Definitive Report - Report No 236, November 1984

Case No 1274 (Uruguay) - Complaint date: 11-APR-84 - Closed

Display in: French - Spanish

Go to:

176. The complaint is contained in a communication from the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) dated 11 April 1984. The Government replied by a communication of 21 May 1984.
177. Uruguay has 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).

178. In its communication of 11 April 1984 the ICFTU alleges that Mr. Hugo de los Santos, leader of the "Manos del Uruguay" textile workers' union and a member of the executive committee of the textile workers' congress, was arrested with his wife in the early hours of 7 April 1984 by members of the army; a hood was placed over his head and he was apparently taken to the 13th regiment. The ICFTU demands his release and assurances as to his physical safety.

179. In its communication of 21 May 1984 the Government states that the arrest of Mr. Hugo de los Santos was connected with the protest demonstration initially involving some 200 people on 5 April 1984 in front of the textile undertaking "Fibratex", which was subsequently joined by workers' representatives from other firms, amounting altogether to some 500 people. Despite the improvised speeches made in front of the above-mentioned undertaking, and the fact that the demonstrators, carrying posters, then headed for the MUSA textile undertaking, the armed forces who are responsible for preserving law and order refrained from intervening and allowed the workers to demonstrate freely. However, when they saw that Mr. Hugo de los Santos Figueroa was part of the group and was acting as an agitator although he was then on probation, they reported the matter to the competent legal authorities who decided on his arrest on 9 April for a period of five days.
180. Finally the Government states that it has no means of verifying the complainant's statement that Mr. de los Santos is a trade union leader of the workers' association of "Manos del Uruguay" and that it presumes this statement to be inaccurate since his name does not appear in the application of the said association to hold a constituent assembly nor has any official appointment been communicated to the Ministry of Labour and Social Security.

181. The Committee observes that according to the Government's statements, the legally authorised detention of Mr. Hugo de los Santos for five days was due to his participation in an activity incompatible with the fact that he was then on probation to be precise, his participation as an agitator in a protest march of textile workers. The Committee observes that this march is said to have been of a peaceful nature since, as the Government recognises, the armed forces refrained from intervening.
182. The Committee considers that the fact that a person is on probation should not mean that he is prohibited from taking part in lawful trade union activities such as a peaceful protest march. Since the Government has expressed doubts as to Mr. Hugo de log Santos' status as trade union leader, the Committee wishes to point out that the above principle applies not only to trade union leaders but also to trade unionists in general.
183. In these circumstances the Committee regrets that Mr. Hugo de los Santos spent five days under arrest and draws the Government's attention to the principle stated above concerning the relationship between probation and the exercise of trade union rights.

184. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to approve the present report and, in particular, the following conclusions:
- (a) The Committee considers that the fact that a person is on probation should not mean that he is prohibited from taking part in lawful trade union activities, such as a peaceful protest march.
- (b) Consequently the Committee regrets that Mr. Hugo de los Santos was held for five days for having taken part in a peaceful march and draws the Government's attention to the principle set forth above concerning the relationship between probation and the exercise of trade union rights.