Definitive Report - Report No 104, 1968

Case No 479 (Nicaragua) - Complaint date: 12-MAY-66 - Closed

1. 15. The complaint is contained in a communication dated 12 May 1966 addressed to the Director-General by the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions (I.F.C.T.U.). The text of the complaint was transmitted to the Government by a letter dated 26 May 1966.
2. 16. At its 169th Session (June 1967) the Governing Body, on the recommendation of the Committee, which is contained in paragraph 27 of the 99th Report, requested further observations and information from the Government concerning the two aspects of the case that were left pending, these being the complainants' allegations concerning two trade union, leaders, Mr. Amadeo Vanegas and Mrs. Lidia Madariaga.
3. 17. The Government has replied to this request by a letter dated 2 December 1967.
4. 18. Nicaragua, in October 1967, 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. A. The complainants' allegations

• Allegations concerning the Detention of a Trade Union Leader
  19. 19 It had been alleged by the I.F.C.T.U that Mr. Amadeo Vanegas, a leader of the Independent Trade Union Movement of Nicaragua (MOSAN), had gone to the locality of Santa Rosa del Peñón in order to hold a meeting with the workers of a chalk quarry. Upon his arrival he had been detained by the local police in accordance with alleged orders from their superiors and had then been forcibly conducted to the town limits and there released:
  20. 20 In its reply of 2 December 1967 the Government states that the allegations that the police authorities had prevented Mr. Amadeo Vanegas from carrying on his trade union activities are false. He had merely been warned by the police " not to continue disturbing public order by activities which had nothing to do with trade union interests but were subversive and against the law ".
  21. 21 The Committee has consistently drawn attention I to the importance it has always attached to the fact that freedom from governmental interference in the holding of trade union meetings constitutes an essential element of trade union rights, as well as to the principle that the public authorities should refrain from any interference which could restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof.
  22. 22 In this case the Committee notes that in reply to the complainants' rather precise allegations concerning Mr. Amadeo Vanegas's detention and expulsion by the police, under allegedly superior orders, from the locality to which he had come in order to hold a meeting with the workers of a chalk quarry, the Government limits itself to stating that Mr. Vanegas was engaged in subversive activities. The Government does not furnish details on the nature of such subversive activities.
  23. 23 Taking note, however, of the fact that, according to the complainants, Mr. Vanegas was detained for a very short while before being released, the Committee considers that, subject to the principle mentioned in paragraph 21 above, there would be no object in pursuing that aspect of the case which refers to the detention of Mr. Amadeo Vanegas.
• Allegations concerning the Assassination of a Trade Union Leader
  24. 24 It has been alleged by the complainants that the assassination of Mrs. Lidia Madariaga, the trade union leader who had witnessed the detention of Mr. Amadeo Vanegas, was connected with her trade union activities.
  25. 25 The Government has now furnished, as requested, the text of the judgment given in the case by a magistrate of the criminal court. From the magistrate's conclusions it appears that the motives for the crime had been of a strictly personal nature, having no connection with trade union matters.
  26. 26 In view of the judgment of the court, and inasmuch as the complainants have furnished no evidence in support of the claim that the criminal offence in question involved a violation of trade union rights, the Committee considers that the complaint concerning the death of Mrs. Lidia Madariaga calls for no further examination.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 27. In these circumstances, and regarding the case as a whole, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to decide that, subject to the principle mentioned in paragraph 21 above, the case does not call for further examination.