Definitive Report - Report No 149, November 1975

Case No 811 (Jordan) - Complaint date: 11-JAN-75 - Closed

1. 18. The Director-General received a letter, dated 11 January 1975, from the General Federation of Jordan Trade Unions (Damascus) containing allegations to the effect that the Jordanian authorities have attacked the headquarters of the unions in Amman and arrested several trade union leaders.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 19. The Committee recalls that it has already received complaints from the General Federation of Jordan Trade Unions (Damascus), specifically in Case No. 668 also relating to Jordan. The Government stated on that occasion that the Federation in question did not represent Jordanian workers. This statement was communicated to the Federation concerned for comments. In its reply, the Federation provided information concerning the trade union situation in Jordan and referred in particular to intervention by the Government in trade union activities in 1971 and the beginning of 1972. The Director-General subsequently designated a representative who visited Jordan in accordance with the direct contact procedure and examined the situation with regard to the Jordanian trade union movement from 1970 up to the time of his visit (April-May 1974).
2. 20. According to the information collected by this representative, the General Federation of Jordan Trade Unions was created in Damascus by three former members of the executive Committee of the General Federation of Trade Unions in Amman towards the end of 1970. Subsequently, following developments in the Federation and elections which took place in 1972, the situation within the Federation in Amman became normal. The Representative of the Director-General then concluded that the claims by the three persons that the Damascus Federation represented Jordanian workers was not well founded. He added that the view was supported by nearly all the trade union leaders in Jordan, including those who openly opposed the Government.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 21. Under the procedure in force, complaints must come either from employers' or workers' organisations or from governments. It is the responsibility of the Governing Body, on the basis of a recommendation from the Committee, to decide what is meant by workers' or employers' organisations. In this connection, the Committee has often referred to the Governing Body's conclusions with respect to the representation made in 1937 by the Labour Party of the island of Mauritius under article 24 of the Constitution of the ILO. In that case, the Governing Body stated that it was free under the Constitution to use its discretion in deciding whether or not a body depositing a complaint was to be regarded as an industrial association and that it was not bound by any terminology established by legislation or custom in the State concerned. Nevertheless, before considering a complaint as receivable it had to be convinced that the organisation submitting it was in effect an industrial organisation.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 22. In view of all these circumstances and particularly the information obtained by the Representative of the Director-General during his visit to Jordan, the Committee considers that the complainant cannot be considered as a workers' industrial organisation and therefore recommends the Governing Body to decide that the complaint is irreceivable under the procedure in force and to file it without communicating it to the Government concerned.