Definitive Report - Report No 378, June 2016

Case No 3166 (Panama) - Complaint date: 01-JUL-15 - Closed

Allegations: Interference by the Government in trade union elections to gain control of the Autonomous Trade Union Confederation of Panamanian Workers (CGTP)

1. 589. The complaint is contained in a communication of 1 July 2015 signed by the National Union of Workers of Construction and Similar Industries (UNTRAICS).
2. 590. The Government sent new observations in communications dated 17 February, 17 May and 1 June 2016.
3. 591. Panama 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).

A. The complainant’s allegations

1. 592. In its communication of 1 July 2015, the complainant organization alleges that the elections for the new executive committee of the Autonomous Trade Union Confederation of Panamanian Workers (CGTP – the confederation to which the complainant is affiliated), which were held on 15 May 2015 during the ninth ordinary congress of the CGTP, were undemocratic because of interference by the public authorities, through high-ranking government officials. In this regard, the complainant organization reports that: (i) Mr Samuel Rivera, the Secretary-General of the Ministry of Labour and Workforce Development, who at the time of the CGTP elections was temporarily holding the office of Deputy Labour Minister under Decree No. 78 of 12 May 2015, participated in the trade union elections as a candidate on the list that emerged victorious and was elected as an officer (Executive Secretary) of the CGTP national executive committee; and (ii) another Ministry of Labour official, Mr Rolando Gálvez, a safety inspector at the Ministry of Labour and Workforce Development, was imposed on the CGTP as Organizational and Statistics Secretary. The complainant organization considers that these acts of interference, and the introduction of other high-ranking civil servants who were formerly trade union officials but are now employed by the Government, demonstrate that the Government has sought to exert influence over the CGTP, undermining its independence and autonomy. Moreover, the complainant indicates that article 25 of the CGTP constitution provides that any CGTP officer who is appointed to a political position or position of authority in any government institution must request leave of absence from the executive committee to occupy such a position and the officer’s deputy will take over his/her duties.
2. 593. The complainant organization indicates that the documentation of the ninth ordinary congress of the CGTP was registered on 3 June 2015 at 12.30 p.m. by the president of the ordinary congress – who, according to the complainant, is not empowered to do this under the CGTP rules, let alone to submit the documentation to the Department of Social Organizations at the Ministry of Labour, which answers to the Office of the Secretary- General of that Ministry, where Mr Rivera officiates. The complainant also explains that the person who headed the victorious list of candidates in the elections, Ms Nelva Reyes, holds union office as the General Secretary of the Democratic Teachers’ Association of Panama, but bizarrely she appeared in the documentation as being accredited with the Federation of Peasant Farmers (FITA). The complainant indicates that, despite these flaws and irregularities, the Ministry of Labour and Workforce Development completed the relevant process and approved the new executive committee in the surprisingly short time of eight and a half hours, which is incomprehensible to the complainant given the size of the case file and the number of documents that the Department in question receives on a daily basis. The complainant indicates that it challenged the elections in the courts – questioning the direct interference of the Government through high-ranking officials in order to place the CGTP at the service of the Government – and that, as a result of this action, government officials published statements tarnishing the image of the complainant organization (the complainant submits a press article criticizing its position on the elections, signed by a former CGTP General Secretary who, according to the complainant, is now a government adviser). Lastly, the complainant indicates that it informed the President of the Republic in writing of the alleged violations of freedom of association.

B. The Government’s reply

1. 594. In its communications of 17 February and 17 May 2016, the Government responds to the allegations made by the complainant organization.
2. 595. The Government indicates that there was no interference by the government authorities in the election of the new executive committee of the CGTP. The Government reports that, while it is true that Mr Rivera is the Secretary-General of the Ministry of Labour and Workforce Development, it is also true that he has been a CGTP member since 1987 and that in 1990 he was elected Finance Secretary, a post that he still holds. The Government indicates that in July 2014 Mr Rivera was appointed Secretary-General of the Ministry of Labour and Workforce Development; that since then his involvement in CGTP activities has decreased; and that on 14 and 15 May 2015, the dates of the elections of the ninth congress of the CGTP, Mr Rivera requested to be relieved of his public office from the Ministry in order to present the finance report to the CGTP congress. The Government also states that, in accordance with the provisions of article 25 of the CGTP by-laws, by a request of 8 June 2015, Mr Rivera asked the Board of the CGTP to relieve him of his position as Executive Secretary of the trade union in order to hold public office. The Government provides the document according to which, on 2 July 2015, the Secretary-General of the CGTP relieved Mr Rivera of his trade union office as requested. As regards the allegation that Mr Gálvez was imposed on the CGTP, the Government indicates that since 2 July 1992 he has been a member of the Union of Workers of the Panamanian Plastics Industry (SITIPP), which is affiliated to the CGTP and that, just as Mr Rivera, Mr Gálvez requested and was relieved from his position in the trade union to hold public office.
3. 596. As regards the registration of the documentation of the ninth ordinary congress of the CGTP by the congress President, the Government states that: (i) congress sessions are governed by an executive body and, once the discussion of the documents is complete, an electoral tribunal is established which is responsible for conducting the electoral process, as set out in the union rules; (ii) Mr Efrén Delgado (independent), Mr Victor Concepción (non-member officer) and Mr Ángel López (non-member officer) were responsible for the running of the congress; (iii) two lists of candidates were presented for the elections of the ninth congress, at which the list headed by Ms Nelva Reyes emerged victorious, and the outcome was registered with the Ministry of Labour and Workforce Development once the official record had been signed; (iv) it is incorrect that the Department of Social Organizations answers to the Office of the Secretary-General of the Ministry, since it is under the Directorate-General of Labour; and (v) as regards the time taken to certify the new executive committee, the documentation was duly presented and the Ministry was therefore obliged to register it in order to avoid differences between trade unions.
4. 597. The Government indicates that the defeated list of candidates challenged the elections in the First Labour Court of the First Sector, which issued ruling No. 248 of 26 June 2015, rejecting the appeal as inadmissible. The Government adds that an appeal was filed with the Higher Labour Court of the First Judicial District, which upheld the rejection of the appeal by the First Labour Court in a ruling of 30 July 2015. The court decisions forwarded by the Government show that both judicial bodies considered that the complainants had not met the legal requirements for challenging the acts of a trade union confederation, and so the appeal was rejected without entering into the substance.

C. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 598. The Committee observes that the complaint concerns allegations of interference by the Government in trade union elections to gain control of the CGTP. The Committee observes that the complainant organization indicates, without being contradicted by the Government, that at least two government officials participated in the ninth congress and in the elections of the CGTP and that the Secretary-General of the Ministry of Labour and Workforce Development was appointed Executive Secretary of the CGTP national executive committee. The Committee notes from the Government: (i) the indication that the government officials concerned had been active trade union members for some time and that, as regards the Secretary-General of the Ministry of Labour and Workforce Development, his involvement in CGTP activities had been decreasing since his appointment to the Ministry in 2012; and (ii) the indication that, according to the CGTP by-laws, the Secretary-General of the Ministry sought to be relieved of his union position of Executive Secretary to exercise his public office and the union acceded to his request, so that the Committee understands that he is currently not exercising any trade union office. The Committee also notes from the information provided by the Government that: (i) in the past, the Secretary-General of the Ministry continued to hold the position of Finance Secretary in the CGTP after his appointment to the Ministry; and (ii) during the period for which he was temporarily appointed as Deputy Minister, he requested to be relieved of his public office from the Ministry to participate in the ninth congress of the CGTP, at which he was elected Executive Secretary by virtue of being on the victorious candidate list.
2. 599. Firstly, the Committee wishes to recall the general principle that the Committee is not competent to make recommendations on internal dissentions within a trade union organization, so long as the government does not intervene in a manner which might affect the exercise of trade union rights and the normal functioning of an organization [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth (revised) edition, 2006, para. 1114]. Secondly, the Committee wishes to draw attention to the resolution concerning the independence of the trade union movement adopted by the International Labour Conference in 1952, which recalls that it is essential to preserve the freedom and independence of the trade union movement in all countries so that it can pursue its economic and social objectives regardless of any political changes. As regards the allegations of interference, the Committee considers that the participation of high-ranking officials of the public administration in trade union elections or in positions of trade union leadership can undermine the independence of the trade union organizations in question.
3. 600. With regard to the case, the Committee observes that, by virtue of the CGTP by-laws, the Secretary-General of the Ministry of Labour and Social Development and the safety inspectors had requested to be relieved of their trade union office to hold public office and that the trade union acceded to these requests, thereby addressing the potential risk of conflict of interest.

The Committee’s recommendation

1. 601. In the light of its foregoing conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to consider that this case does not call for further examination.