Interim Report - Report No 218, November 1982

Case No 1134 (Cyprus) - Complaint date: 28-APR-82 - Closed

1. 783. The complaint of the Pancyprian Greek Teachers Organisation (POED), presented by Mr. Yiangou and Mr. Tsountas, in their capacity as President and Secretary-General, is contained in a communication dated 28 April 1982. The Government supplied its observations in a communication dated 31 May 1982.
2. 784. Cyprus has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Allegations of the President and Secretary-General of the complainant organisation

1. 785. In the present case, the President and General Secretary of the POED, Elpidoforos Yiangou and Andreas Tsountas, state in their communication of 28 April 1982 that on 28 May 1981 the previous management of their elementary school teachers union organised trade union elections by secret ballot under the supervision of the supervisory Committee, in accordance with the trade union constitution.
2. 786. The result was that the complainants won, and were elected by a Pancyprian Congress on 28 June 1981. The previous management congratulated them and handed over the books, funds and other trade union property. Within the period specified by the rules of the trade union, the new management notified the Registrar of Trade Unions of the change in order to be registered, and sent the prescribed fee.
3. 787. However, continue the complainants, the Registrar, instead of proceeding with the registration, as he was obliged by the Trade Union Law 71/65, began an investigation, after the validity of the elections had been contested by a number of candidates who had been members of the former management of the trade union.
4. 788. Five months later, around 2 December 1981, explain the complainants, the Registrar informed them that he could not register the new management because of violations and omissions imputable to the former trade union management in carrying out the preparations for the elections.
5. 789. The Registrar also ordered the previous management, i.e. the one responsible for the alleged violations and omissions, to resume its duties and to organise new elections (although, say the complainants, under the terms of the trade union constitution, new elections should not take place until two years after those of 28 May 1981).
6. 790. After the Registrar's decision, the Minister of Education and the other governmental departments refused to negotiate with the complainant new management, but did negotiate with the management appointed by the Registrar.
7. 791. The complainants conclude by stating that they appealed to the Supreme Constitutional Court against the interference of government officials in the functioning and administration of their union. They also allege that despite the fact that the Supreme Court issued a provisional order suspending the decision of the Registrar ordering the previous management to resume its duties and carry out new elections, the authorities continued to recognise the previous management.

B. The Government's reply

1. 792. The Government, in its communication of 31 May 1982, describes the facts as follows: on 28 May 1981, trade union elections did in fact take place in various branches of the POED. The trade union representatives elected then proceeded to elect their trade union management on 28 June 1981. However, after members of the POED sent written communications contesting the validity of the elections in four out of the seven branches of the POED, the Registrar, before registering the new management, carried out, in accordance with section 16 of the Trade Union Regulations, an investigation into whether the elections had been carried out in conformity with the constitution of the organisation.
2. 793. The Registrar's investigation revealed several violations of provisions of the constitution in the elections in five of the branches:
   • (a) persons who were not members of the trade union organisation voted, in violation of article 3 of the constitution:
   • (b) more representatives were elected than the number provided for in the constitution, in violation of article 18(a);
   • (c) ballots which were invalid because the number of candidates exceeded the number provided for by the constitution were counted as valid, in violation of article 18(b) and (c).
3. 794. In view of these violations, the Registrar informed the secretaries of the five branches concerned that the change of officers could not be registered. Consequently, the Registrar, in accordance with the legal advice previously given by the Attorney-General of the Republic in a similar case, considered that the previous management should hold new elections. In. addition, he informed the General Secretary of the POED that the new management could not be registered on the grounds that it had been elected by representatives who had themselves not been properly elected.
4. 795. The Government adds that the Registrar's decision not to register the change of officers is under appeal to the Supreme Court by three of the branches of the organisation and by the new management. Another appeal was filed by the officers of one of these three branches and by the new management, claiming a provisional order suspending the effect of the part of the Registrar's decision ordering the former management to carry out new elections, until the final determination of the recourse for annulment.
5. 796. Finally, the Government encloses with its reply a copy of the provisional order of the Supreme Court which, before dealing with the substance of the case, states that it considers unlawful the part of the Registrar's decision ordering that new elections be carried out by the former management because of the Registrar's lack of competence in the matter and the absence of legal grounds.
6. 797. In addition, the Government explains that, pending the ruling of the Supreme Court on the substance of the case, and acting on the opinion given by the Attorney-General at its request following the provisional order of the Supreme court (the opinion is, enclosed with the Government's reply), the authorities have in fact recognised the former management as the one which is legally in office. The enclosed opinion of the Attorney-General states that the Registrar invalidated elections which had been unlawfully carried out, and that, as the elections of 28 May 1981 had been invalidated, only the former management was legally empowered to perform its duties.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 798. The Committee observes that this case involves a dispute within a trade union organisation, the complainants contesting the registrar's decision to invalidate their election to the management of the Pancyprian Greek Teachers Organisation. The case is pending before the Supreme Constitutional Court.
2. 799. In the present case, the Committee notes that the Supreme Court is to rule on the substance of the case, whether the trade union elections in question were valid. In order to enable it to make recommendations in full knowledge of the case, the Committee requests the Government to send it a copy of the final decision of the Supreme Court as soon as it is handed down.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 800. In these circumstances, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to approve the present interim report and in particular the following conclusion: The Committee requests the Government to send it a copy of the Supreme Court's decision concerning the validity of the trade union elections in question as soon as it has been handed down.
   • Geneva, 12 November 1982. (Signed) Roberto Ago, chairman.