Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Gabon (Ratification: 1960)

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

A Government representative welcomed the vigilance which had been shown by the ILO in enforcing applications of its standards, particularly as concerned member States slipping dangerously in their application under the weight of economic crisis; it was in this spirit that the Government communicated to the present Committee information on the application of the Convention. As concerned Articles 173 and 174 of the Labour Code (which created a trade union solidarity tax in favour of COSYGA) and its implementing decree, the Government had always recognised the relevance of the observations of the Committee of Experts; it had never stopped expressing its will to bring its legislation into conformity with the Convention. As the Government had indicated in its reports, as well as in 1984 to the Committee, these precisions were adopted with the consent of the social partners at a point in time when things were quite different than they are now. Today the country lives in a new political and social context. The new Constitution promulgated by Law No.3/91 and in force since 26 January 1991 recognised individual freedoms and Article 13 of the first part establishes the right to form associations, political parties or structures, unions, societies and social interest groups as well as religious communities; these rights are guaranteed to all under the conditions established by the law. This recognition of individual freedoms has a corollary in the overall social plan in the abolition of the trade union monopoly, that is to say with the creation of a true and complete freedom of association. Thus a draft labour code, which was discussed during a tripartite meeting from January to April 1991 in which participated the unitary employers' and workers' centres and other organisations of workers and employers, has already been examined by the Government and will probably be presented before the end of the year to the National Assembly. The amendments envisaged include the repeal of Article 174 of the current Labour Code. As regards Law No. 13/80, it became inapplicable and, in practice, meaningless with the creation of freeedom of association. Since March 1990 the trade union solidarity tax has not been deducted; a law will be adopted for its formal repeal. As concerns the provisions relating to compulsory arbitration which restrict the right of workers to strike, a draft law specifically on the right to strike (which takes into account the requirements of the Convention) has been drafted and examined by the Government and may be integrated into the revised Labour Code.

The speaker indicated that the Government has not sent a report for the period ending 30 June 1990. This was not done because the information which has just been given to the Committee had not yet been ready for communication; also it did not seem appropriate to put forward again the same arguments which had been made in previous reports. The speaker concluded by indicating that practice had overcome legislation and that his Government would inform the Committee of Experts of the progress which would occur.

The Workers' members noted with interest the information communicated by the Government concerning the important questions raised in the observations of the Committee of Experts; it did allow them to hope that the various restrictions on freedom of association would be lifted. They indicated that the draft laws mentioned should be submitted to the Committee of Experts as soon as possible and hoped to be able to note progress in the near future.

The Employers' members suggested that the present Committee's discussion might not have been necessary if the government had sent on time a report containing information of the current state of the situation. They believed that the information communicated by the Government concerning the legislation envisaged and of the fact that practice has already changed, permitted a positive interim assessment of the situation; they hoped that the Committee would soon note that the legislation and practice is in full conformity with the Convention.

The Workers' member of Gabon stated that his country had to conform to the Conventions which it had ratified. He recalled that COSYGA was freely formed by workers on 4 October 1969 and indicated that both the old and new Constitutions recognised freedom of association; it was for good reasons that the authorities recognised in the law of 1973 COSYGA as the sole trade union centre and that this had not disturbed its members. The Labour Code of 1978 contained these same provision. The speaker pointed out that since March 1990 many unions had been formed; in August 1990 the general convention of Gabonese trade unions was held; all the trade unions which were present at the national conference and all those which continued in existence after the conference responded to the call and confirmed trade union unity. As concerns the reform of the Labour Code the speaker hoped an ILO mission would be undertaken to Gabon before the draft law was presented to the National Assembly because it contained provisions which affected the right to strike as well as other acquired social rights. Concerning the trade union solidarity tax, the speaker commented that in Africa voluntary contributions cannot support an institution, be it private or public. The Gabonese trade union movement, after having succeeded in uniting itself in 1969, found that it lacked material means and staff. Having demanded the institution of a check-off system and after the refusal by the authorities to institute an obligatory withholding, it was the trade union solidarity tax which was used for material support; in practice it favoured only COSYGA as the only trade union centre. He hoped that this system could be maintained for the benefit of all the centres as it was - for the old unions as well as the new - the only means by which they were able to function. In Africa, a union which must rely only upon voluntary contributions may not function; on this basis it may be able to operate on a seasonal basis with a limited staff working only outside of business hours. He hoped that the ILO, the Government and trade union leaders would find a formula which would guarantee the necessary resources for the unions' functioning.

The Government representative reiterated his promise to communicate to the Committee of Experts all the text of laws which would be proposed to apply the Convention. Referring to the intervention by the Workers' delegate concerning the trade union tax, he said that the decision of the Government to eliminate the tax and repeal the law which made the tax obligatory was irreversible. If COSYGA encountered financial difficulties it was its right to discuss the question together with its members and perhaps with employers' organisations in the hope of determining whether financing could be re-established by a more conventional means.

The Committee noted the information submitted by the Government and the deliberations held during its session. It recalled that for several years the Committee of Experts had requested the Government to repeal the legislative restrictions as regards, among other things, genuine trade union pluralism. It is aware that changes have occurred, in particular and because of the adoption of a new Constitution which should make it legally possible to develop towards freedom of association. The Committee nevertheless regretted that the Government had not sent in a report on the application of Conventions. It expressed the hope that this report would be provided for consideration next year and that it would contain information on measures taken and, in particular, on the adoption of the new Labour Code, to bring legislation and practice into conformity with the requirements of the Convention.

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

Previous comment

The Committee notes the adoption of Act No. 022/2021 of 19 November 2021 issuing the Labour Code.

Article 3. Negotiated minimum service. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the provisions adopted relating to the procedures for determining the list of sectors in which it is compulsory to provide a minimum service, the arrangements for the negotiation of this minimum service and any independent body envisaged to settle disagreements in the event of collective disputes. The Committee also asked the Government to hold negotiations with the social partners with a view to determining the characteristics of a minimum service in the event of a strike in the education sector. The Committee notes that the Government refers to the provisions of section 385 of the new Labour Code, which provides for a mandatory minimum service for all enterprises on declaration of strike action. In the event of a strike in an enterprise in which the total cessation of work would place public health, access to care, access to water and electricity or the equilibrium of the national economy at risk, the strike notice shall obligatorily be accompanied by a list of the days and hours at which a minimum service shall be provided, as well as of the staff required to provide the minimum service, which shall be equal to 40 per cent of activity, spread over the day, exclusive of breaks. Section 385 also provides that the practical arrangements for putting in place the minimum service, according to specific conditions, may be organized through sectoral collective agreements.

While observing that the minimum service was previously restricted to certain enterprises by reason of their social utility or their specific nature (section 348 of the Labour Code of 1994), and not applicable to all enterprises, as is the case under the new section 385, the Committee recalls that the maintenance of minimum services in the event of strikes should only be possible in certain situations, namely: (i) in services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population (or essential services “in the strict sense of the term”); (ii) in services which are not essential in the strict sense of the term, but in which strikes of a certain magnitude and duration could cause an acute crisis threatening the normal conditions of existence of the population; and (iii) in public services of fundamental importance. The committee also recalls that such a service should meet at least two requirements: (i) it must genuinely and exclusively be a minimum service, that is one which is limited to the operations which are strictly necessary to meet the basic needs of the population or the minimum requirements of the service, while maintaining the effectiveness of the pressure brought to bear; and (ii) since this system restricts one of the essential means of pressure available to workers to defend their interests, their organizations should be able, if they so wish, to participate in defining such a service, along with employers and the public authorities (see the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraphs 136–137). In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the provisions of section 385 as indicated.

Right of organizations to elect their representatives in full freedom. The Committee notes that under section 305 of the new Labour Code members of the executive board of a trade union that are of foreign nationality shall have resided in Gabon for five consecutive years having exercised a defined professional activity during that period, while the requirement under the former Labour Code (section 272) was 18 months’ residence. The Committee recalls that it considered that national legislation should allow foreign workers to take up trade union office, at least after a reasonable period of residence in the host country. For example it considered that a requirement of a period of residence of three years could be considered as being reasonable (see the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 103). In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to consider taking measures to amend section 305 of the Labour Code and to report on any developments in this regard.

Article 2. Trade union rights of minors. The Committee notes that section 307 of the Labour Code provides that minors aged more than 16 years may join an organization of their own choosing unless such membership is opposed by their legal representatives. In the Committee’s opinion, this provision is contrary to Article 2 of the Convention. Accordingly, the Committee invites the Government to take measures with a view to modifying section 307 of the Labour Code to allow minors to join an organization of their own choosing, on attaining the minimum working age, without authorization on the part of their parents or guardians.

The Committee regrets that the adoption of the new Labour Code did not provide the opportunity to ensure greater conformity between its provisions and the requirements of the Convention and hopes that the Government will do its utmost to take the necessary measures in the near future.

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

Previous comment

In its previous comments, further to the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) relating to restrictions on the right to strike in the public sector on the repeatedly invoked grounds of ensuring public safety, the Committee asked the Government to provide detailed information on the number of strikes called in the public sector, the sectors concerned and the number of strikes prohibited on the grounds of a possible disruption of the public order.

Moreover, further to the observations received from Education International (EI) denouncing the adoption of various regulations which are making the exercise of trade union activities in the education sector increasingly difficult, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken in that sector to ensure that trade unions have access to educational establishments so that they can perform their representative functions and defend their members’ interests.

The Committee notes that according to the Government, only 12.34 per cent of school establishments across the entire national territory were affected during the unlimited general strike called in September 2021 by the National Congress of Education Sector Unions (CONASYSED) and the National Education Union (SENA). However, the Government adds that it is not able to provide the information requested by the Committee, since the collection and centralization of data is ongoing.

The Committee regrets the Government’s inability to provide the requested information, and reiterates its request with the hope that the Government will shortly be able to provide said information.

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

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

The Committee notes with concern that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition

Article 3 of the Convention. Negotiated minimum service. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to report any new developments concerning the adoption of the draft revised version of the Labour Code and, if applicable, to specify in particular the provisions adopted relating to the procedures for determining the list of sectors in which it is compulsory to provide a minimum service, the arrangements for the negotiation of this minimum service and any independent body envisaged to settle disagreements in the event of collective disputes. The Committee also asked the Government to hold negotiations with the social partners with a view to determining the characteristics of a minimum service in the event of a strike in the education, training and research sector.As there has been no reply from the Government, the Committee reiterates its request and trusts that the Government will take all necessary steps without delay to provide the requested information. The Committee once again encourages the Government to continue consultations with the social partners with a view to reaching an agreement on the minimum services to be provided in the event of a strike in the education sector.

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

The Committee notes with concern that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

Repetition

In its previous comments, further to the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) relating to restrictions on the right to strike in the public sector on the repeatedly invoked grounds of ensuring public safety, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the number of strikes called in the public sector as a whole, the individual sectors concerned and the number of strikes prohibited on the grounds of a possible disruption of public order. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that trade unions within a number of government departments, including customs, taxation, higher education, national education, health and social affairs, have availed themselves of their right to strike. Moreover, the Government indicates that the National Congress of Education Sector Unions (CONASYSED) held its latest strike at the Martine Oulabou Public School without being removed from the premises and without the right to strike being prohibited.While taking note of the information provided by the Government on examples of strikes called in the public sector, the Committee requests once again that the Government provide detailed information on the number of strikes that have been called in the public sector, and the number of strikes prohibited on the grounds of a possible disruption of public order.

Moreover, further to the observations previously received from Education International (EI), denouncing the adoption of various regulations which are making the exercise of union activities in the education sector increasingly difficult, the Committee asked the Government to indicate the measures taken in the education sector to ensure that trade unions have access to educational establishments so that they can perform their representative functions and defend their members’ interests. The Committee notes with regret that there has been no reply from the Government on this matter.The Committee reiterates its request and expects that the Government will take all necessary steps to provide the requested information.

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

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition

Article 3 of the Convention. Negotiated minimum service. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to report any new developments concerning the adoption of the draft revised version of the Labour Code and, if applicable, to specify in particular the provisions adopted relating to the procedures for determining the list of sectors in which it is compulsory to provide a minimum service, the arrangements for the negotiation of this minimum service and any independent body envisaged to settle disagreements in the event of collective disputes. The Committee also asked the Government to hold negotiations with the social partners with a view to determining the characteristics of a minimum service in the event of a strike in the education, training and research sector. As there has been no reply from the Government, the Committee reiterates its request and trusts that the Government will take all necessary steps without delay to provide the requested information. The Committee once again encourages the Government to continue consultations with the social partners with a view to reaching an agreement on the minimum services to be provided in the event of a strike in the education sector.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

Repetition

In its previous comments, further to the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) relating to restrictions on the right to strike in the public sector on the repeatedly invoked grounds of ensuring public safety, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the number of strikes called in the public sector as a whole, the individual sectors concerned and the number of strikes prohibited on the grounds of a possible disruption of public order. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that trade unions within a number of government departments, including customs, taxation, higher education, national education, health and social affairs, have availed themselves of their right to strike. Moreover, the Government indicates that the National Congress of Education Sector Unions (CONASYSED) held its latest strike at the Martine Oulabou Public School without being removed from the premises and without the right to strike being prohibited. While taking note of the information provided by the Government on examples of strikes called in the public sector, the Committee requests once again that the Government provide detailed information on the number of strikes that have been called in the public sector, and the number of strikes prohibited on the grounds of a possible disruption of public order.

Moreover, further to the observations previously received from Education International (EI), denouncing the adoption of various regulations which are making the exercise of union activities in the education sector increasingly difficult, the Committee asked the Government to indicate the measures taken in the education sector to ensure that trade unions have access to educational establishments so that they can perform their representative functions and defend their members’ interests. The Committee notes with regret that there has been no reply from the Government on this matter. The Committee reiterates its request and expects that the Government will take all necessary steps to provide the requested information.

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

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Article 3 of the Convention. Negotiated minimum service. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to report any new developments concerning the adoption of the draft revised version of the Labour Code and, if applicable, to specify in particular the provisions adopted relating to the procedures for determining the list of sectors in which it is compulsory to provide a minimum service, the arrangements for the negotiation of this minimum service and any independent body envisaged to settle disagreements in the event of collective disputes. The Committee also asked the Government to hold negotiations with the social partners with a view to determining the characteristics of a minimum service in the event of a strike in the education, training and research sector. As there has been no reply from the Government, the Committee reiterates its request and trusts that the Government will take all necessary steps without delay to provide the requested information. The Committee once again encourages the Government to continue consultations with the social partners with a view to reaching an agreement on the minimum services to be provided in the event of a strike in the education sector.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

In its previous comments, further to the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) relating to restrictions on the right to strike in the public sector on the repeatedly invoked grounds of ensuring public safety, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the number of strikes called in the public sector as a whole, the individual sectors concerned and the number of strikes prohibited on the grounds of a possible disruption of public order. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that trade unions within a number of government departments, including customs, taxation, higher education, national education, health and social affairs, have availed themselves of their right to strike. Moreover, the Government indicates that the National Congress of Education Sector Unions (CONASYSED) held its latest strike at the Martine Oulabou Public School without being removed from the premises and without the right to strike being prohibited. While taking note of the information provided by the Government on examples of strikes called in the public sector, the Committee requests once again that the Government provide detailed information on the number of strikes that have been called in the public sector, and the number of strikes prohibited on the grounds of a possible disruption of public order.

Moreover, further to the observations previously received from Education International (EI), denouncing the adoption of various regulations which are making the exercise of union activities in the education sector increasingly difficult, the Committee asked the Government to indicate the measures taken in the education sector to ensure that trade unions have access to educational establishments so that they can perform their representative functions and defend their members’ interests. The Committee notes with regret that there has been no reply from the Government on this matter. The Committee reiterates its request and expects that the Government will take all necessary steps to provide the requested information.

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

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

Article 3 of the Convention. Negotiated minimum service. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the current process of the revision of the Labour Code and requested the Government to hold consultations with the social partners in this framework on issues concerning the determination of the list of sectors in which it is compulsory to provide a minimum service, the arrangements for the negotiation of this service and the need for an independent body to settle disputes, if the social partners so wish. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the draft revision of the Labour Code was validated by the administration and the social partners in April 2015 and submitted to Parliament, and that it cannot provide any more information on this matter until the Parliament decides on the draft submitted. The Committee requests the Government to report any new developments concerning the adoption of the draft revision of the Labour Code and, where applicable, to specify in particular the provisions adopted relating to the mechanisms for determining the list of sectors in which it is compulsory to provide a minimum service, the arrangements for the negotiation of this minimum service and any independent body envisaged to settle disputes in the event of collective disputes.

Furthermore, in its previous comments, the Committee referred to Circular No. 01418/MENSRSIPPG/CAB of 16 November 2009 on the minimum service in schools and recalled that minimum services can be established in the education sector in the event of a long strike, but that they should be determined in full consultation with the social partners. The Committee, therefore, requested the Government to hold negotiations with the social partners with a view to determining the characteristics of a minimum service in the event of a strike in the education, training and research sector. In its reply, the Government indicates that the negotiations conducted with the social partners with a view to achieving a comprehensive and satisfactory response to this issue could not be concluded as a result of the radicalism and systematic recourse to strikes by some trade unions. The Government nevertheless indicates that it is determined to encourage dialogue in the sector. The Committee encourages the Government to continue consultations with the social partners with a view to an agreed determination of the minimum services to be provided in the event of a strike in the education sector, and requests the Government to report any further developments in this regard.

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

The Committee notes the observations made by the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) in a communication received on 1 September 2015, which are of a general nature.

In its previous comments, further to the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) relating to restrictions on the right to strike in the public sector on the recurrently cited grounds of ensuring public safety, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the number of strikes called in the public sector, the sectors concerned and the number of strikes prohibited on the grounds of a possible disruption of public order. In the absence of a reply, the Committee reiterates its request and trusts that the Government will take, without delay, all the necessary measures to provide the information requested.

Moreover, further to the observations previously received from Education International (EI), which denounced the adoption of various regulations making the exercise of union activities in the education sector increasingly difficult, the Committee requested the Government to specify the measures taken in the education sector to ensure that trade unions have access to educational establishments so that they can perform their representation functions and defend their members’ interests. In the absence of a reply, the Committee reiterates its request and trusts that the Government will take, without delay, all the necessary measures to provide the information requested.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Article 3 of the Convention. Negotiated minimum service. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to Decree No. 023/PR/MTEPS of 11 February 2010 adopting the list of enterprises obliged to provide a minimum service and determining the procedures for its implementation. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the minimum services agreed with the social partners in relation to the list of different sectors determined in section 5 of the Decree, and to indicate the legislative provisions that prescribe settlement by an independent body of any disagreement regarding the minimum service. In its reply, the Government indicates that the minimum service is negotiated on a case by-case basis by the parties under the supervision of the competent labour inspector, and that up to now it has always been established in a consensual manner. Moreover, the Government considers that in the current socio-economic environment, an independent body does not need to be established to resolve any disagreement regarding the composition of the minimum service. Nevertheless, the Government indicates that it intends to examine this possibility. Noting the Government’s indication that it is reviewing the Labour Code in consultation with the social partners, the Committee trusts that the issues concerning the determination of the list of sectors obliged to provide a minimum service, the arrangements for the negotiation of agreements and the need for an independent body to settle disputes could be examined within this framework if the social partners express the need to do so. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any development in this respect.

In its previous comments, the Committee noted Circular No. 01418/MENSRSIPPG/CAB of 16 November 2009 concerning the minimum service for schools. The Committee recalled that minimum services can be established in the education sector in the event of a long strike, but that they should be determined in full consultation with the social partners. The Committee previously requested the Government to indicate the extent to which the minimum services provided for in the 2009 Circular were determined in consultation with the social partners concerned. In its reply, the Government indicates that it is holding negotiations with the social partners from the education, training and research sector with a view to achieving a comprehensive and satisfactory response in this matter. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

The Committee notes the observations made by the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) in a communication received on 1 September 2014.

The Committee recalls that its previous comments referred to the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received in 2011, relating to restrictions on the right to strike in the public sector on the frequently stated grounds of ensuring public safety. In the absence of a reply in this respect, the Committee urges the Government to provide information on the number of strikes in the public sector during the next reporting period, the sectors concerned and the number of strikes prohibited on the grounds that they may disrupt public order.

The Committee also referred previously to the observations received from Education International (EI), which denounced the adoption of various regulatory instruments that have been making the exercise of union activities in the education sector increasingly difficult, and particularly the Circular of 4 April 2011 (No. 000294/MENESRSIC/ SG/DAPE) of the Director of the Estuaire Provincial Academy, which prohibits trade unions from conducting any activities in establishments in which teachers work. According to EI, this Circular was in violation not only of the provisions of the Convention, but also of Act No. 18/92 on the establishment and operation of trade unions. The Committee therefore requested the Government to take the necessary measures to make it possible for the representatives of trade unions to have lawful access to teachers in educational establishments. In the absence of a reply in this regard, the Committee urges the Government to specify the measures taken in the education sector to ensure that the trade unions have access to educational establishments so that they can perform their duty of representing and defending their members’ interests.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Article 3 of the Convention. Negotiated minimum service. In its previous comments the Committee asked the Government to provide copies of any text issued under the Labour Code concerning minimum service (sections 348, 352 and 354 of the Labour Code) and any other texts relating to the application of the Convention. In this regard, the Committee notes Decree No. 023/PR/MTEPS of 11 February 2010 adopting the list of enterprises obliged to provide a minimum service and determining the procedures for the implementation thereof, a copy of which is attached to the Government’s report. The Committee notes that, under section 2 of the Decree, minimum service is defined as the organization and execution, by a group of employees on strike from an enterprise or one or more of its establishments, of activities the total interruption of which is such as to jeopardize vital economic activities or the continuity of essential public services. The Committee observes that section 5 of the Decree establishes a list of enterprises which are obliged to provide a minimum service. The Committee recalls that the determination of a minimum service should be limited to the operations which are strictly necessary to meet the basic needs of the population or the minimum requirements of the service in order to avoid endangering public health or safety. It also recalls that the workers’ and employers’ organizations concerned should be consulted in the definition of such a minimum service and that in the event of disagreement regarding the composition of the minimum service, the legislation should provide for the settlement thereof by an independent body and not by the Ministry of Labour or the ministry or public enterprise concerned. The Committee requests the Government to send information on the minimum services agreed with the social partners in relation to the list of different sectors determined in section 5 of the Decree of 11 February 2010. It also requests the Government to indicate the provisions that prescribe settlement by an independent body of any disagreement regarding composition of the minimum service.

The Committee notes Circular No. 01418/MENSRSIPPG/CAB of 16 November 2009 concerning the minimum service for schools. It notes that the circular provides in the event of a stoppage for the organization and operation of the following minimum service: regular functioning of all first and final years of all cycles of education, training and research; normal organization of examinations and competitions held at the end of a cycle and for moving to the year above; teaching of core courses in the intermediate years. This minimum service is one of the prerequisites for a strike to be legal. The Committee considers that even though minimum services can be established in the education sector in the event of a long strike, these must be determined in full consultation with the social partners. Hence, in determining minimum services and the number of workers for ensuring they are maintained, it is important to have the participation not only of the public authorities but also of the workers’ organizations concerned. Apart from the fact that this would enable a careful discussion of what minimum services are strictly necessary in reality, it would contribute towards ensuring that minimum services are not extended so far as to render the strike useless because of its limited impact and towards avoiding giving the impression to the trade unions that any failure of the strike is due to the minimum service having been prescribed in excessively broad terms and in a unilateral manner. The Government is therefore requested to indicate whether the minimum services provided for in Circular No. 01418/MENSRSIPPG/CAB of 16 November 2009 concerning the minimum service for schools have been determined in consultation with the social partners concerned. If not, the Government is requested to take the necessary steps to start negotiations as soon as possible with the social partners with a view to determining the features of a minimum service in the event of a strike in the education, training and research sector. The Committee trusts that the Government’s next report will contain information in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Observations received from trade unions. The Committee notes the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 4 August 2011 concerning restrictions on the right to strike in the public sector and also problems with exercising trade union rights in the education sector. The Committee also notes the communication of 31 August 2011 from Education International (EI), which denounces the adoption of various regulatory instruments which, it claims, have been making the exercise of union activities in the education sector more and more difficult since 2009. In its communication EI denounces in particular the circular of 4 April 2011 from the Director of the Estuaire Provincial Academy prohibiting trade unions from conducting any activities in educational establishments, i.e. the teachers’ workplace. The Committee recalls that freedom of association implies for workers’ organizations the right to organize their activities in full freedom aimed at defending the occupational interests of their members, including the right of workers’ representatives to have access to all workplaces where such access is necessary to enable them to perform their representative duties. However, access for workers’ representatives to workplaces must of course not be used to the detriment of the efficient functioning of the administration or public institutions concerned. For this reason the workers’ organizations concerned and the employer must seek to reach agreements in such a way that access to the workplace during and outside working hours is recognized for the workers’ organizations without jeopardizing the operation of the administration or public institution concerned. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations on the comments from the ITUC and EI and take the necessary steps in the meantime to ensure that trade union representatives have the possibility of access to teachers in educational establishments, in accordance with the legislation in force.

Furthermore, in its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that the designation of the most representative trade union confederations in the country is not the result of a unilateral decision by the Government, but the outcome of an agreement concluded on 27 March 2007 among six trade union confederations (COSYGA, CGSL, USAP, UTG, CONSINEQ and Intersyndicale), which designated the four most representative organizations to participate in the consultative bodies envisaged by the Labour Code, prior to their subsequent determination through trade union elections. The Committee notes the Government’s confirmation in its latest report that the 2007 agreement still remains in force today and, recognizing that the problem of the representativeness of the trade union confederations persists, repeats its request for assistance from the Office in the organization of occupational elections. Recalling once again that the determination of the most representative organizations must be based on objective, pre-established and precise criteria so as to avoid any possibility of bias or abuse (see the 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 97), the Committee expects that the Government will take the necessary measures to resolve the problem of the representativeness of trade union organizations and hopes that it will be able to avail itself of ILO technical assistance. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any progress achieved in this respect in its next report.

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

Article 3 of the Convention. Negotiated minimum service. The Committee recalls that in its previous comments it requested the Government to provide copies of any text issued under the Labour Code respecting minimum service (sections 348, 352 and 354 of the Labour Code), and any other texts pertaining to the application of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that a draft text regulating minimum service is currently being prepared. The Committee recalls that the determination of a minimum service should be limited to the operations which are strictly necessary to meet the basic needs of the population or the minimum requirements of the service, while maintaining the effectiveness of the pressure brought to bear, that the workers’ and employers’ organizations concerned should be consulted in the definition of such a minimum service and that any disagreement should be resolved by an independent body that is able to examine the matter rapidly and is empowered to issue enforceable decisions. The Committee requests the Government to provide copies of any text regulating minimum service once it has been adopted with an indication, where appropriate, of the cases in which it has been applied.

Political strikes. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide information on any occasions in which section 343(a) of the Labour Code has been used to ban a strike. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, no political strikes have been recorded in enterprises or administrative services in Gabon.

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

In its previous observation, the Committee noted the comments of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) of 2007 reporting the arrest and arbitrary detention of representatives of the Free Trade Union Confederation of Gabon (CGSL) over recent years. It notes that, in a communication dated 26 August 2009, the ITUC once again reports cases of the arrest and harassment of members of the CGSL. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that replies to the issues raised by the ITUC have been provided to the Committee on Freedom of Association and that the dispute which gave rise to the arrests has been resolved. The Committee recalls that the arrest and detention, even if only briefly, of trade union leaders and trade unionists for exercising legitimate activities without any charges being laid or court warrants being issued constitutes a serious violation of the principles of freedom of association. The Committee urges the Government to guarantee the representatives of the CGSL the unimpeded exercise of their trade union rights.

Furthermore, the Committee noted the 2007 observations of the Trade Union Congress of Gabon (CSG) reporting the Government’s refusal to consider the issue of the representativeness of trade unions and calling for the organization of trade union elections. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the designation of the most representative trade union confederations in the country is not the result of a unilateral decision by the Government, but the outcome of an agreement concluded on 27 March 2007 between six trade union confederations (COSYGA, CGSL, USAP, UTG, CONSINEQ and Intersyndicale), which designated the four most representative organizations to participate in the consultative bodies envisaged by the Labour Code, prior to their subsequent determination through trade union elections. In this respect, the Government, confirming that the issue of the representativeness of trade union confederations raised by the CSG remains topical, once again requests the assistance of the Office for the organization of trade union elections. The Committee recalls that the determination of the most representative organizations must be based on objective, pre-established and precise criteria so as to avoid any possibility of bias or abuse (see the 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 97). The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures to resolve the problem of the representativeness of trade union organizations, which it acknowledges, and hopes that it will be able to benefit from ILO technical assistance. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any progress achieved in this respect in its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee refers to its previous direct request and asks the Government to provide information and texts concerning the following matters.

Article 3 of the Convention. Negotiated minimum service. In its previous comments, the Committee requested that the Government provide copies of any texts that implement the Labour Code with regard to the minimum service (sections 348, 352 and 354 of the Labour Code, according to the new numbering) and any other texts relating to the application of the Convention. The Committee once again asks the Government to provide copies of any Decree adopted on the minimum service and any other texts pertaining to the application of the Convention, and to indicate whether trade unions may take part in defining the minimum service if they so wish. The Government is also asked to give examples of instances in which the Government or enterprises involved in public management have had to resort to a minimum service during a strike, specifying the procedures for its implementation.

Political strikes. The Committee again requests that the Government provide details of the effect given to section 343(a) of the Labour Code, and particularly the specific reasons in each instance for the banning of a strike under this provision.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes the Government’s report. In its previous observation, the Committee noted the comments of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU, now ITUC – International Trade Union Confederation) which referred largely to legislative issues already addressed by the Committee and restrictions on trade union rights, particularly acts of violence by the police against trade unionists. In its reply, the Government states that, in the cases of strike action referred to by the ICFTU where security forces were obliged to intervene (forestry sector, Ministry of Foreign Affairs), the dispute has been brought to an end through conciliation. The Committee recalls that strikes are one of the essential means available to workers and their organizations for the promotion and defence of their economic and social interests and trusts that in the future the Government will ensure that recourse to law enforcement only occurs in situations of a serious nature in which public order is seriously threatened.

The Committee notes the comments of the ITUC of 28 August 2007 which refer to the arrest and arbitrary imprisonment of representatives of the Free Trade Union Confederation of Gabon (CGSL) over recent years. The Committee also notes the communication from the Trade Union Congress of Gabon (CSG) dated 25 September 2007, which states that the problematic issue of trade union representation has been the object of intensive ILO technical assistance to Gabon, but that at present the Government refuses to address the issue. The CSG states that the designation of the most representative organizations is carried out in violation of the Convention and requests that professional elections be held. The Committee asks the Government to reply to the comments made by the ITUC and the CSG in its next report.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the comments of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) of 10 August 2006, which refer largely to pending issues relating to the legislation and the application of the Convention in practice that are already under examination, as well as restrictions on trade union rights, and particularly on the exercise of the right to strike and acts of violence by the police against trade unionists. The Committee takes note of a recent communication from the Government containing its observations on these comments.

The Committee will examine the comments of the ICFTU with the Government’s observations to these comments at its next session and requests the Government, in the context of the regular reporting cycle, to provide its observations for this session (November-December 2007) on all the matters relating to the legislation and the application of the Convention in practice raised in its previous direct request in 2005 (see 2005 direct request, 76th Session).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report.

Article 3 of the Convention. Negotiated minimum service. In its previous comments, the Committee requested that the Government provide copies of any texts that implement the Labour Code with regard to minimum service (sections 348, 352 and 354 of the Labour Code, according to the new numbering) and any texts relating to the application of the Convention. It also asked the Government to specify how, in the absence of an implementing text, the minimum service is determined and organized, and to indicate whether trade union organizations may participate in defining the minimum service if they so wish. In its last report, the Government indicates that the text governing minimum service during strikes has not yet been published and that it is to be in the form of a decree giving a list of the enterprises concerned by minimum service and setting out procedures for implementing it. The Government indicates, however, that in practice the minimum service is observed and implemented on a case-by-case basis.

The Committee takes note of this information. It requests that the Government once again provide the decree or draft decree on minimum service and any other texts pertaining to the application of the Convention. It again asks the Government to specify whether trade unions may take part in defining the minimum service if they so wish. The Government is also asked to give examples of instances in which the Government or enterprises involved in public management have had to resort to a minimum service during a strike, specifying the procedures for its implementation.

Political strikes. The Committee notes that the Government has taken note of its observations about strike action as a means of seeking solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policy trends, which have a direct impact on membership (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 165). The Committee notes the Government’s statement that it cannot allow strikes triggered by a trade union following a call by one or more political party for political purposes. The Committee again requests that the Government provide details of the effect given to section 343(a) in practice, and particularly of the specific reasons in each instance for the banning of the strike under this provision.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report.

Article 3 of the Convention. Negotiated minimum service. The Committee recalls that in its previous comments it requested the Government to provide a copy of any text implementing the Labour Code as regards minimum service (sections 348, 352 and 354 of the Labour Code, according to the new numbering) and of any other text relating to the application of the Convention. In its last report, the Government indicates that the commission responsible for preparing the implementing legislation for the Labour Code has taken up its work once again following a suspension. The Government will provide the Committee with a copy of the Decree respecting minimum service as soon as it is issued.

The Committee notes this information. It requests the Government to provide it with the Decree or draft decree respecting the minimum service and any other text relating to the application of the Convention. It also requests the Government to indicate the manner in which, in the absence of an implementing text, the minimum service is determined and organized, and whether trade union organizations can participate, if they so wish, in defining this service.

The Committee had noted in previous comments that section 343(a) (new numbering) of the Labour Code classifies as unlawful any strike of a purely political nature. The Committee recalls that organizations responsible for defending workers’ socio-economic and occupational interests should, in principle, be able to use strike action to support their position in seeking solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policy trends which have a direct impact on their members and on workers in general, in particular as regards employment, social protection and the standard of living (see the General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 165). The Committee requests the Government to provide particulars on the application of section 343(a) in practice, and particularly on the specific reasons in each case that have led to the prohibition of strike action under this provision.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report. It recalls that its previous comments concerned the following points.

Article 3 of the Convention. Negotiated minimum service. The Committee had requested the Government to provide the text of any legislation implementing the Labour Code as regards minimum service, as well as any other text relating to the application of the Convention. In its last report, the Government states that the Decree establishing the procedures for implementing a minimum service, as provided for in section 348 of the Labour Code, is under examination by the commission for the preparation of implementing legislation. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide a copy of the above draft Decree so that it can examine its conformity with the provisions of the Convention.

With regard to the comments made in 1998 by the Federation of Energy, Mines and Affiliated Free Trade Unions (FLEEMA) and the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Gabon (CGSL) regarding the refusal by the directors of the enterprise COGEMAT to allow its personnel to join and participate in FLEEMA trade union activities, on the pretext that they do not belong to the same sector, the Committee notes with interest the Government’s indications that it ordered an investigation to ascertain the truth of these allegations. The Government states that the investigation carried out by the labour inspectorate showed that the CGSL’s allegations were well-founded. The Government thus urged the general management of the COGEMAT to allow its personnel to join and participate in the activities of FLEEMA in full freedom, which it agreed to do.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report does not contain a reply to its previous comments. It expresses the hope that the next report will contain full information on the following matters.

The Committee requests that the Government provide the text of any implementing legislation of the Labour Code regarding minimum service, as well as any other text relating to the application of the Convention to enable the Committee to examine its conformity with the provisions of the Convention.

The Committee also notes with regret that the Government has not supplied any information in reply to the comments made in 1998 by the Federation of Energy, Mines and Affiliated Free Trade Unions (FLEEMA) and the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Gabon (CGSL) regarding the refusal of the directors of the enterprise COGEMAT to allow its personnel to join and participate in FLEEMA trade union activities, on the grounds that they do not belong to the same sector.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the measures which have been taken or are envisaged to guarantee the right of employees of COGEMAT to join the trade union of their own choosing, in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comment:

The Committee requests the Government to transmit any implementing legislation of the Labour Code regarding minimum service as well as any other text in respect of the Convention to enable it to examine the scope with reference to the principles of freedom of association.

The Committee regrets that the Government has failed to supply information in response to the comments by the Federation of Energy, Mines and Affiliated Free Trade Unions (FLEEMA) and the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Gabon (CGSL) regarding the refusal of the directors of the enterprise COGEMAT to allow the personnel thereof to join and participate in FLEEMA trade union activities, on the pretext of not belonging to the same sector of activity.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information in its next report concerning measures taken to grant COGEMAT personnel the right to join the trade union of their choice, in conformity with the provisions of Article 2 of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee notes the information in the Government's report that the implementing legislation of the Labour Code has been drawn up, although it is not yet in force. It requests the Government to transmit any implementing legislation regarding minimum service as well as any other text in respect of the Convention to enable it to examine the scope with reference to the principles of freedom of association.

The Committee regrets that the Government has failed to supply information in response to the comments by the Federation of Energy, Mines and Affiliated Free Trade Unions (FLEEMA) and the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Gabon (CGSL) regarding the refusal of the directors of the enterprise COGEMAT to allow the personnel thereof to join and participate in FLEEMA trade union activities, on the pretext of not belonging to the same sector of activity.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information in its next report concerning measures taken to grant COGEMAT personnel the right to join the trade union of their choice, in conformity with the provisions of Article 2 of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. The Committee again recalls that its previous comments referred to the need to transmit the implementing legislation of the new Labour Code respecting minimum service as well as any other decree respecting the application of the Convention to enable it to examine the scope of reference of the principles of freedom of association.

The Committee moreover notes the communications transmitted by the Federation of Energy, Mines and Affiliated Free Trade Unions (FLEEMA) and the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Gabon (CGSL) concerning the allegations of interference in the exercise of the right of freedom of association by several employers and the public authorities. The Committee requests the Government to provide any information which it considers useful in respect of these allegations in its next report.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 1999.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report.

Noting that the Government indicates that the regulations concerning the new Labour Code are being drawn up, the Committee requests the Government to send it the implementing legislation for the minimum service as well as any other decree relating to the application of this Convention so as to enable it to examine the scope with reference to the principles of freedom of association.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

The Committee notes the Government's report.

With regard to the calling of strikes, the Committee notes that a minimum service has to be maintained in certain enterprises on the grounds of their social utility or their specific nature (section 349) or because they are responsible for the provision of a public service (section 353). The Committee recalls that the right to strike can be restricted, or even prohibited, only in respect of public servants exercising authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, or in the event of an acute national crisis. The Committee requests the Government to provide the text of any decree issued under section 349 of the Labour Code determining the list of enterprises in which a compulsory minimum service is required, as well as the text of section 22 of Act No. 18/92 respecting the minimum service to be established by the trade union or unions of the employees concerned in the public service.

The Committee also notes that any strike which is of a purely political nature (section 342(a)) or which is called during the course of collective bargaining (section 342(e)) is unlawful. The Committee wishes to recall in this respect that organizations responsible for defending workers' socio-economic and occupational interests should, in principle, be able to use strike action to support their position in the search for solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policy trends which have a direct impact on their members and on workers in general, in particular as regards employment, social protection and the standard of living (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 165).

Finally, the Committee requests the Government to provide information in future reports on the conclusion of any collective agreement concerning the question of the deduction from wages of union dues, as well as any regulations or decrees adopted under section 380 of the Labour Code relating to the application of this Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received, but it has noted the communication from the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Gabon concerning the application of the Convention. The Committee recalls that the divergencies between the national legislation and the Convention concern the following points:

-- the need, in order to lift legislative restrictions on the possibility of trade union pluralism, to repeal or amend section 174 of the Labour Code, which obliges all workers' or employers' organizations to affiliate with the Trade Union Confederation of Gabon (COSYGA) or the Employers' Confederation of Gabon (CPG), and section 173 of the Labour Code, which prohibits the establishment of more than one union in a given occupation or region, and the need to amend Act No. 13/80 of 12 June 1980 establishing a trade union solidarity tax deducted for COSYGA;

-- the need to amend sections 239, 240, 245 and 249 on compulsory arbitration, which impose excessive restrictions on the right to strike of workers' organizations in defense of economic, social and professional interests, since restrictions, or even prohibitions, should only be imposed in respect of public servants acting in their capacity as agents of the public authority or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, that is services whose interruption is likely to endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, or in the event of acute national crisis.

In this connection, the Committee again asks the Government to inform it in its next report of the measures taken to lift all the legislative restrictions on the possibility of trade union pluralism and to limit restrictions on the right to strike in accordance with the principles of freedom of association. It reminds the Government that the International Labour Office is at its disposal for any assistance that may be needed in formulating amendments which will give effect to the Convention.

The Committee also notes the communication of 6 October 1994 from the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Gabon (CGSL). The CGSL expresses concern at the delay in the promulgation of the new Labour Code, which the Government announced long ago, and complains that for the last two years the Employers' Confederation of Gabon (CPG) has forbidden, by circular, the collectors of free trade unions to deduct their members' dues from wages despite the formal written consent of the workers concerned. The CGSL also states that it wants machinery to be established with the technical assistance of the Office, particularly in collective agreements, for the payment of trade union dues, and seeks the repeal of Act No. 13-80 of 12 June 1980 of 12 June 1980 on the trade union solidarity tax deducted for COSYGA.

The Committee recalls that the deduction and transfer to unions of trade union dues is a matter that should be dealt with in free negotiations between the parties concerned in observance of the principles of the freedom of association, and requests the Government to ensure that employers and their organizations, particularly the CPG, apply this principle, and to keep it informed of any developments in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with satisfaction the provisions of the new Labour Code (Act No. 3/94 of 21 November 1994) and of Act No. 18/92 of 18 May 1993 determining the conditions for the establishment and functioning of trade union organizations of public servants. These new Acts do not retain the provisions contained in sections 174, 239, 240, 245 and 249 of the former Code, which imposed a trade union monopoly through the obligation to join an organization designated by name in the law, and placed important restrictions on the right to strike. The Committee notes that the new Acts contain provisions establishing the possibility of trade union pluralism in both the private and public sectors (section 270), the right of employees to call strikes in the defence of their occupational, economic and social interests (section 342) and the possibility, in the event of a dispute, to have recourse to arbitration at the request of the two parties (section 369).

The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the public servants' trade unions can organize at the federal level with unions from the private sector.

The Committee also notes with interest the Government's statement in its report that trade union pluralism exists and that, alongside the Trade Union Confederation of Gabon (COSYGA), other trade union confederations have been established both for workers in the private sector and for state employees. With regard to Act No. 13-80 of 12 June 1980 establishing a trade union solidarity tax deducted on behalf of COSYGA, the Committee notes that the new Labour Code prohibits any deductions from wages apart from those covered by collective agreements (sections 161 and 162).

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on various aspects of the new Acts.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

The Committee requests the Government to state in its next report whether Act No. 13-80 of 12 June 1980, establishing a trade union solidarity tax deducted for the Trade Union Confederation of Gabon (COSYGA) has been repealed and, if so, to supply a copy of the text repealing it. It also requests the Government to state whether a collective agreement settling the question of the collection of trade union contributions has been formulated between the representatives of workers and employers.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report, as well as by the Trade Union Confederation of Gabon (COSYGA) and the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Gabon (CGSL).

The Committee recalls that the divergencies between the national legislation and the Convention concern the following points:

- the need to repeal or amend section 174 of the Labour Code, which obliges all workers' or employers' organizations to affiliate with the Trade Union Confederation of Gabon (COSYGA) or the Employers' Confederation of Gabon (CPG), and section 173 of the Labour Code, which prohibits the establishment of more than one union in a given occupation or region, and to amend Act No. 13/80 of 12 June 1980, establishing a trade union solidarity tax deducted for the COSYGA, with a view to lifting legislative restrictions on the possibility of trade union pluralism;

- the need to amend sections 239, 240, 245 and 249 on compulsory arbitration, which impose excessive restrictions on the right to strike of workers' organizations in defence of economic, social and professional interests, since restrictions, or even provisions should only be imposed in respect of public servants acting in their capacity as agents of the public authority or in the essential services in the strict sense of the term.

The Committee notes with interest section 13 of the Constitution of 26 March 1991, which provides for the right to establish trade unions under the conditions set out by the law. It also takes due note of the assurances provided by the Government in its report that the draft Labour Code, which is before the National Assembly, has taken into account all of its observations, and particularly those respecting section 174 of the Labour Code, establishing the trade union monopoly, and sections 242 to 249, with a view to reconciling the points of view as regards the right to strike. The Government adds that since the national conference, trade union pluralism has been in effect in the country.

The Committee nevertheless notes that the by-laws of the COSYGA adopted by the States General and the Extraordinary Congress on 15 and 16 August 1990, which the Government attached to its report, still provide in their first clause that the COSYGA is a central organization of all trade unions which exist or come into existence throughout the territory, and that clause 6 provides that, in order to maintain unity of action, all enterprise trade unions, occupational trade unions and national federations shall affiliate with the COSYGA. It nevertheless notes with interest that the CGSL, the rival of the COSYGA, states that the civil court considered the constituent act of the CGSL to be legal, even though the CGSL had been denied legal personality.

The Committee trusts that the new Labour Code which is currently being prepared will be in conformity with the requirements of the Convention. It requests the Government to keep it informed in its next report of the measures taken to raise all the legal restrictions on the possibility of trade union pluralism, and to limit the restrictions on the right to strike in accordance with the principles of freedom of association. The Committee would remind the Government that the International Labour Office is at its disposal for any assistance that may be needed in formulating amendments which will give effect to the Convention.

The Committee is also addressing a request directly to the Government concerning the trade union solidarity tax.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes the information supplied by a Government representative at the Conference Committee in 1991, the reports of the Government, and the comments it made in reply to the observations of the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Gabon (CGSL) of 15 October 1991.

The Committee notes, in particular, the Government representative's statement that the recognition of individual liberties in the new Constitution of Gabon, which came into force on 26 March 1991, has a corollary in the overall social plan, which is the abolition of trade union monopoly, that is to say the establishment of genuine and complete freedom of association. It notes that a draft new Labour Code which was discussed during a tripartite meeting from January to April 1991, attended both by the unitary employers' and workers' central organisations and by other organisations of workers and employees, has already been examined by the Government and was to be presented before the end of 1991. According to the Government, the amendment envisaged includes the repeal of section 174 of the present Labour Code which obliges all workers' or employers' organisations to affiliate with the Trade Union Confederation of Gabon (COSYGA) or the Employers' Confederation of Gabon (CPG). The Government also states that Act No. 13/80 of 2 June 1980, establishing a trade union solidarity tax deducted for the COSYGA, is no longer applied and that the tax has not been deducted since March 1990. Legislation is to be adopted for its formal repeal.

With regard to the provisions on compulsory arbitration restricting workers' right to strike (sections 239, 240, 245 and 249 of the Labour Code), the Government representative stated that a draft law specifically on the right to strike, which takes into account the requirements of the Convention, has been prepared and may be incorporated into the revised Labour Code.

The Committee again draws attention to the need to amend section 173 of the Labour Code prohibiting the establishment of more than one union in a given occupation or a given region, and trusts that the above-mentioned provisions of the national legislation will shortly be amended to take account of its comments. It once again asks the Government in its next report to provide information on the measures taken in this respect and to provide copies of all new legislation adopted to give effect to the Convention.

The Committee recalls that the Government could ask the ILO for technical assistance in this regard.

The Committee also notes that the CGSL, in a communication dated 15 October 1991, asks the Government to provide the ILO with full particulars of the nature of workers' organisations in Gabon, in the light of the proposals made by the National Conference on the dissolution of the single central trade union organisation (COSYGA) which, according to the CGSL, is a specialised agency of the Democratic Party of Gabon, the trade union freedoms recognised in the new Constitution of 26 March 1991 and the actual dissolution of COSYGA which, according to the CGSL, was approved by the workers concerned who have created several trade union organisations, including the CGSL.

The Committee notes the Government's reply in its last report to the effect that: (1) COSYGA, whose members wish the organisation to continue under the same name, has complied with the laws of the Republic of Gabon and adopted new rules under which it is now protected from any influence on the part of political parties and religions; (2) the new rules of COSYGA settle clearly the problem of the social assets of COSYGA vis-à-vis the new unions; (3) the sole object of occupational organisations is to examine and defend members' economic, industrial, commercial, agricultural and artisanal interests and there are no longer any restrictions on the establishment of these organisations; and (4) future elections of staff delegates and members of the Economic and Social Cooperation Committees will demonstrate that the various unions in establishments and enterprises are representative.

In the light of this information, the Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of the new COSYGA rules with its next report and to indicate the results of the above-mentioned elections.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee notes the Government's report has not been received. It nevertheless understands from information available to it that changes now under consideration should permit the development of trade union plurality.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to lift the legislative restrictions on genuine trade union plurality (sections 173 and 174 of the Labour Code; and Act No. 13/80 of 2 June 1980 creating a trade union solidarity tax in favour of COSYGA and its implementing Decree No. 9/000/882/PR/MFPTE).

The Committee also recalls that compulsory arbitration which legally excludes any resort to strike action (sections 239, 240, 245, 249 of the Labour Code) is a restriction on the right of workers to strike in defence of their occupational interests, even if - as the Government says - strikes do take place without any legal proceedings being taken against strikers; prohibitions or other restrictions on strikes may only be imposed in respect of public servants acting in their capacity as agents of the public authority or in essential services in the strict sense of the term.

The Committee therefore trusts the above-mentioned legislation will be amended in line with its comments and once again asks the Government to supply information on the measures taken to this end.

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

The Committee takes note of the new comments made by the Trade Union Confederation of Gabon (COSYGA), transmitted by the Government. It also takes note of the Statutes of the COSYGA.

The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the following points:

- the impossibility of establishing more than one union in a given occupation or a given region and the obligation placed on every workers' or employers' organisation to affiliate with the Trade Union Confederation of Gabon (COSYGA) or the Employers' Confederation of Gabon (CPG) (sections 173 and 174 of the Labour Code);

- the imposition of a trade union solidarity tax deducted each month by the employers for the COSYGA, the rate of 0.4 per cent of a worker's wage being fixed by decree (Act No. 13/80 of 2 June 1980 and Decree No. 9000882/PR/MFPTE);

- the imposition of compulsory arbitration, making it legally impossible to call a strike (sections 239, 240, 245 and 249 of the Labour Code) even though in practice strikes may be called without legal action being taken.

For several years, the Committee has been drawing the Government's attention to the fact that the legislation is not consistent with the Convention in that it provides that workers may establish only one union in a given occupation, that unions must affiliate with the COSYGA, the sole confederation, and that the solidarity tax is deducted for the sole confederation, designated by name.

The Government has consistently stated that the fact that this situation is confirmed in the law is the result of the wish of the workers and not of the will of the Government to interfere with the freedom of workers to set up unions of their own choosing in the future.

In its latest comments, the COSYGA reaffirms that trade union unity is the result of the wish of the workers and that the introduction of the trade union solidarity tax responds to the COSYGA's need for independence from extra-national trade unions, which used to subsidise the central trade union organisations, and that no discontent has been reported from workers. The COSYGA adds that it is not opposed to a trade union security clause being inserted in the general collective agreement but that certain elements, particularly the rates and variations of deductions at source, should not be the subject of negotiations.

While noting these statements, the Committee recalls that the obligation by law to affiliate to the COSYGA implies that trade unions must comply with the statutes of the single confederation; in this connection, an examination of the statutes of the COSYGA reveals that the organisation of the trade union movement, the activities of its various affiliates - provincial professional unions, provincial unions, national federations - are established by the single central trade union. The legislation therefore leaves the workers no other choice but to group together in the manner laid down by the Statutes of the COSYGA, i.e. in a system of trade union unity, thereby impeding the emergence of any other structure.

The Committee once again draws the Government's attention to the fact that the Convention does not aim to make trade union pluralism compulsory, but it does imply that such pluralism should be possible in all cases. The legislation should therefore allow the workers, should they so wish, to establish trade unions of their own choosing outside the existing structure. With regard to union security clauses which, in the present context, reinforce trade union monopoly because they are instituted by law to the benefit of a single central trade union designated by name, the Committee recalls that, in order to be compatible with the Convention, they should be negotiated between the social partners, it being understood that the workers themselves, through their trade union organisations, determine the rates of trade union dues.

As regards the question of recourse to compulsory arbitration, the Committee recalls its previous comment to the effect that the right to strike is one of the means available to trade unions to further and defend the interests of their members (Article 10 of the Convention) and to organise their activities ( Article 3). Restrictions or prohibitions on calling strikes should only be admissible in exceptional cases for workers in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population or in the event of an acute national crisis (in this connection, see paragraphs 199 to 226 of the General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining of 1983, concerning the right to strike).

In its previous observation, the Committee noted that a general review of the Labour Code was being undertaken and that the Government requested the Committee to grant the necessary time to carry this out, particularly in view of the delicate nature of some of the points to be revised.

The Committee again expresses the hope that, as part of this review, it will be possible to amend the legislation to take account of the Committee's comments, and requests the Government in its next report to provide information on the measures taken in this respect.