Interim Report - Report No 17, 1956

Case No 104 (Iran (Islamic Republic of)) - Complaint date: 20-MAR-54 - Closed

1. 157. At its 127th Session (Rome, 16-19 November 1954) the Governing Body, when adopting the Fourteenth Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association, approved the recommendations submitted to it by the Committee with regard to a complaint presented by the World Federation of Trade Unions against the Government of Iran, contained in two letters dated 20 March and 24 July 1954.
2. 158. In accordance with these recommendations, the Governing Body decided that certain of the allegations formulated in the complaint did not call for further examination. With regard to certain other allegations, it took note of the interim report of the Committee, it being understood that the Committee would report further on these matters when it had received more detailed information from the Government.
3. 159. In a letter dated 25 March 1955, addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and transmitted by him to the I.L.O, the W.F.T.U declares that the Iranian Official Gazette (Ettlaal Havai) of 16 March 1955 published a communiqué of the Military Governor for the Teheran area announcing the arrest of 31 trade union leaders and militants, the names of whom are given and, in particular, Mahboub Azimi, Secretary of the Council of Trade Unions of Teheran and a substitute member of the General Council of the W.F.T.U. This letter was transmitted by the Director-General to the Government of Iran, for its observations, by a letter dated 23 April 1955.
4. 160. Two other communications-one, dated 18 April 1955, from the Moroccan Federation of Railway Workers' Unions, and the other, dated 19 April 1955, from the Union of Confederated Trade Unions of Morocco-which were transmitted to the I.L.O by the Secretary-General of the United Nations by a letter dated 28 April 1955 also relate to the arrests mentioned above.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 161. The allegations still calling for consideration are the following:
   • (a) Martial law has been extended indefinitely. In consequence all trade union meetings have been forbidden on pain of dismissal, imprisonment and deportation, and no meeting of workers is allowed if attended by more than two persons.
   • (b) The Government has issued a decree abolishing the right to strike.
   • (c) The workers' press has been ordered to cease publication-three trade union newspapers are cited by the complainant : Navide Azade, Asre Piruzi (the organ of the Federation of Iranian Railway Workers) and Zafar (the principal organ of the Central Council of the Unified Trade Union Movement of Iran).
   • (d) Trade unionists have been imprisoned without trial. Four hundred workers were imprisoned or deported on account of their trade union activities in the latter half of August and in September 1953. Hundreds of manual and professional workers have been imprisoned or deported to concentration camps, especially to the fortress of Falakol-Aflak and the death island of Khark, in the Persian Gulf. In the government-owned Zirab mines 120 miners have been arrested and deported and payment of bonuses and other benefits to the workers has been stopped. In the communication dated 24 July 1954 the complainant states that further deportations are taking place.
   • (e) Hundreds of workers, teachers and salaried employees have been dismissed by purge committees " for their trade union activities ". Six workers at the Teheran Tobacco Factory were dismissed by order of the authorities for refusing to work overtime.
   • (f) Various acts of brutality have been committed against the workers. At Shahi, Behshahr and Sari, workers' homes were pillaged by marauders in government pay ; at Chalus, workers in the silk and textile factory were arrested for trade union activity and tortured and flogged by order of the military government of the town; a worker in the Chitsazi cotton mill in Teheran was arrested, flogged and refused food and died two days later as a result of his brutal treatment.
   • (g) Thirty-one trade union leaders and militants were arrested by a decision of the Military Governor for the Teheran area, published in the 16 March 1955 issue of the Official Gazette of Iran. Among them was Mahboub Azimi, Secretary of the Council of Trade Unions of Teheran and a substitute member of the General Council of the W.F.T.U.
     • ANALYSIS OF THE FURTHER INFORMATION FURNISHED BY A LETTER DATED 5 JANUARY 1955
   • 162. In a letter dated 5 January 1955 the Government makes the following observations supplementary to those already presented in its letter dated 16 September 1954 which had been considered insufficient by the Committee.
2. 163. Martial law has absolutely no connection with the exercise of trade union rights and contains no clause or express or tacit reference restricting or suppressing the right of meeting in general or the right of trade union meeting in particular. It is decreed solely in order to protect such rights in those regions where their free exercise is threatened by agitators, whose harmful activities it is intended to prevent. All trade union or other meetings may take place merely on notice thereof being given beforehand to the military government and without any other formality. Under the previous Government martial law was applied in all important urban centres and extended almost to the whole territory ; the Government has endeavoured, progressively, as order and safety have been re-established, to put, an end to martial law in many places, and now it no longer exists except in the towns, where the Government is contemplating its termination at an early date. Martial law may never be decreed without approval of Parliament, and then only for a strictly limited period and in specific areas. At the present time it is in force, for reasons of public order, in the regions of Teheran and Abadan, and for a distance of 6 kilometres on either side of the railways. No legally constituted trade union has ever been prevented from holding its meetings as a result of the existence of martial law in those regions in which it is temporarily applied.
3. 164. No governmental decree has suppressed the right to strike, and martial law has no repercussions on the exercise of this right. The right is laid down in articles 13 and 14 of the Labour Law and in no way comes within the authority or competence of the military government. Article 14 of the Labour Law provides that " the right to strike is recognised and may be exercised after other means of settlement, namely conciliation and negotiation, have been tried and exhausted ". The last paragraph of this article provides, however, that " any threat to public order and safety and violence or injury caused to persons, the commission of damage and other offences resulting from the exercise of this right and related to it are punishable under the penal law ". Strikes of an occupational character, therefore, are in no way prohibited, as is amply proved by the strikes which have taken place recently. Thus, the shoemakers and the public transport employees, following strikes, have obtained agreements with their employers giving them entire satisfaction.
4. 165. The press enjoys entire freedom. The question is governed by the legislative decree of 1952 concerning the press. Article 2 of the decree provides that whosoever desires to found a newspaper or periodical must obtain the authorisation of the Ministry of the Interior ". Article 10 of the same text provides that " previous authorisations will be valid and prolonged in the case of newspapers and periodicals which have appeared without interruption for the 12 months preceding the promulgation of this decree ". The Ministry for Public Education is also required to draw up a list of these publications, giving full details with regard to each, and to deliver it to the Ministry of the Interior. The proprietors of publications are required, within a period of one month from the coming into force of the legislative decree, to make application for the authorisation prescribed. No authorisation was requested by the proprietors of the three so-called trade union newspapers referred to by the complainant. In accordance with the last paragraph of article 10 referred to above, " authorisations given prior to this legislative decree will be withdrawn from the publications which do not conform with this legislation within the prescribed period ". Hence no special measure was taken to prohibit these newspapers from appearing, but their proprietors did not make application in accordance with statutory provisions.
5. 166. The competent authorities to whom the Government has addressed its inquiries have vigorously denied, giving evidence in support of their denial, the allegation that 400 workers have been deported on the orders of the military government. It is to be observed that the complainant has refrained from giving details with respect to an allegation which is as vague as it, is confused and that the complainant has not even taken the trouble to indicate the undertaking or undertakings to which these persons belonged or the region in which they worked. In the view of the Government this accusation should have been rejected because it is not supported by details or by credible arguments.
6. 167. With regard to the 120 Zirab miners, the Government declares that a legislative decree promulgated in July 1953 set up public security committees in each town to ensure the maintenance of public order and the safety of the population and to prevent the disturbances which had shaken more than one region at that period. These committees each consist of the prefect, the representative of the Parquet and the chief of police or of the local station, and have the power, according to article 7 of the legislative decree, to take up special cases and to impose penalties, in particular, to assign a compulsory place of residence to persons who have committed acts which may endanger the security of the region by spreading terror and provoking serious disturbances. In the agitated period of August and September 1953 the management of the Zirab mines, acting on the advice of the local security committee, decided to banish from the region certain miners who were known for their subversive activities. They were left free to choose to be employed at any other mine owned by the State and directed by the Société des houillères de l'organisation du plan. Many of them are now working at Ghadjéré and in other mines in the neighbourhood of the capital. They have received their regular wages and other bonuses and benefits to which they are entitled. There is no question, therefore, of a " mass deportation " or of any infringement of freedom of association. These miners continue to enjoy the advantages prescribed by the Labour Law and both the Société des houillères de l'Etat and their occupational trade union scrupulously assure the protection of their legitimate interests. These workers are entirely free to terminate their contracts of employment, on giving one week's notice m accordance with article 8 of the Labour Law, and the employer has no right to retain them.
7. 168. The alleged purge committees alluded to by the complainant have never existed and no worker in any undertaking has ever, to the Government's knowledge, been dismissed because of his trade union activities. The Iranian tobacco undertaking has officially informed the Government that not only has it never called upon the workers in its factories to work overtime but that, on the contrary, many of them press strongly for overtime in order to increase their wages and they are allowed to work overtime to such extent as is permitted by the Labour Law. The Ministry of Labour formally rejects the accusation as being entirely without foundation. In this connection the Government mentions that there has always been a surplus of manpower in state undertakings with a view to providing a remedy for unemployment and that, in these circumstances, it is not logical to work overtime. This is particularly the case in the Teheran tobacco factory. As the result of inquiries addressed to the management of this undertaking it appears that the number of workers alluded to by the complainant should be nine and not six. Accused of having belonged to the Tudeh Party declared illegal by Parliament and being guilty of having fomented serious disturbances and incited workers to revolt, offences which come within penal law, these workers became the subject of legal proceedings. The employer observes that, in the event of their acquittal by the competent court before which their trials are proceeding, the workers will be re-engaged.
8. 169. The military government does not have the right to intervene in relations between employers and workers ; accordingly it is untrue to allege that tortures have been applied to workers by the orders of this government and because of their trade union activities. There has never been any arrest at the Ghalus textile factory and it is absolutely untrue to say that any worker was tortured and died as a result. Neither the Ministry of Labour nor the Prefecture or the authorities of the military government have any knowledge of this.
9. 170. In conclusion the Government states that the complainant is acting in bad faith and is inspired by political motives and that the Government has never failed to ensure the strict application of the law and to provide by every means for the protection of the workers and for their well-being.
   • SECOND REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
10. 171. At its 11th Session (February 1955) the Committee decided to address a further request for supplementary information to the Government of Iran concerning the consequences of the application of martial law, the text of the statutory provisions under which martial law has been decreed, the nature of the conditions governing the granting of authorisation to publish to trade union newspapers and the exact nature of the grounds of complaint against the 120 Zirab miners. The Committee had also asked whether it was true that there were more deportations in July 1954.
    • ANALYSIS OF THE FURTHER INFORMATION
11. 172. In its letter dated 21 May 1955 the Government of Iran furnished the following details in reply to the second request for supplementary information made to it by the Committee.
12. 173. According to the legislation of Iran martial law may be decreed only with the approval of the legislative authority for a specific period and in a strictly limited area. In support of its statement the Government refers to the text of the law authorising the maintenance of the military government in the regions in which it is at present instituted. The Government reaffirms that the institution of martial law, which is decreed only in exceptional cases as a precautionary security measure, can have no influence on the exercise of trade union rights, which are guaranteed by law and are absolutely inviolable, and that, in particular, martial law cannot prevent the holding of occupational meetings by the workers, which may take place simply after notice thereof has been given. The Government declares that the provisions of martial law are very liberally interpreted and that it happens frequently that the competent authorities officially suspend the application of certain of these provisions which do not appear absolutely necessary as, for example, the article relating to the curfew, which is, most of the time if not always, not in application.
13. 174. By virtue of articles 2 and 3 of the Press Law of 1952 any person wishing to found a newspaper or periodical must obtain authorisation from the Ministry of Labour. The applicant for authorisation must fulfil the following conditions : be of Iranian nationality, be at least 30 years of age, not have been convicted of any offence or crime which may involve loss of civil rights, know how to read and write the Persian language adequately, be known as an honest and upright man and possess a good public reputation. Article 10 of the same law relates to publications existing before the promulgation of the law. This article provides that authorisations granted to newspapers and periodicals having appeared regularly for 12 months prior to the promulgation of the Press Law will have the right to continue, the Ministry for Public Education being required to prepare a complete list, giving all necessary details, of the newspapers and periodicals in question and to communicate this list to the Ministry of the Interior. The proprietors of such newspapers and periodicals must, within one month from the date of the promulgation of the Press Law, present a request for authorisation to the Ministry of the Interior in accordance with the provisions of articles 2 and 3, and the latter must give a decision on these requests within a maximum period of two months. The Government emphasises that there was nothing to prevent the three publications referred to by the complaining organisation from appearing as regularly as their proprietors may have desired and that, to ensure this, it would have been sufficient if their proprietors had, in due time, made application for a renewal of their authorisations, in accordance with the provisions of article 10, or even a new request, in accordance with articles 2 and 3. The Government also points out that the Press Law makes no distinction or discrimination between trade union and other publications, and that the conditions laid down apply to all periodicals of every kind. Thus, article 9 requires the ministries and other governmental institutions which desire to issue a publication regularly to appoint, as in the case of other periodicals, a responsible manager fulfilling the prescribed conditions and qualifications.
14. 175. The measures taken with regard to the Zirab miners constitute a preventive security measure taken by the competent authorities in accordance with the provisions of the Public Security Law promulgated in July 1953. This type of transfer to another place, often made necessary by economic fluctuations and geographical circumstances, is in no sense a " deportation " and is not regarded as such by the administration or by the persons concerned. In fact, the coal mines, like the oil wells and other mineral deposits in Iran, are in many cases situated in regions which are more or less desert and are often very far from centres of population. A large number of the workers working in these mines are not natives of the region and sometimes come from very distant provinces. The conditions under which the mines are worked and the utilisation of manpower sometimes require that a certain number of workers, who cannot be employed for a certain period in the mines in which they have worked hitherto, should be sent to other centres where their presence would be more useful. The 120 Zirab miners are continuing to work under the same conditions as their comrades, but in other mining undertakings also belonging to the State. The transfer which was ordered in their case was also of a preventive nature, this transfer being closely related to the events of August and September 1953, which were clearly of a political nature. It is not true that " deportations " continued to take place up to July 1954 and the Government, whose inquiries have revealed no indication of any other similar transfer, formally denies these allegations.
15. 176. With regard to the communication from the World Federation of Trade Unions, transmitted to it for its observations on 23 April 1955, the Government declares that the military authorities, in accordance with the laws and regulations in force, have in fact been endeavouring to discover centres of underground activity by an illegally constituted political party, the dissolution of which the Government proclaimed with the approval of Parliament. Following their inquiries these authorities arrested a number of militant members of the Tudeh Party, who were charged, among other things, with distributing clandestine, subversive and legally prohibited publications of that party. The persons arrested will be set free if investigations establish their innocence. The Government points out that, the political party in question having on several occasions attempted to endanger the safety of the State and the independence and integrity of Iranian territory, those of its members who take part in its underground and subversive activities are liable to be prosecuted in accordance with the laws in force. It is possible that some or even all of the persons arrested are trade union militants or leaders, but they have not been prosecuted as trade unionists or because of their occupational activities. The Government emphasises that trade unionism and political agitation are two very different things, that trade unionists cannot be exempt from the liability to prosecution which they incur by their non-trade-union, illegal and subversive activities and that a political party cannot be allowed, under the guise of trade unionism, to re-form itself and to undertake with impunity illegal and anti-Constitutional activities.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

• Allegations Relating to Martial Law and the Prohibition of Trade Union Meetings
  177. 177 The complainant maintains that martial law has been extended indefinitely, resulting in the prohibition of all meetings on pain of dismissal, imprisonment and deportation and, in particular, the prohibition of all workers' meetings attended by more than two persons.
  178. 178 In its first reply, dated 16 September 1954, the Government denied that trade union meetings were subject to any restrictions but admitted that martial law continues to exist in a few areas.
  179. 179 At its 10th and 11th Sessions (November 1954 and February 1955), the Committee observed that in Case No. 93 " no reference was made specifically to trade union meetings, but it was alleged that, under the measures taken in the agitated period following the events of August 1953, all meetings were prohibited. As over a year had passed since those events took place but martial law still continued to exist in some areas, and having regard to the fact that it had on several occasions emphasised that the freedom of trade union meetings constitutes one of the fundamental elements of trade union rights, the Committee took the view that, before it reached final conclusions on this aspect of the case, it was necessary to obtain further information from the Government as to the areas in which martial law still existed and the consequences of its application and, if possible, the text of the legislative provisions by virtue of which it had been decreed.
  180. 180 In its second reply dated 5 January 1955 and in its third reply dated 21 May 1955 the Government declares that martial law has absolutely no connection with the exercise of trade union rights, that it contains, moreover, no clause or reference, either express or tacit, restricting or suppressing the right of meeting in general and of trade union meeting in particular, that all trade union or other meetings may take place simply on previous notice being given to the military government and without any other formality and that no legally constituted trade union has ever been prevented from holding its meetings by reason of the existence of martial law in the regions in which it is temporarily applied. The Government also points out that martial law can be decreed only with the approval of Parliament, that it is now in force only in the regions of Teheran and Abadan and for a distance of six kilometres on either side of the railways and that, whereas under the former Government it extended to almost the whole territory, the present Government has endeavoured, as order and security have been re-established, to put an end to martial law in many places and contemplates the suppression of martial law at an early date.
  181. 181 Having regard to the details given by the Government and, in particular, to its statements that the temporary maintenance of martial law in specific areas of the territory places no restriction on the exercise of trade union meetings, which may take place simply on previous notice being given to the military government, a notice which would appear not to imply any request for authorisation, the Committee considers that, while, as it has already emphasised in earlier cases", the right to organise trade union meetings constitutes an important aspect of trade union rights, the complainant has not offered sufficient proof in support of the allegation that this right has been infringed by the Government and that, in these circumstances, the allegations relating to martial law and the prohibition of trade union meetings do not call for further examination on the part of the Governing Body.
• Allegation Relating to the Right to Strike
  182. 182 The complainant declares that a decree has been promulgated abolishing the right to strike.
  183. 183 In its first reply (letter dated 16 September 1954) the Government purely and simply denied this assertion.
  184. 184 At its 10th Session (November 1954) the Committee, while noting the Government's denial that any decree has been issued to prohibit the right to strike, observed that it had no information before it indicating whether or not any such prohibition might exist as a consequence of the maintenance of martial law in certain areas and considered it necessary to obtain further information on this question from the Government.
  185. 185 In its second reply (letter dated 5 January 1955) the Government points out that the application of martial law has had no repercussions on the exercise of the right to strike, that this right in no way comes within the authority or competence of the military government and that article 14 of the Labour Law provides that " the right to strike is recognised and may be exercised after other means of settlement, namely conciliation and negotiation, have been tried and exhausted ". In support of these statements the Government mentions the strikes which were called recently by the shoemakers and public transport employees, and following which the strikers obtained satisfaction from their employers.
  186. 186 In view of the details given by the Government, according to which the application of martial law has had no repercussions on the free exercise of the right to strike guaranteed by article 14 of the Labour Law, and having regard, moreover, to the fact, that the complainant has not offered any proof in support of the statement that the right to strike has been suppressed by governmental decree and, in particular, has given no information permitting any such decree to be identified, the Committee considers that the allegation relating to the right to strike does not call for further examination on the part of the Governing Body.
• Allegation concerning Prohibition of the Trade Union Press
  187. 187 The complainant alleges that the trade union press is prohibited and, in particular, the three following newspapers : Navide Azade, Asre Piruzi and Zafar.
  188. 188 In its first reply (letter dated 16 September 1954) the Government stated that the press enjoyed entire freedom of publication and that it could " suffer no prohibition except in accordance with the very precise regulations contained in the relevant legislation ".
  189. 189 At its 10th Session (November 1954) the Committee, noting that the terms of this reply did not preclude the possibility that the publications mentioned had been ordered to cease publication under that legislation, considered that, before it formulated its conclusions on this aspect of the case, it was necessary to request the Government to inform it whether these publications were still being issued, or, if all or any of them had been ordered to cease publication, to forward to the Committee a copy of the legislative provisions pursuant to which such order had been made and information concerning the grounds for such action.
  190. 190 In its second reply (letter dated 5 January 1955) the Government states that the question of the freedom of the press is governed by the legislative decree of 1952 concerning the press. Article 2 of this decree provides, in particular, that " whosoever founds a newspaper or a periodical must obtain authorisation from the Ministry of the Interior ".
  191. 191 At its 11th Session (February 1955) the Committee took the view that, in so far as the legislative decree of 1952 dealt with the freedom of the press in general, this involved a problem relating to human rights in general which, as such, was outside its competence, but, as in several earlier cases', considered that, since a question directly affecting the exercise of trade union rights, was involved, it should examine this aspect of the matter.
  192. 192 The Committee had emphasised on several occasions that the right to express opinions through journals or publications constitutes one of the essential elements of trade union rights. In the present case it was not denied that three trade union publications had been prohibited by virtue of the legislative decree, of 1952 concerning the press.
  193. 193 In this connection the Government emphasised in its second reply that, while the three publications mentioned above have had their authorisations withdrawn, this is not by virtue of any special measure applied against, them but pursuant to a general measure providing that authorisations delivered prior to the promulgation of the legislative decree of 1952 would be withdrawn in the case of those periodicals whose proprietors did not, within the prescribed time limit, present an application for the authorisation required by the decree. According to the Government, therefore, the proprietors of the publications in question were themselves responsible for the authorisations to publish their newspapers being withdrawn, because all they had to do was to apply for the renewal of the authorisations within the prescribed time.
  194. 194 The question before the Committee, therefore, is whether, by imposing on the proprietors of trade union newspapers the obligation to request authorisation from the Ministry of the Interior, the legislation decree of 1952 may have restricted the free exercise of the right of trade union publication. The reply to this question appears to depend essentially on the conditions governing the granting of authorisation and on the reasons for which it may be accorded or refused.
  195. 195 The Government not having given precise information on this point in its second reply, the Committee decided at its 11th Session to ask the Government to furnish further information as to the nature of the conditions governing the granting of authorisation to publish to trade union newspapers.
  196. 196 In its third reply (letter dated 21 May 1955) the Government declares that a person who requests the Ministry of the Interior to authorise the founding of a newspaper or periodical must fulfil the following conditions : be of Iranian nationality and of at least 30 years of age, not have been convicted of any offence or crime which may involve loss of civil rights, be able to read and write the Persian language adequately, be known as an honest and upright man and possess a good public reputation. It emphasises that the Press Law applies to all publications of every kind and that no discrimination exists in respect of trade union publications. The Government also recalls that the three publications mentioned by the complaining organisation could have continued to appear if their proprietors had, in due time, requested the authorisation required by law and that it is only because they failed to do so that the authorisation accorded to the said publications was withdrawn.
  197. 197 In view of the detailed explanations furnished by the Government, from which it would appear that the appearance of trade union publications is not subject to any conditions beyond those applying to other publications and that the prohibition of the three publications mentioned by the complainant was occasioned by the fact that their proprietors omitted to carry out the formal conditions required by the law with respect to all publications, of whatever nature, the Committee considers that the complainant has not offered sufficient proof to show that the exercise of trade union rights was infringed in this connection and that the allegation concerning the prohibition of trade union publications does not call for further examination.
• Allegations Relating to Arrests and Deportations for Trade Union Activities
  198. 198 The complainant alleges that 400 workers were deported, because of their trade union activities, in August and September 1953, that 120 miners employed in the state-owned Zirab mines have been arrested and deported (the payment of bonuses having been abolished in other mines) and that as recently as July 1954, 11 months after the agitated period of August 1953, similar deportations took place.
  199. 199 At its 10th Session (November 1954) the Committee observed that in its reply dated 16 September 1954 the Government denied the abolition of bonuses but, apart from a general statement that inquiries revealed no cases corresponding to allegations made in the complaint as a whole, did not refer specifically either to the 400 workers or to the 120 Zirab miners or to the contention that deportations were taking place as late as July 1954. In these circumstances the Committee considered that, before reaching final conclusions on these two points, it was necessary to request the Government to inform it whether, in fact, 400 workers and 120 miners had been arrested and deported, whether deportations of workers continued to occur up to July 1954 and, if so, on what charges they were tried and convicted.
  200. 200 In its second reply (letter dated 5 January 1955) the Government declared that the competent authorities to whom it has addressed its inquiries have vigorously denied, giving evidence in support of their denial, the allegation that 400 workers were deported by the orders of the military government. The Government pointed out that the complainant did not indicate either the undertaking or undertakings to which these persons belonged or the region in which they worked and it considered that the allegation should be rejected because it was supported neither by details nor by credible arguments. Having regard, first, to the formal denial with which the Government answers this allegation and, secondly, to the absence in the complaint of any information making it possible to identify the workers alleged to have been the subject of deportation measures, the Committee considers that the allegation relating to the deportation of 400 workers, without further details being given, is too vague to permit of an examination of this aspect of the matter on its merits.
  201. 201 With respect to the second point (the 120 Zirab miners) the Government stated that, during the agitated period in August and September 1953, the management of the Zirab mines, acting on the advice of the local public security committee-an organ set up in each town, under a legislative decree of July 1953, to ensure the maintenance of public order and having the power to assign a compulsory place of residence to persons having committed acts which might endanger the safety of the region by spreading terror and provoking serious disturbances-decided to banish from the region certain miners who were known for their subversive activities.
  202. 202 The Government not having explained what was the nature of these activities, the Committee decided at its 11th Session (February 1955) to request it to supply further information as to the exact nature of the grounds of complaint against the 120 miners in question.
  203. 203 In its third reply (letter dated 21 May 1955) the Government emphasises that the transfer measure taken with regard to the 120 Zirab miners was in no way a " deportation ". The miners are continuing to work in the same, conditions as their comrades, but, in other mining undertakings also belonging to the State. It frequently occurs, in fact, that workers employed in a mine are sent to other centres where their presence is considered to be more useful. In this connection the Government mentions that the coal mines are often situated in regions which are more or less desert and often very far from centres of population and that a large number of the workers working in such mines are natives of other regions. The Government admits that the transfer of these miners was also a preventive measure from the security point of view, but emphasises that such transfer was made necessary by reason of the events of August-September 1953, the political character of which cannot be denied. The Government formally denies that any other " deportations " continued to take place in July 1954.
  204. 204 It would appear from the explanations given by the Government that the transfer measure taken with regard to the 120 Zirab miners consisted of a transfer of workers to another mine also belonging to the Government, a measure which, in the view of the Government, cannot be likened to a deportation because it entailed no change in the working conditions of those concerned. It also appears that the measure was taken in the period August-September 1953, that is to say, in a disturbed period from a political and Constitutional point of view during which security measures may have been considered necessary by reason of exceptional circumstances. In these circumstances the Committee considers that this allegation does not call for further examination.
• Allegations Relating to Dismissals for Trade Union Activities
  205. 205 At its 10th Session (November 1954) the Committee observed that the allegation that hundreds of workers and other employed persons have been dismissed by " purge committees " for trade union activities was dismissed by the Government, in its letter dated 16 September 1954, as slanderous, but that, on the other hand, the Government did not refer specifically to the allegation that six workers employed by the Teheran Tobacco Company were dismissed by order of the governmental authorities for refusing to work overtime. Considering that it was not in a position to judge whether, in this case, there had been any infringement of trade union rights, the Committee decided that the Government's statement was too imprecise to enable it to reach a conclusion on these allegations and requested the Government to furnish further information.
  206. 206 In its second reply the Government reaffirms that the alleged " purge committees " alluded to by the complainant have never existed and that no worker in any undertaking has ever been dismissed, to its knowledge, on the ground of his trade union activities. The Government states that the Iranian tobacco undertaking has informed it officially that it has never asked its workers to work overtime but that, on the contrary, the workers often ask for overtime in order to increase their wages, a request which can be granted only in so far as is permitted under the Labour Law. The Government states that undertakings directed by the State have always employed excess manpower in order to reduce unemployment and that, in these circumstances, it is not logical to have recourse to overtime. In fact, the nine workers-and not six as alleged by the complainant-who have been dismissed were accused of belonging to the Tudeh Party, which has been declared illegal by Parliament, of having fomented serious troubles and of having incited workers to revolt, offences punishable under penal law, and legal proceedings have, therefore, been instituted against them. In the event of these workers' being acquitted by the competent court which is trying their case, they will, the Government states, be re-engaged.
  207. 207 Having regard to the Government's statements that the dismissal of nine workers employed by the tobacco undertaking was occasioned not by their trade union activities but by reason of offences punishable under penal law and that the workers will be re-engaged if they are acquitted by the competent court which is trying their case, the Committee considers that the allegations relating to dismissals because of trade union activities do not call for further examination on the part of the Governing Body.
• Allegations Relating to Acts of Brutality Committed against Workers on the Ground of Their Trade Union Activities
  208. 208 The complainant alleges that workers in the silk and textile factory at Chalus were arrested and tortured for trade union activity by order of the military authorities and that a worker in the Chitsazi cotton mill in Teheran was arrested and brutally treated in such a way as to cause his death.
  209. 209 In a letter dated 16 September 1954 the Government made no specific reference to these two allegations beyond the general statement that inquiries revealed no cases corresponding to the allegations in the complaint as a whole.
  210. 210 At its 10th Session (November 1954) the Committee, having regard to the specific nature of these allegations, requested the Government to supply further and more precise information as to the result of its inquiries into the incidents alleged with respect to the two factories in question.
  211. 211 In its second reply the Government declares that the military government has no right to interfere with relations between employers and workers and that it is therefore untrue to pretend that tortures could have been applied to these workers by order of that government and because of their trade union activities. It categorically denies that any arrests have taken place in the Chaloussa textile factory and that a worker has died as the result of torture. The Government confirms that neither the Ministry of Labour nor the prefecture, or the authorities of the military government have any knowledge of any such facts.
  212. 212 Having regard to the formal denial by the Government of the allegations made by the complainant with respect to acts of brutality committed against workers on the ground of their trade union activities, the Committee considers that these allegations are not supported by sufficient precise and detailed evidence to cause them to call for further examination on the part of the Governing Body.
• Allegation Relating to the Arrest of 31 Trade Union Leaders and Militants
  213. 213 The complainant alleges that 31 trade union leaders and militants, whose names are given, were arrested by virtue of the decision of the Military Governor of the Teheran area, published in the issue of the Iranian Official Gazette dated 16 March 1955. Among these was Mahboub Azimi, Secretary of the Council of Trade Unions of Teheran and a substitute member of the General Council of the W.F.T.U.
  214. 214 In its reply dated 21 May 1955 the Government declares that the military authorities did, in fact, make these arrests. However, the trade union leaders or militants in question were not arrested on account of their trade union activities but only in their capacity as members of the Tudeh Party, dissolved by the Government with the approval of Parliament, and because they had distributed clandestine publications of that party. The Government observes that this political party has on several occasions attempted to endanger the safety of the State and the independence and integrity of Iranian territory. The Government emphasises that trade unionists cannot be exempt from any prosecution to which they render themselves liable by their non-trade-union activities and that a prohibited political party cannot be allowed, under the guise of trade unionism, to re-form itself and to carry on illegal and anti-Constitutional activities. The Government also points out that any of the persons arrested whose innocence is established by the investigations' being made will be set free.
  215. 215 When it examined Case No. 6 also relating to Iran the Committee had before it an allegation relating to the arrest of Mr. Reza Rousta, Secretary of the General Council of Trade Unions of Iran and a member of the Tudeh Party. Having regard to the fact that the conviction of Mr. Reza Rousta by the Military Tribunal was based on charges showing, among other things, that he had acted on behalf of a foreign army, the Committee considered that the allegation was so purely political in character that it was undesirable to pursue the matter further.
  216. 216 In the present case also the Government has observed that the persons arrested were not arrested by reason of their trade union activities but in their capacity as members of the Tudeh Party, a political party dissolved because it had attempted on several occasions to endanger the security of the State and the independence and integrity of Iranian territory.
  217. 217 In several earlier cases the Committee has been called upon to give a decision with regard to the application of measures which, although of a political nature and not intended to restrict trade union rights as such, might nevertheless affect the exercise of such rights.,
  218. 218 In accordance with its previous practice the Committee considers that, because, according to the terms of the decision of the Military Governor of Teheran referred to by the complainant, the persons arrested assumed responsibilities of a trade union nature, their arrest may, even if that were not the intention, have affected the exercise of trade union rights.
  219. 219 If, in certain cases, the Committee has concluded that allegations relating to the arrest of trade union militants did not call for further examination, this has been after it has received information from the governments showing sufficiently precisely and with sufficient detail that the arrests were in no way occasioned by trade union activities but solely by activities outside the trade union sphere which were either prejudicial to public order or of a political nature.
  220. 220 In the present case the Committee notes that the Government states that an investigation is in progress and has given the assurance that any of the persons whose innocence is established in the course of such investigation will be set free.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 221. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
   • (a) to draw the attention of the Iranian Government to the importance which it attaches to the free exercise of the right of meeting, the right to express opinions freely through journals or publications and the protection of workers against transfer or dismissal on account of trade union activities, as essential elements in trade union rights;
   • (b) to decide that, subject to these observations, the different allegations dealt with in paragraphs 181, 186, 197, 200, 204, 207 and 212 do not call for further examination for the reasons indicated therein ;
   • (c) to take note of the present interim report with regard to the allegation relating to the arrest of 31 trade union leaders and militants and to express a desire to be kept informed as to the outcome of the investigation now being made.
     • Geneva, 11 November 1955. (Signed) Paul RAMADIER, Chairman.