ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards

Interim Report - Report No 95, 1967

Case No 397 (Spain) - Complaint date: 28-APR-64 - Closed

Display in: French - Spanish

Go to:

Cases Nos. 294, 383 and 397

Cases Nos. 294, 383 and 397
  1. 165. The last time the Committee examined these cases together when it met in May 1966 it submitted to the Governing Body a new interim report on these cases, which is contained in paragraphs 166 to 187 of its 90th Report.
  2. 166. The Committee has already submitted to the Governing Body its final conclusions regarding a certain number of allegations which formed part of the cases in question. Various questions remain pending, the Government having been requested in accordance with paragraph 416 of the Committee's 85th Report and paragraph 187 of the 90th Report to supply certain additional information.
  3. 167. In a communication dated 5 November 1966 the Government made additional observations regarding certain aspects of the trade union situation in Spain and supplied information referring to the various allegations remaining pending.
  4. Information Supplied by the Government concerning Various Aspects of the Trade Union Situation in Spain
  5. 168. At its November 1965 session the Committee examined certain information communicated by the Government with regard to various questions relating to trade union rights in Spain and in particular to the creation of the councils of workers and councils of employers as well as the procedure in force with regard to approval of collective agreements. The Committee made the following recommendations to the Governing Body with regard to the above two points, in paragraph 416 of its 85th Report:
  6. With regard to the case as a whole the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
  7. (1)................................................................................................................................................
  8. a) to take note of the creation of the councils of workers and councils of employers, which may constitute a preliminary step towards the setting up of independent workers and employers' organisations, freely established by the workers and by the employers respectively, and to suggest the advisability of taking further steps in the direction already being followed, with a view to ensuring that all the offices in the councils of workers, without exception, shall be occupied by persons freely elected by all Spanish workers, without any disqualification based on their part in or attitude towards past events;
  9. ......................................................................................................................................................
  10. (c) (i) to take note of the increasing number of collective agreements concluded in Spain as a means of regulating conditions of work for a constantly increasing number of workers;
  11. (ii) to suggest to the Government that it examine the possibility of replacing the procedure for the approval of collective agreements, in its present form, by the creation of a system for the registration of all collective agreements negotiated in accordance with the terms of the law;
  12. (iii) to point out, nevertheless, that, in the case of certain collective agreements the terms of which appeared to conflict with considerations of general interest, it might be possible to envisage a procedure whereby the attention of the parties could be drawn to these considerations to enable them to examine the matter further, it being understood that the final decision thereon should rest with the parties.
  13. ......................................................................................................................................................
  14. 169. The above recommendations were approved by the Governing Body and transmitted to the Government by letter dated 26 November 1965.
  15. 170. In its communication dated 5 November 1966 the Government, referring to the above-quoted recommendations, states that it wishes to call the attention of the Governing Body to its concern, reflected in its own statements, in the press, and particularly in trade union circles, for the modernisation and improvement of trade union methods and structures in a careful, appropriate and efficient manner, so that those structures may attain their specific social and labour objectives more fully and surely. It adds that, as has been publicly stated on repeated occasions, it is the intention of the unions themselves and of the Government that the role of the trade unions should not be restricted to the mere defence of the interests of labour but that the trade union structures should be the means of ensuring greater participation and integration of the employers' and workers' organisations in the economic and social development of the nation.
  16. 171. Referring specifically to collective agreements the Government again states that the approval of such agreements by the authorities is in practice automatic, provided that the agreements do not infringe any of the basic principles of social legislation or cause any serious repercussions of an economic character for other branches of the economy which may be connected with that in which the particular collective agreement applies. It further mentions that approval is given in all cases, apart from a very few exceptions, so that such approval may almost be regarded as simple confirmation of the conditions freely negotiated in the collective agreement submitted to the authorities. Nevertheless the trade union organisation, wishing Spanish practice in this matter to coincide with the letter of the corresponding provision of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), has accepted the Committee's suggestion regarding the possibility of replacing the procedure for approval of collective agreements in its present form by a system for the registration of collective agreements negotiated in accordance with the law. With that aim in view the trade union organisation has placed before the Government proposals-which are now being examined by the competent authorities-of the kind mentioned in paragraph 416 (1) (c) (ii) and (iii) of the Committee's 85th Report.
  17. 172. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
  18. (a) to take note of the Government's statement regarding the existing concern in Spain for the modernisation and improvement of trade union methods and structures, with a view to ensuring that those structures attain their specific social and labour objectives more fully and surely;
  19. (b) to express the hope that the general measures undertaken for those purposes will not only enable the employers and workers to participate to a greater degree in the economic and social development of the nation through their freely constituted representative organisations but will also ensure the effective enforcement of the generally recognised principles of freedom of association, including those brought to the attention of the Government in various previous reports of the Committee, as approved by the Governing Body;
  20. (c) to request the Government to be good enough to keep it informed of any measures proposed or adopted with regard to the objectives stated under (b) above;
  21. (d) with regard to collective agreements, to take due note of the Government's statements that proposals are at present being considered with a view to replacing approval of collective agreements in its present form by a system for the registration of collective agreements negotiated in accordance with the law, as suggested by the Committee in paragraph 416 (1) (c) of its 85th Report, these proposals responding to the desire that Spanish practice in this respect should coincide with the letter of the corresponding provision of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98);
  22. (e) to request the Government to be good enough to keep it informed of any provisions adopted to put the proposals concerned into effect.

Allegations relating to the Amendment of Section 222 of the Penal Code

Allegations relating to the Amendment of Section 222 of the Penal Code
  1. 173. With regard to this question the Committee recommended the Governing Body in paragraph 187 (a) of its 90th Report:
  2. ....................................................................................................................................................
  3. (i) to take note of the adoption of the new text of section 222 of the Penal Code by Act dated 21 December 1965;
  4. (ii) to take note of the statement by the Government, in its communication of 4 February 1966, according to which strikes not aimed at undermining the security of the State, disturbing its normal activity or seriously disrupting national production are excluded from the scope of section 222 of the Penal Code following the amendment of that section, and according to which the courts of ordinary jurisdiction have exclusive competence to decide whether the provisions of the section may or may not be applied to a specific case;
  5. (iii) to stress the importance it attaches to the need for the new text to be interpreted so that strikes aimed at promoting and defending the workers' occupational interests cannot in any circumstances be considered as constituting the offence of sedition;
  6. (iv) to request the Government to keep the Governing Body informed of any specific cases of strikes in respect of which the courts may decide whether or not section 222 of the Penal Code is applicable.
  7. 174. The Government states in its communication dated 5 November 1966 that it has taken note of the position adopted by the Committee with regard to the adoption of the new text of section 222 of the Penal Code. Regarding the request for transmission of the decisions of the Court of Public Order, it notes that these decisions are read publicly in the Court at the close of its proceedings and are normally reproduced in the daily press, which gives their contents wide dissemination, and that the decisions of the Supreme Court are published regularly in the Colección Legislativa. The Government further states that, since the date of its amendment, section 222 of the Penal Code has not been applied, so that no precedent has yet been established for either the Court of Public Order or the Supreme Court.
  8. 175. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
  9. (a) to take note of the information supplied by the Government in its communication of 5 November 1966, according to which section 222 of the Penal Code has not yet been applied since its amendment by Act dated 21 December 1965;
  10. (b) in view of the fact that the allegations relating to the right to strike do not fall outside the Committee's competence in so far as they relate to the exercise of trade union rights, and in view of the importance which the Governing Body attaches to the recommendations on this point contained in paragraph 187 of its 90th Report, to repeat its request to the Government that it should be kept informed of any cases where the courts may apply section 222 of the Penal Code.
  11. Allegations relating to the Arrest of Mr. José Maria Rodriguez Manzano
  12. 176. Mr. Rodriguez Manzano was sentenced by the Court of Public Order for activities which, according to the complainants, were of a trade union character and, according to the Government, were of a political character. On the basis of the information examined when it met in November 1965 the Committee considered that, although it could not be categorically concluded from the sentence imposed by the Court of Public Order and the Supreme Court that the alleged activities were not related to the exercise of trade union rights, " it would appear that the acts of Mr. Rodriguez Manzano exceeded in some ways the normal framework of trade union activities as such ". The Committee therefore recommended the Governing Body in paragraph 416 (3) of its 85th Report to note that Mr. Rodriguez Manzano had appealed to the Supreme Court, which confirmed the sentence, and to; request the Government to keep it informed in the event of any further developments in the matter.
  13. 177. In its communication dated 5 November 1966 the Government states that Mr. Rodriguez Manzano has now been released and that, in its opinion, this aspect of the case has now been clarified quite sufficiently by the Spanish Government's reply and in view of the fact that the Committee has recognised that the activities on which the sentence was based would appear to have exceeded the normal framework of trade union activities.
  14. 178. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to take note of the additional information supplied, according to which Mr. José Maria Rodriguez Manzano has now been released, and to decide that this aspect of the case does not call for any further examination.
  15. Allegations relating to Arrests Arising out of the 1962 Strikes
  16. 179. Allegations respecting the arrest and conviction of four workers out of the 47 originally charged with offences relating to the 1962 strikes remain pending. According to the Government, Mr. Ramón Ormazábal Tife and Mr. Gregorio Rodriguez Gordon were sentenced for unlawful entry into Spain with a view to engaging in the subversive activities of a clandestine organisation (the former being responsible for organisation of such activities), and Mr. Agustin Ibarrola Goicoechea and Mr. Antonio Jimenez Pericás were sentenced for various subversive activities committed in conjunction with the other two persons mentioned above. At its November 1965 session the Committee examined certain information supplied by the Government according to which the terms of imprisonment of the four persons concerned would expire at dates running from 13 June 1969 to 13 June 1978 unless they were granted remission under the amnesty, and recommended the Governing Body to request the Government to keep the question under examination and to keep it informed of any measures that might be taken concerning Mr. Rodriguez Gordon, Mr. Ormazábal Tife, Mr. Jiménez Pericás and Mr. Ibarrola Goicoechea.
  17. 180. In its communication dated 5 November 1966 the Government states that Mr. Ormazábal Tife, who was tried and sentenced in 1962 for offences already communicated to the Committee by the Government, has had his term of imprisonment reduced from 20 to 16 years as a result of the amnesty of 24 June 1963, and that he is at present serving his sentence at Burgos. The Government further states that the three other persons mentioned have been released (Mr. Jiménez Pericás in 1964, and Mr. Rodriguez Gordon and Mr. Ibarrola Goicoechea in 1965).
  18. 181. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to note that the three persons referred to have already been released. With regard to Mr. Ramón Ormazábal Tife, sentenced in 1962, whose term of imprisonment has been reduced to 16 years, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to keep it informed of any measures that may be taken concerning him.
  19. Allegations relating to the Arrest of Workers Belonging to the Workers' Committee of Vizcaya
  20. 182. On the basis of the details summarised in paragraphs 397 to 405 of the Committee's 85th Report, the Committee recommended the Governing Body in paragraph 416 (5) and (6) (b) of that report to note that the workers belonging to the Workers' Committee of Vizcaya were at liberty pending their appeal to the Supreme Court against the sentence of six months' imprisonment passed on each of them, to request the Government to communicate the decision of the Supreme Court and to decide in the meantime to postpone its examination of this aspect of the case.
  21. 183. The Government refers in this connection to its previous communications and states that the appeals to the Supreme Court lodged by Mr. David Morin Salgado, Mr. Valeriano Gómez Lavin, Mr. Ricardo Basarte Amézaga, Mr. Agustin José Begoña Sánchez Corrales and Mr. José Maria Echevarria Hepe have not yet been heard and that all these persons were provisionally released on 13 May 1964.
  22. 184. In these circumstances, since no developments have occurred in this matter, the Committee reserves its conclusions on this point until such time as it receives the text of the decision which the Government was previously requested to supply, as mentioned in paragraph 182 above.
  23. Allegations relating to the Verdicts against Mr. Francisco Calle, Mr. Agustin Mariano and Mr. José Cases
  24. 185. For the reasons stated in paragraphs 407 to 411 of its 85th Report the Committee recommended the Governing Body in paragraphs 412 and 416 (6) (a) of that report to request the Government to communicate the text of the judgments concerning Mr. Francisco Calle, Mr. Agustin Mariano and Mr. José Cases, together with the grounds adduced, or in any event information on the acts that led to their trial. The three persons mentioned were sentenced on 6 August 1964 for activities which, according to the complainants, were of a trade union character and, according to the Government, constituted the offences of unlawful association and subversive propaganda.
  25. 186. In its communication dated 5 November 1966 the Government states that Mr. Francisco Calle was sentenced to six months' imprisonment for unlawful association and to six years' imprisonment and a fine for illicit propaganda; Mr. Agustin Mariano to four months' imprisonment for unlawful association and to three years and a fine for illicit propaganda; and Mr. José Cases to five years' imprisonment and a fine for illicit propaganda. The convicted persons appealed to the Supreme Court, which disallowed the appeal on 12 January 1965. These three persons have now been released. The Government considers this question to have been satisfactorily answered and points out to the Governing Body that the Supreme Court's decisions are public and are published and that those of the Court of Public Order are also public, so that the Government does not consider it necessary to provide the texts of the judgments in question since the Governing Body or the Committee can easily obtain them.
  26. 187. The Committee has already pointed out in connection with this aspect of the complaints (see paragraph 410 of the 85th Report) that its purpose in requesting additional information was merely to obtain all the necessary information that would enable it to reach a fully informed and objective decision. The Committee considers it appropriate to point out once more that, in numerous previous cases which were the subject of national judicial proceedings and in which the Committee considered that such proceedings might provide information of value in enabling it to decide whether or not the allegations were well-founded, it has regularly followed the practice of requesting the governments concerned to communicate the texts of the judgments given and the grounds adduced therein, and that generally governments have co-operated with the Committee by responding to such requests. The Spanish Government has already done so with regard to other similar questions examined by the Committee (see paragraph 392 of the 85th Report).
  27. 188. Subject to the statement made in paragraph 187 above, in view of the information supplied by the Government that the three persons to whom this part of the allegations referred have already been released, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to decide that there would be no point in pursuing further the examination of the allegations in question.
  28. Allegations relating to the Arrest of Workers in Connection with the Strikes of 1964
  29. 189. At its November 1964 and November 1965 sessions the Committee examined the allegations referring to the arrest of workers at Bilbao, Sabadell and the Asturian mines which the complainants alleged to have been the result of various strikes. The Government had stated that some of the persons arrested had been placed at the disposal of the civil courts in connection with the clandestine activities of a terrorist organisation or on the grounds of unlawful political activities and unlawful association. Following its usual practice, the Committee recommended the Governing Body at the first of the above-mentioned sessions to request the Government to communicate the judgments given and their grounds, this recommendation having been repeated by the Committee at its November 1965 session.
  30. 190. In its communication of 5 November 1966 the Government states, with regard to the so-called " strikers of Bilbao ", that these persons were neither tried nor sentenced as strikers since in 1964, when the events in question occurred, they were already under arrest and awaiting trial for unlawful association and illicit propaganda. It further states that on 26 January 1965 the Court of Public Order sentenced Francisco Iturrios Herrero, Alejandro Echevarria Arrozola and Juan Antonio Nicolás López de Ituino to one year's imprisonment and a fine for each offence; Juan Ramón Lopotegui to six months' and one day's imprisonment for each offence; and Joaquin Garate (absent in contempt of court) to one year's imprisonment and a fine for the same offences. Excepting Joaquin Garate, each of the above has served his sentence and has been released. All the others were acquitted.
  31. 191. The Committee observes that the information supplied by the Government refers only to the workers arrested in Bilbao and notes from the information that all of the workers concerned, excepting Mr. Joaquin Garate, who was sentenced in his absence in contempt of court, have been released, either because they were acquitted or because they have served their sentences.
  32. 192. However, the Government's communication contains no information regarding the sentences passed on Mr. Domenech Ferrer and Mr. Norberto Orovitch, who were stated in a previous communication by the Government dated 14 October 1964 to have been sentenced for political activities, whereas the complainants claim that they were arrested in connection with a strike at Sabadell early in May 1964. Nor does the Government refer to the situation of the 25 workers named in the complaint by the World Federation of Trade Unions dated 3 September 1964 as having been arrested because of the strikes that took place in the Asturian mines in May and June 1964. When it met in November 1964 the Committee examined certain information supplied by the Government and stating that most of these 25 persons had been placed at the disposal of the civil courts, accused with unlawful clandestine political activities and with unlawful association. The Committee's recommendations that the Government should be requested to supply the texts of the sentences passed on these persons and the grounds adduced therein (see paragraph 330 (d) of the 78th Report and paragraph 416 (6) (c) of the 85th Report) were approved by the Governing Body and communicated to the Government.
  33. 193. The Committee therefore recommends the Governing Body to note that all of the so-called " strikers of Bilbao ", excepting Mr. Joaquin Garate, who was sentenced in his absence in contempt of court, are at liberty, either because they were acquitted or because they have served the sentences passed on them by the Court of Public Order, and to request the Government to supply it with the text of the sentence passed on Mr. Joaquin Garate, together with the grounds adduced therein, as well as the text of the sentences already passed or of any sentences which may be passed in the future on the workers mentioned in paragraph 192 above.
  34. Allegations relating to the Conviction of Four Workers in November 1965
  35. 194. At its May 1966 session the Committee examined these allegations, which refer to the conviction of the workers Mr. Sabino Urrutia Ureta, Mr. Ambrosio Ibargüen Ereno, Mr. Luis Maria Echave Orobengoa and Mr. Jesús Otanduy Belastegui. The Committee noted from the Government's observations that the above-mentioned persons had been sentenced by the Court of Public Order for engaging in illegal propaganda on behalf of a clandestine organisation (the Basque Workers' Solidarity Movement). From the text of the verdict, as communicated by the complainants, it appeared that the offences alleged related to the distribution of the periodical Lan Deya, with regard to which the Committee had already examined at its November 1965 session other information supplied by the Government. Although it was unable to conclude categorically, on the basis of the evidence provided, that the acts concerned were unrelated to the exercise of trade union rights, the Committee believed that the said acts may have gone outside the framework of normal trade union activities (see paragraph 184 of the 90th Report). The Committee therefore recommended the Governing Body to note that the persons mentioned were convicted for the offence of illegal propaganda defined in the Penal Code and to request the Government to communicate the verdict of the Supreme Court in the event of an appeal against the verdict of the Court of Public Order. This recommendation was approved by the Governing Body and communicated to the Government.
  36. 195. In its communication dated 5 November 1966 the Government states that three of the four persons mentioned appealed against the sentences passed on them by the Court of Public Order on 27 November 1965, alleging misapplication of the law. When the Supreme Court considered the appeals on I June 1966 it disallowed them. The Government goes on to say, however, that Mr. Ambrosio Ibargüen Ereno, Mr. Luis Maria Echave Orobengoa and Mr. Jesús Otanduy Belastegui have now been released and that Mr. Sabino Urrutia Ureta will complete his term of imprisonment on 20 July 1968.
  37. 196. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to take note of the information supplied by the Government according to which the Supreme Court upheld the verdict of the Court of Public Order but that three of the workers mentioned in the allegations have already been released. The Committee further recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to keep it informed of any new developments with regard to the penal situation of Mr. Sabino Urrutia Ureta.

The Committee's recommendations

The Committee's recommendations
  1. 197. In these circumstances, with regard to the cases examined as a whole, the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
  2. (1) with regard to the information supplied by the Government concerning various aspects of the trade union situation in Spain:
    • (a) to take note of the Government's statement regarding the existing concern in Spain for the modernisation and improvement of trade union methods and structures with a view to ensuring that those structures attain their specific social and labour objectives more fully and surely;
    • (b) to express the hope that the general measures undertaken for those purposes will not only enable the employers and workers to participate to a greater degree in the economic and social development of the nation through their freely constituted representative organisations but will also ensure the effective enforcement of the generally recognised principles of freedom of association, including those brought to the attention of the Government in various previous reports of the Committee, as approved by the Governing Body;
    • (c) to request the Government to be good enough to keep it informed of any measures proposed or adopted with regard to the objectives stated under (b) above;
    • (d) with regard to collective agreements, to take due note of the Government's statements that proposals are at present being considered with a view to replacing approval of collective agreements in its present form by a system for the registration of collective agreements negotiated in accordance with the law, as suggested by the Committee in paragraph 416 (1) (c) of its 85th Report, these proposals responding to the desire that Spanish practice in this respect should coincide with the letter of the corresponding provision of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98);
    • (e) to request the Government to keep it informed of any provisions adopted to put the proposals concerned into effect;
  3. (2) with regard to the allegations relating to amendment of section 222 of the Penal Code:
    • (a) to take note of the information supplied by the Government in its communication of 5 November 1966, according to which the section concerned has not yet been applied since its amendment;
    • (b) in view of the fact that the allegations relating to the right to strike do not fall outside the Committee's competence in so far as they refer to the exercise of trade union rights, and in view of the importance which the Governing Body attaches to the recommendations on this point contained in paragraph 187 of its 90th Report, to repeat its request to the Government that it should be kept informed of any cases where the courts may apply section 222 of the Penal Code;
  4. (3) with regard to the allegations relating to the arrest of Mr. José Maria Rodriguez Manzano, to take note of the additional information supplied by the Government according to which he has now been released, and to decide that this aspect of the case does not call for any further examination;
  5. (4) with regard to the allegations relating to the verdicts against Mr. Francisco Calle, Mr. Agustin Mariano and Mr. José Cases, to decide, in view of the information supplied by the Government that these three persons have now been released, that there would be no point in pursuing examination of this aspect of the question;
  6. (5) with regard to the allegations relating to arrests arising out of the 1962 strikes, to note that Mr. Antonio Jiménez Pericás, Mr. Gregorio Rodriguez Gordon and Mr. Agustin Ibarrola Goicoechea have already been released, and to request the Government to keep it informed of any measures that may be taken in respect of the personal situation of Mr. Ramón Ormazábal Tife;
  7. (6) with regard to the allegations relating to the arrest of workers belonging to the Workers' Committee of Vizcaya, to note that the Committee reserves its conclusions on this point until such time as it receives the text of the decision which the Government was previously requested to supply, and to decide to suspend examination of this aspect of the question in the meantime;
  8. (7) with regard to the allegations relating to the arrest of workers in connection with the strikes of 1964, to note that the so-called " strikers of Bilbao ", excepting Mr. Joaquin Garate, who was sentenced in his absence in contempt of court, are now at liberty either because they were acquitted or because they have served the sentences passed by the Court of Public Order, and to request the Government to supply it with the text of the sentence passed on Mr. Joaquin Garate, together with the grounds adduced therein, as well as the text of the sentences already passed or of any sentences which may be passed in the future on the workers mentioned in paragraph 192 above;
  9. (8) with regard to the allegations relating to the conviction of four workers in November 1965, to take note of the information supplied by the Government according to which the Supreme Court upheld the verdict of the Court of Public Order but that Mr. Ambrosio Ibargüen Ereno, Mr. Luis Maria Echave Orobengoa and Mr. Jesús Otanduy Belastegui have now been released, while Mr. Sabino Urrutia Ureta is due to complete his term of imprisonment on 20 July 1968, and to request the Government to keep it informed of any new developments in regard to the penal situation of Mr. Sabino Urrutia Ureta;
  10. (9) to take note of this interim report, it being understood that the Committee will submit a further report once it receives the additional information to be requested from the Government.
© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer