Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body - Report No 362, November 2011

Case No 2527 (Peru) - Complaint date: 28-SEP-06 - Closed

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 115. The Committee last examined this case regarding alleged acts of anti-union discrimination by the San Martín Mining Company SA at its November 2010 meeting, when it requested the Government to: (1) keep it informed of the status of the ongoing judicial proceedings relating to the dismissal of union official Mr José Arenaza Lander; (2) keep it informed of progress in the amparo (protection of constitutional rights) proceedings in relation to the dismissal of union official Mr César Augusto Elías García; and (3) send its observations on the allegations of the CATP of 18 June 2009 regarding acts of violence against union official Mr César Augusto Elías García and the outcome of the criminal complaint presented by that official in connection with the alleged assaults [see 358th Report, paras 83–87].
2. 116. In its communications dated 20 October 2010, 7 February and 23 September 2011, the Government states that proceedings to annul dismissal, initiated by Mr José Antonio Arenaza Lander (reference No. 434-2006-0-1801-JR-LA-19) against the San Martín Mining Company were introduced with the 19th Labour Court. In a decision dated 31 March 2010, the 19th Labour Court of Lima ruled that the application was unfounded; an appeal against that ruling was lodged by Mr Arenaza Lander on 17 May 2010. In a hearing decision dated 13 August 2010, the Provisional Labour Appeals Chamber of the High Court of Justice of Lima upheld the first instance judicial ruling declaring the application unfounded and ordered that the case be definitively set aside. On 14 October 2010, Mr José Antonio Arenaza Lander lodged an appeal on points of law which was overturned in a decision of 18 October 2010 on the grounds that the time allowed for it had elapsed and, on 24 January 2011, the case was referred again to the original court to be set aside. On 11 March 2011, Mr Arenaza Lander lodged an application for amparo (protection of constitutional rights) in relation to the Chamber of the High Court of Justice of Lima; the said constitutional action was declared inadmissible by the Sixth Constitutional Court of Lima. This ruling was appealed before the Seventh Civil Chamber of the High Court of Justice of Lima.
3. 117. In its communications dated 27 July and 23 September 2011, the Government indicates that, on 15 July 2011, the Constitutional Court took a decision in the constitutional grievance appeal initiated by Mr César Augusto Elías García against the decision taken by the Fifth Civil Chamber of the High Court of Justice of Lima. The Constitutional Court declared the appeal well-grounded, repealed the cassation and confirmed the decision dated 24 December 2008 which declared the arbitrary dismissal invalid.
4. 118. The Committee takes note of this information. The Committee expects that, following the decision taken by the Constitutional Court regarding the dismissal of union official Mr César Augusto Elías García, this union official will be reinstated in his position without delay and with the payment of lost wages. The Committee also urges the Government once again to send its observations on the allegations of the CATP of 18 June 2009 regarding acts of violence against union official Mr César Augusto Elías García, and the outcome of the criminal complaint presented by that official in connection with the alleged assaults. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the appeal filed by the union official, Mr Arenaza Lander, with the Seventh Civil Chamber of the High Court of Justice of Lima relating to his dismissal.