Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2011, Publicación: 101ª reunión CIT (2012)

Convenio sobre la libertad sindical y la protección del derecho de sindicación, 1948 (núm. 87) - Aruba

The Committee recalls that it had previously noted that article 1 of State Ordinance AB 1999 No. GT2 prohibited the holding of any public meeting or speech in open air without prior written authorization from the Minister of General Affairs and requested the Government to provide information on the practical application of this article. In particular, the Committee requested the Government to indicate on which basis the Minister delivered the authorization and according to which specific requirements. The Committee had also noted that while section 5(1) of the State Ordinance provided that the right to assembly may be subject to certain conditions specified in a national decree, if public order is disturbed or if there is a serious risk of disturbance of public order, section 5(3) stated that “[the] provisions of paragraph 1(a) and (b) shall not apply to associations, committees or bodies established by virtue of a legal regulation or to committees, associations or bodies expressly excluded in the national decree”. The Committee had therefore requested the Government to indicate if, according to section 5(3), the trade unions and other workers’ and employers’ organizations were exempted from the application of section 5(1).

The Committee had noted the following information provided by the Government. When a request is submitted to the police, the petition is evaluated on its purpose and location as to the safety and public order of the event. There are no written guidelines and it remains at the discretion of the police to determine the extent of risk to the safety and public order and to advise for or against the event. The Minister of General Affairs makes the ultimate decision, which usually is in conformity with the decision reached by the police. The Government further indicated that a national decree, as referred to in section 5(1), has not been adopted and that therefore, there are no organizations (workers’ or employers’ included) exempted from the application of section 5(1). The Committee recalled that while prohibition of demonstrations or processions on public streets, when it is feared that disturbances might occur, does not necessarily constitute an infringement of trade union rights, the authorities should strive to reach an agreement with organizers of the meeting to enable it to be held in some other place where there would be no fear of disturbances (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 37). The Committee notes that the Government does not provide any information on this issue in its report. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures, including through adoption of legal provisions, which would ensure that the authorization for holding public meetings in the specific areas could be denied only when it is feared that serious disturbances might occur and public order is threatened and that in such cases, the authorities responsible for public order take the necessary measures to reach an agreement with the organizers of a meeting concerning the place where it can be held and the manner in which it can take place. It requests the Government to provide information in this respect.