either sector, the Committee points out that such legislation entails the risk of interference by the employer through the dismissal of trade union leaders for the exercise of legitimate trade union activities with the result (or even the intention) of depriving them, in the future, from holding a position as a trade union officer. This is evident particularly in the case of section 264(a) of the Labor Code which permits the dismissal of trade union officers for participating in an illegal strike, who then, in turn, would no longer be eligible for a post as union officer.

The Government states that it is nevertheless taking into account the Committee's comments on this matter and will try to temper, as much as possible, the application of this requirement, particularly when it would pose difficulties in the workers' exercise of their fundamental rights. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures to render this requirement more flexible so as to allow, for example, a reasonable proportion of a union's officers to come from outside the particular enterprise or to admit as candidates persons who have previously been employed in the occupation or enterprise concerned (see 1994 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, paragraph 117).

The Government is requested to indicate, in its next report, the progress made in bringing its legislation concerning strikes into conformity with the principles of the Convention and to supply copies of any texts adopted in this regard.

II. The Committee would also recall the following further discrepancies between the Labor Code and the provisions of Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention: (i) the requirement that at least 20 per cent of the workers in a bargaining unit are members of a union for the union to be registered (section 234(c)); (ii) the requirement of too high a number of unions (ten) to establish a federation or a central organization (section 237(a)); (iii) the prohibition of aliens - other than those with valid permits if the same rights are guaranteed to Filipino workers in the country of origin of the alien workers - from engaging in any trade union activity (section 269) under penalty of deportation (section 272(b)).

Noting that the Government has sought technical assistance from the International Labour Office for the reform of national labour laws, the Committee expresses the firm hope that its comments on the above points will be taken into account in order to bring these legislative provisions into conformity with the Convention and requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the progress made in this regard.

III. Finally, the Committee had noted in its previous comments information which had been given to the Committee on Freedom of Association on the passage through Congress of a new Civil Service Code which would grant government workers the right to strike in certain circumstances, in accordance with the Filipino Constitution (article XIII(3) which grants all workers the right to strike). The Government is requested to indicate, in its next report, whether this Code has indeed been adopted and to supply a copy with its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

With reference to its previous direct request concerning the limitation on the right to elect freely workers' representatives contained in Rule II(3)(f) of Book V implementing the Labor Code (officers of a union operating in the enterprise must be employed there), the Committee notes the Government's reply that, as this provision was the outcome of tripartite consultations, it would be unfeasible to advocate its amendment without going through the same consultation process, but that the Government has requested ILO assistance for a review of the labour laws and it will keep the Committee informed of developments in relation to this provision.

The Committee accordingly asks the Government to indicate in its future reports progress towards rendering this requirement more flexible so as to allow, for example, a reasonable proportion of union's officers to come from outside the particular enterprise or to admit as candidates persons who have previously been employed in the occupation or enterprise concerned (General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, 1983, paragraph 158).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

With reference to its previous observations, the Committee takes note of the Government's statement in the Conference Committee in June 1991 that, with the assistance of the ILO, efforts were under way to bring the existing national laws into conformity with international labour standards and the discussion which took place thereafter, as well as of the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Cases Nos. 1570 and 1610 (approved by the Governing Body in May-June 1991 and May-June 1992, respectively).

For several years the Committee has been raising the following points:

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention

- The requirement that at least 20 per cent of the workers in a bargaining unit are members of a union for the union to be registered (s.234(c) of the Labor Code).

- The requirement of too high a number of unions (10) to establish a federation or a central organization (s.237(a)).

- The prohibition of aliens - other than those with valid permits if the same rights are guaranteed to Filipino workers in the country of origin of the alien workers - from engaging in any trade union activity (s.269) under penalty of deportation (s.272(b)).

Article 3

- Compulsory arbitration when, in the opinion of the Secretary of Labor and Employment, a planned or current strike affects an industry indispensable to the national interest, which results in restrictions on the right to strike in non-essential services (s.263(g) and (i)).

- Penalties for participation in illegal strikes: the dismissal of trade union officers (s.264(a); penal liability to a maximum prison sentence of three years (s.272(a)) or imprisonment for the organizers or leaders of strikes and participants in pickets deemed to be for propaganda purposes against the Government (s.146 of the revised Penal Code).

Noting that information was given to the Committee on Freedom of Association on the passage through Congress of a new Civil Service Code which would grant government workers the right to strike in certain circumstances, in accordance with the Filipino Constitution (article XIII(3) which grants all workers the right to strike), and the most recent information from the Government to the effect that the ILO's technical assistance is being sought for reform of the national labour laws, the Committee trusts that its comments on the above five points will be taken into account with a view to bringing them into conformity with the Convention.

The Committee asks the Government to inform it in its next report of developments in the reform of the labour legislation.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee takes note of the Government's reply to the points it raised in its previous direct request.

1. Regarding section 3(f) of Rule II, Book V, of the Labor Code, it notes the Government's affirmation that the requirement that union officers of unions operating in an establishment must be employed by the establishment is intended to maintain the integrity of an already established and duly registered labour organisation made up of employees of a particular establishment; according to the Government, this requirement does not restrict the workers' freedom to choose their leaders since the organisation in a given establishment would have been set up by the workers themselves for their own benefit. It points out that if such a union affiliates with another union or federation this requirement does not apply.

The Committee would nevertheless recall that this employment-in-the- enterprise requirement could deprive unions of the benefit of experienced outside officers, such as retired workers, as noted in paragraph 158 of the Committee's 1983 General Survey. The Committee accordingly would ask the Government to reconsider this provision so as to allow, for example, a reasonable proportion of the union's officers to come from outside the particular enterprise, or by admitting as candidates persons who have previously been employed in the occupation or enterprise concerned.

The Committee asks the Government to indicate in its future reports, the measures taken or contemplated in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

With reference to its previous observations, the Committee takes note of the Government's report, in particular its statement that the recent amendments to the Labor Code contained in Act No. 6715 were the outcome of tripartite consultation.

In its previous observation the Committee had taken note of the amendments introduced by Act No. 6715, but it had still to raise the following points:

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention

- the requirement that at least 20 per cent of the workers in a bargaining unit are members of a union for the union to be registered (section 234(c) of the Labor Code);

- the requirement of too high a number of unions to establish a federation or a central organisation (section 237(a));

- the prohibition of aliens - other than those with valid permits if the same rights are granted to Filipino workers in the country of origin of the alien workers - from engaging in any trade union activity (section 269) under penalty of deportation (section 272(b)).

Article 3

- compulsory arbitration when, in the opinion of the Secretary of Labor and Employment, a planned or current strike affects an industry indispensible to the national interest, which results in restrictions on the right to strike in non-essential services (section 263(g) and (i));

- penalties for participation in illegal strikes: the dismissal of trade union officers (section 264(a)); penal liability under section 272(a) which provides for the possibility of a maximum prison sentence of three years, or under section 164 of the revised Penal Code relating to illegal strikes which provides for sentences of penal servitude for life for the organisers or leaders of strikes or collective actions deemed to be for propaganda purposes against the Government, and imprisonment for strike pickets or collective actions deemed to be for propaganda purposes against the Government.

1. As regards the trade union rights of alien workers, the Committee notes the Government's report according to which to grant foreigners the same rights that are accorded to Filipinos would not be acceptable "as it would not speak well of local union leaders" if the law were to allow foreigners to organise workers in the country.

The Committee considers that it should be left to the workers themselves to decide who can set up workers' organisations and consequently it views this prohibition as undermining the right of migrant workers to play an active role in the defence of their interests. It accordingly requests the Government once again to amend this provision so as to guarantee the trade union rights of aliens working legally in the country without distinction on grounds of reciprocal conditions, and thus to ensure full conformity with Article 2 of the Convention.

2. As regards the membership requirement of section 234(c), the Committee notes from the Government's report that 20 per cent is applied only in establishments where there is a multiplicity of unions and that in unorganised establishments, no such requirement is followed. Likewise it notes that the affiliation requirements for registration of federations or central organisations set out in section 237(a) is, according to the report, necessary to establish the substantial interest of an organisation to form a federation and ensures the strength of the federation in its actions.

The Committee, given the importance of the right of workers to be able to establish organisations of their own choosing and of workers' organisations to be able to establish federations and confederations without previous authorisation, can only again request the Government to reconsider reducing these prescriptions in the legislation so as to give full effect to Articles 2 and 5.

3. As regards limitations on the exercise of the right to strike contained, inter alia, in section 263(g) and (i) of the Labor Code, the Committee notes the Government's emphasis on the definition of industries where the Secretary of Labor can prevent or halt strikes, namely those "indispensable to the national interest" and the specific references in section 263(g) to hospitals. While insisting on the State's need for power to intervene "where its very existence is at stake", the Government recognises that this measure should be used sparingly, particularly as the Philippines' Constitution itself advocates the use of voluntary modes of dispute settlement. According to the report, it is in fact unions which have increasingly petitioned the Secretary to assume jurisdiction especially where collective bargaining negotiations are deadlocked. Despite this explanation, the Committee must insist on revision of this provision of the Labor Code which still, in the opinion of the Committee, is not in full conformity with the principle of freedom of association regarding situations where strike action may be limited or totally banned. It recalls that such intervention is permissible in the following cases: (1) for public servants acting in their capacity as agents of the public authority; (2) in essential services, i.e. those whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population; and (3) in acute national crises for a reasonable period.

Since the definition in section 236(g) goes beyond the three situations outlined above, the Committee would again request the Government to take measures to limit this restriction on the right to strike.

4. As regards penalties under section 272 of the Labor Code and section 164 of the revised Penal Code for engaging in illegal strikes, the Committee notes from the Government's report that there is no automatic prosecution since efforts are made to settle disputes extra-judicially and government prosecutors are required to secure clearance from the Department of Labor (DOLE) and/or the Office of the President before taking cognisance of complaints for preliminary investigation and eventual filing of cases in the courts. In addition, the DOLE must then conduct a conference with a view to achieving voluntary settlement of the case through the National Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB); this latter body always includes in a settlement agreement provisions for both parties not to engage in retaliatory actions against each other, or for the withdrawal of any cases filed against either of them.

The Committee acknowledges the role of the NCMB but points out that section 272 sets out strong penalties, including imprisonment of up to three years, for violations of section 264, a provision which this Committee considers lays excessive restrictions on legitimate strike action. Moreover, the revised Penal Code still lays down sanctions of life imprisonment. So, where the NCMB fails to achieve a settlement and workers go on strike, they run the risk of severe sanctions for exercising a right which the supervisory bodies have consistently protected. It thus recalls that penal sanctions should not be imposed for strikes except where the grounds of their illegality are in accordance with the principles of freedom of association, such as those outlined above. In such cases, the sanctions should be proportionate to the offences committed and penalties of imprisonment should not be imposed in the case of peaceful strikes. The Committee accordingly asks the Government to review section 272 of the Code and section 164 of the Penal Code so as to make the sanctions for illegal strikes commensurate with the limits described above.

5. Lastly, the Committee notes the Government's acknowledgement that the present law needs some improvement; it points out that the ILO is at its disposal for any assistance that the Government may need in revising the legislation along the lines outlined above and covering all the points raised by the Committee.

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

1. The Committee notes the amendments made to Book V of the Labor Code by Act No. 6715 and its Regulations. It notes in particular that section 3(f) of Rule II, Book V, provides that no person who is not an employee or worker of the company or establishment can be elected or appointed as an officer of a trade union.

The Committee wishes to draw the Government's attention to paragraph 158 of its 1983 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining and in particular to the fact that, by virtue of the principle set out in Article 3 of the Convention, workers have the right to elect their representatives in full freedom without any intervention by the public authorities which would restrict the exercise of this right. In the Committee's opinion, provisions such as the one referred to above may prevent qualified persons, such as pensioners or full-time union officers, from carrying out union duties. Trade union organisations should be left to themselves to determine this matter through their own rules.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to envisage making its legislation more flexible by lifting the requirements that are set out regarding occupation for a reasonable proportion of trade union officers and to supply information on the measures that it intends to take to conform to these provisions of the Convention.

2. The Committee notes that by virtue of section 238 of the Labor Code the certificate of registration of a trade union can be cancelled for the reasons set out in section 239.

It also notes that, under section 9 of Rule II, Book V, as amended, an appeal against such a decision, which has been taken after hearing the party concerned, can only be made to the Bureau or Secretary of Labor and Employment.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the ordinary courts may consider an appeal against a decision taken by the administrative authorities and whether appeals to the courts suspend a decision to cancel registration.

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

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government representative to the Conference Committee in 1989. It also notes the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 1444 (268th Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association, approved by the Governing Body at its November 1989 Session) and the adoption of Act No. 6715, which came into force on 2 March 1989, to amend the Labour Code, and in particular Book V (labour relations) and the Regulations issued thereunder which came into force on 7 June 1989. Although these texts make a number of positive changes, particularly as regards limiting the supervisory powers of the authorities over trade union finances and the trade union rights of aliens, they continue not to be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention on several points.

The Committee recalls that its comments dealt with the following points:

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention

- the requirement for at least 20 per cent of the workers in a bargaining unit to be members of a union for the union to be registered (section 234(c) of the Labour Code);

- the requirement of too high a number of unions to establish a federation or a central organisation (section 237(a));

- the prohibition of aliens from engaging in any trade union activity (section 269) under penalty of deportation (section 272(b)).

Article 3

- the broad powers of inquiry of the Secretary of Labor into the financial affairs of trade unions;

- the requirement of a majority of union members in a bargaining unit for the calling of a strike (section 263(f)), whereas a simple majority (excluding those workers not taking part in the ballot) of a bargaining unit should be sufficient for this purpose;

- compulsory arbitration when, in the opinion of the Secretary of Labor and Employment, a planned or current strike affects the national interest, including industrial export zones, which result in restrictions on the right to strike in non-essential services (section 263(g) and (i));

- sentences in the event of illegal strikes: the dismissal of trade union officers (section 264(a)); penal liability under section 272(a) which provides for the possibility of a maximum prison sentence of six months, or under section 164 of the revised Penal Code relating to illegal strikes which provides for sentences of penal servitude for life for the organisers or leaders of strikes or collective actions deemed to be for propaganda purposes against the Government, and imprisonment for pickets for strikes or collective actions deemed to be for propaganda purposes against the Government.

1. The Committee notes with satisfaction that section 274 of the Labour Code respecting the powers of inquiry into the financial affairs of trade unions has been amended and only authorises the authorities to undertake such inquiries upon the filing of a complaint that is duly supported and is signed by at least 20 per cent of the members of a bargaining unit.

2. As regards the trade union rights of alien workers, the Committee takes due note that, by virtue of section 269, as amended by Act No. 6715, aliens with valid permits issued by the Department of Labor and Employment may establish organisations of their own choosing and join them. However, the Committee notes that the legislation still requires, for the granting of trade union rights to aliens, that the same rights are granted to Filipino workers in the country of origin of the alien worker. Any violation of the provisions of Title VIII respecting strikes and lock-outs and the participation of aliens in trade union activities may result in the immediate deportation of alien workers (section 272(b)).

In its 1983 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, the Committee of Experts indicated in paragraph 97 that restrictions based on nationality may, among other effects, prevent migrant workers from playing an active role in the defence of their interests, especially in sectors where they are the major source of labour.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend its legislation so as to guarantee the trade union rights of aliens working legally in the country without distinction on grounds of reciprocal conditions.

3. In its previous observation, the Committee indicated that the powers of the Secretary of Labor and Employment to prevent or terminate a strike, when the dispute affects the national interest, may constitute a restriction on the right of workers to take strike action in non-essential services.

Although it notes that certain amendments introduced by Act No. 6715 are along the lines of observing the principles of the Convention, the Committee nevertheless notes that by virtue of section 263(g), as amended, the Secretary of Labor and Employment may still prevent or terminate a strike by referring a dispute to compulsory arbitration when it takes place in an industry that is indispensable to the national interest (without giving other details).

The Committee once again recalls that the purpose of trade union organisations is to defend the interests of their members; in this connection, they should be able to take strike action, which is considered as one of the essential means of achieving this objective, without the authorities being able to terminate it unilaterally. However, the Committee has always admitted that strikes could be restricted, or even prohibited, in three cases: (1) for public servants acting in their capacity as agents of the public authority; (2) in essential services, i.e. those whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population; (3) in a situation of acute national crisis for a reasonable period. Nevertheless, the wording of section 263(g) empowers the Secretary of Labor and Employment to restrict the right to strike in industries which are not essential in the sense of the Convention.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to take measures to limit restrictions on the right to strike as set out in these comments.

4. As regards penalties for engaging in illegal strikes, the Committee notes that trade union officers who have participated in illegal strikes are still liable to dismissal and that the penal sanctions have been strengthened since, under the terms of the new section 272(a), any person who has engaged in an illegal strike may be punished by a sentence of imprisonment, the minimum length of which has been increased from one day to three months and the maximum from six months to three years. Furthermore, section 164 of the Penal Code has not been repealed.

The Committee emphasises once again that it should not be possible to impose penal sanctions for strikes except where the grounds for their illegality are in accordance with the principles of freedom of association. However, in such cases, the sanctions should be proportionate to the offences committed and penalties of imprisonment should not be imposed in the case of peaceful strikes. It therefore requests the Government to make the sanctions for illegal strikes more flexible within the limits mentioned above.

5. The Committee notes that the provisions respecting the minimum number of members of a trade union, which is set at 20 per cent of the workers of a bargaining unit, for the union to be registered (section 234(c)), the provisions concerning the minimum number of trade unions to establish a federation or a central union organisation, which is fixed at ten (section 237(a)), and the provisions laying down the majority of the members of a trade union in a bargaining unit that are needed in a vote for the calling of a strike (section 263(f)) have not been amended by Act No. 6715.

The Committee also takes due note, from the information supplied by the Government representative to the Conference Committee in 1989, that the National Tripartite Review Committee is now a permanent body convened regularly for the purpose of reviewing legislation in accordance with the principles of the Convention.

The Committee therefore trusts, in the same way as the Committee on Freedom of Association, that the aspects of the legislation that remain contrary to the Convention will be re-examined in the light of its comments. It therefore requests the Government to supply information in its next report on the work of the National Tripartite Review Committee concerning the provisions of the national legislation that are not in conformity with the Convention and on the measures that the Government plans to take to give full effect to the Convention.

The Committee reminds the Government that the ILO is at its disposal for any assistance that it may need for the current revision of the legislation in order to bring the whole of its legislation into conformity with the requirements of the Convention.