Interim Report - Report No 144, 1974

Case No 736 (Spain) - Complaint date: 24-JAN-73 - Closed

1. 98. The Committee previously examined this case at its session in November 1973, when it submitted to the Governing Body an interim report contained in paragraphs 395-398, 405-410 and 422(b) of its 139th Report, which was approved by the Governing Body at its 191st Session (November 1973).
2. 99. In paragraph 422(b) of the report cited, the Committee recommended the Governing Body to ask the Government to supply further information of various kinds.
3. 100. The Government supplied further information in a communication dated 23 April 1974.
4. 101. In this letter, the Government reaffirms the position taken in its communications of 29 February and 13 May 1972 with respect to certain cases pending in regard to Spain. The Committee draws attention in this respect to what was stated in paragraphs 98 and 99 of its 137th Report. In supplying this information, the Government once again declares that "the fact that a government replies to a request for information on a specific complaint does not imply that the government recognises the accuracy or - even less - the validity of the complaint, but merely that it is co-operating with the Committee and with the Governing Body".
5. 102. Spain has ratified neither the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) nor the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 103. It should be recalled that in its first communication the WCL alleged that on 16 December 1972, at Cornellá, near Barcelona, the police arrested a trade union leader, Mr. Claudio Pérez, a workers' delegate in the "Tornilleria Mata" factory, who was later released. The WCL alleged also that the Civil Guard had on 19 December 1972 broken into the premises of the "Newpol" undertaking at Mollet de Vallés to evict the workers who were peacefully demonstrating their solidarity with a fellow worker who had been unjustly punished by the management. Since they were unable to meet on the premises of the official trade union, the workers met in a church, but were evicted from there also.
2. 104. In another communication, the WCL added that the workers in the Siemens, Soler Almirall and Tornilleria Mata works, again in Cornellá, had organised a peaceful demonstration which, not having been authorised by the trade union authorities, could not be held in the premises of the "official trade union" and was consequently held in the bar of the union building. The demonstration was broken up violently by the Civil Guard and Mr. Jésús Garrido Santiago of Siemens and Mr. Juan Sánchez Mora of Soler Almirall were arrested.
3. 105. The Government stated in its communication that the persons in question had appeared before the competent civil court and that they had been at liberty since 15 February 1973.
4. 106. When it examined this case at its November 1973 session the Committee recommended the Governing Body to request the Government to supply information concerning the intervention of the police and the refusal of permission to hold a meeting on trade union premises, as well as to indicate whether charges had been preferred against the arrested persons and, if so, the nature of the charges and, if appropriate, the text of the judgements delivered together with the grounds adduced therefor.
5. 107. In its last communication, the Government protests against the fact that the complainant organisation describes as trade union organisations which can only be considered underground political groups. The Government then refers to the situation in the undertakings cited by the WCL, in which it maintains that there had been no conflict on the dates mentioned in the complaint. The Government adds that permission to use trade union premises had never been refused but that, on the contrary, the workers of these undertakings had used and continue to use the premises for their meetings.
6. 108. According to the Government, the nature of the incidents referred to in the complaint differed from the version given by the complainants. The Government goes on to say that tracts of a political nature had been distributed for several days in the Barcelona metropolitan area. On the following days meetings had taken place in the bar of the Regional Trade Union Office, which meetings were largely made up of people who were neither workers nor local inhabitants but of whom some were students. In the course of these meetings there were attacks on property and subversive slogans were shouted, particularly insults against the State, the Government, the Spanish nation and its unity. These meetings, which were purely political, and at which occupational issues were never raised, gave rise to disturbances in the trade union premises and to violent clashes in the street. The Secretary of the Regional Office and a Civil Guard sergeant were seriously injured at the time. Two persons were arrested and charged with taking part in an unauthorised and non-peaceful demonstration during which subversive slogans were shouted and the police were stoned. The two accused have been provisionally released; the Public Prosecutor has asked for a sentence of three years' imprisonment.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 109. The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government. In particular it notes that, according to this information, it appears that the two persons arrested following the incidents that occurred at Cornellá, and who have been provisionally released, are to be brought to trial.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 110. In these circumstances, the Committee, in accordance with the practice it has always followed in such cases, recommends the Governing Body:
   • (a) to request the Government to furnish the text of the judgement concerning the two persons mentioned in the complaint once it has been delivered; and
   • (b) to take note of the present interim report, it being understood that the Committee will submit a further report to the Governing Body when it has received the information requested from the Government.