Interim Report - Report No 49, 1961

Case No 168 (Paraguay) - Complaint date: 10-AUG-57 - Closed

1. 140. The complaint of the Confederation of Latin-American Workers is contained in a communication addressed to the Director-General of the I.L.O on 10 August 1957. It was transmitted to the Government of Paraguay on 21 August 1957.
2. 141. At its 18th (October 1957), 19th (February 1958), 20th (November 1958), 21st (February 1959), 22nd (May 1959), 23rd (November 1959), 24th (February 1960) and 25th (May 1960) Sessions, the Committee adjourned its examination of the case, as it had not received the Government's observations on the complaint.
3. 142. The Government forwarded its observations in a communication dated 1 June 1960.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

• Allegations relating to Denial of Trade Union Rights
  143. 143 It is alleged that an unjustifiable state of siege exists in the country, that enjoyment of civil liberties, of the right to associate and of the right to strike is impossible, and that workers cannot improve their conditions because they are not permitted to form a free and independent trade union organisation; only a single trade union centre, patronised by the Government, is recognised. Hence, declare the complainants, the workers of Paraguay call for an end of the state of siege, the right to associate and to strike and a minimum wage of 156.52 guaranis.
  144. 144 In its reply dated 1 June 1960 the Government declares that at no time has the Government refused to recognise the trade union rights of the workers or made use of the state of siege to persecute them. During the period 1948-60, contends the Government, laws have been passed which protect the right of the workers to belong to trade union organisations; there are laws which govern both the right of association and the right to strike. The Government denies that there is any " state trade union centre " and states that hundreds of trade unions exist which freely elect their officers and that their delegates set up the Paraguayan Confederation of Trade Unions. In order to call strikes in Paraguay, the requirements of the law must be observed; conciliation boards exist. Matters affecting the workers are dealt with by the national Department of Labour. Complaints of the workers have always received attention, adds the Government, but strikes on occupational grounds have been called on many occasions. In conclusion the Government declares that the wage for an eight-hour day is 161 guaranis - more than the demand put forward in the complaint.
  145. 145 One of the essential points put forward by the Government is that in the period 1948-60 laws have been passed protecting the right to organise in trade unions and concerning the right to strike. No further details as to these laws are given. Paraguay resumed membership of the I.L.O in 1956, but did not forward any reports under article 19 of the Constitution of the I.L.O, on the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), for the period ending 31 December 1957, as requested by the Governing Body.
  146. 146 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to be good enough to furnish texts of the legislation to which reference is made in its reply.
• Allegations relating to the Detention of Workers and Trade Union Officers
  147. 147 It is alleged that workers and trade union officers who speak up in defence of trade union and civil rights are exposed to persecution, imprisonment and confinement in concentration camps, such as the Chaco camp.
  148. 148 The Government declares in general terms that measures have been taken on occasions against persons engaging in seditious and rebellious activities in order to safeguard public order but never for the purpose of repressing any legal trade union movement. A few of the persons concerned in subversive political activities have been workers' leaders, but any steps taken against them have not meant that the rights of the workers have not been recognised. No foreign country or international organisation, maintains the Government, has the right to censure it for exercising these sovereign powers, which derive from Constitutional provisions.
  149. 149 The complainants, apart from the case of Mr. Insfrán, which is dealt with in paragraphs 150 to 153 below, give no details in support of the allegation in general terms set forth in paragraph 147 above. In the past the Committee has expressed the view that when complainants formulate in general terms allegations that persons have been arrested, but do not give their names or other sufficiently precise information, it would be unreasonable to ask the governments concerned to make investigations which, in view of the very vague nature of the allegations, would occasion considerable difficulty, and has accordingly recommended the Governing Body to decide that such allegations do not call for further examination, In view of the very imprecise nature of the general allegation made in the present case, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to decide that the allegation is too vague to permit of an examination of this aspect of the case on its merits.
• Allegations relating to the Detention of Mr. Insfrán, General Secretary of the Grau Union
  150. 150 More specifically, it is alleged that, a few months before the presentation of the complaint in August 1957, Mr. Insfrán, General Secretary of the Grau Union, was kidnapped at his home and placed in the dungeons of the Chaco concentration camp, because of his activities in defence of democratic freedom and trade union rights.
  151. 151 No reference is made to the case of Mr. Insfrán in the Government's reply except in so far as the Government has made the statement, in general terms, as mentioned in paragraph 148 above, that, where measures have been taken against persons-workers' leaders or others-engaging in seditious or rebellious activities, they have been taken in order to safeguard public order and never for the purpose of repressing any legal trade union movement, and that, when a government has taken such action in the exercise of its sovereign powers, no international organisation has the right to censure it.
  152. 152 With respect to the Government's argument that where measures have been taken against persons, including trade unionists, for seditious or rebellious activities, this has been pursuant to the exercise of sovereign powers by the Government for which no international organisation has the right to censure it, the Governing Body has, in a number of earlier cases', on the recommendation of the Committee, rejected such arguments, stating that the question whether the formulation of charges of having committed crimes on the basis of facts and allegations involving the exercise of trade union rights is to be regarded as a matter relating to a criminal offence or a matter related to the exercise of trade union rights is not one which can be determined unilaterally by the government concerned, in such a manner as to prevent the Governing Body from inquiring further into it. In the present case, there-, fore, the Committee considers that it is competent to examine the case of Mr. Insfrán on its merits.
  153. 153 In a number of earlier cases, the Committee has emphasised the importance which it has always attached to the principle of prompt and fair trial by an independent and impartial judiciary in all cases, including cases in which trade unionists are charged with political or criminal offences which the government considers have no relation to their trade union functions. In the past, moreover, where allegations that trade union leaders or workers have been arrested for trade union activities have been met by governments with statements that the arrests were made for subversive activities, for reasons of internal security or for common law crimes, the Committee has followed the rule that the governments concerned should be requested to submit further and as precise information as possible concerning the arrests, particularly in connection with the legal or judicial proceedings instituted as a result thereof and the result of such proceedings. The Committee, therefore, recommends the Governing Body to draw the attention of the Government to the importance which it attaches to the principle of prompt and fair trial set forth above and to request the Government to be good enough to inform the Governing Body whether Mr. Insfrán, General Secretary of the Grau Union, is in prison or in confinement and to furnish information as to the legal or judicial proceedings taken in his case and as to the result of these proceedings.
• Allegations relating to a Police Attack on an Assembly of Workers
  154. 154 It is alleged that, on 1 May 1955, workers were peacefully assembled at the Pantheon of Heroes in memory of their victimised comrades, when they were fired on by the police, some being killed or injured, while others were imprisoned or persecuted.
  155. 155 The Government's only specific reference to this brief but precise allegation is to state that the accusation is false.
  156. 156 The Committee has pointed out in the past that, when precise allegations are made, it cannot regard as satisfactory replies from governments which are confined to generalities, and that where the information given in a government's reply appears to be inadequate or of too general a character, it will request the government concerned to supply it with more detailed information in order to enable it to express a considered view to the Governing Body. In the present case the Committee recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to furnish more detailed information concerning the incidents alleged to have taken place at the Pantheon of Heroes on 1 May 1955.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 157. In all the circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
   • (a) to request the Government to be good enough to furnish texts of the legislation to which reference is made in its reply;
   • (b) to decide that the allegations relating to the detention of unnamed workers and trade union officers are too vague to permit of an examination of this aspect of the case on its merits;
   • (c) to decide, with respect to the allegations relating to the detention of Mr. Insfrán, General Secretary of the Grau Union:
   • (i) to draw the attention of the Government to the importance which the Governing Body has always attached to the principle of prompt and fair trial by an independent and impartial judiciary in all cases, including cases in which trade unionists are charged with political or criminal offences which the Government considers have no relation to their trade union functions;
   • (ii) to request the Government, having regard to the principle set forth above, to inform the Governing Body whether Mr. Insfrán is in prison or in confinement and to furnish information as to the legal or judicial proceedings taken in his case and as to the result of such proceedings;
   • (d) to request the Government to furnish more detailed information concerning the incidents alleged to have taken place at the Pantheon of Heroes on 1 May 1955.