Informe provisional - Informe núm. 83, 1965

Caso núm. 202 (Tailandia) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 08-JUN-59 - Cerrado

1. 74. This case, already considered by the Committee at its 24th, 25th, 26th, 27th, 28th, 29th, 30th, 31st and 33rd Sessions (February 1960, May 1960, November 1960, February 1961, May 1961, November 1961, February 1962, May 1962 and February 1963), was further examined by the Committee at its 34th Session (May 1963), when it submitted a further interim report in paragraphs 125 to 133 of its 70th Report, which was approved by the Governing Body on 1 June 1963, in the course of its 155th Session.
2. 75. Paragraph 133 of the Committee's 70th Report contains the recommendations of the Committee, as adopted by the Governing Body, and reads as follows:
3. 133. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
   • (a) to draw the attention of the Government once again, as it has done on previous occasions, to the fact that the situation of the workers of Thailand, who, since the dissolution of all the trade unions in Thailand in October 1958, have been unable to form and join trade union organisations for the protection of their interests, is contrary to generally recognised principles relating to freedom of association;
   • (b) to express its disappointment that, after stating on 26 April 1961 that the text of a new Labour Act had been finalised and would be submitted to the Legislative Assembly as soon as possible, the Government, almost two years later, only states that the draft of this text has now been completed, but will still not be submitted to the Legislative Assembly until after the promulgation of a new Constitution which is only in the stage of being drafted; and to request the Government to state when it is anticipated that the draft Labour Act will be submitted to the Legislative Assembly;
   • (c) to draw the attention of the Government to the importance which the Governing Body attaches to its taking promptly steps to enable the workers to form organisations of their own choosing in the meantime in order to defend their interests, and to request the Government to inform the Governing Body as a matter of urgency as to the steps it intends to take;
   • (d) to reaffirm yet again the importance which the Governing Body has always attached to the principle of prompt and fair trial by an independent and impartial judiciary in all cases, including cases in which trade unionists are charged with political or criminal offences which the Government considers have no relation to their trade union functions; and to draw the attention of the Government yet again to its view that a situation in which proceedings had been completed in the cases of only four of the 19 trade unionists arrested as long ago as October 1958 is incompatible with the said principle;
   • (e) to request the Government to explain the position with regard to Mr. Prayoon Chuenswasdi, former Assistant General Secretary of the Thai National T.U.C, having regard to the fact that, whereas in its communication dated 10 January 1963 the Government stated that he had been cleared of the former criminal charge brought against him but was being further detained on a charge of hooliganism, it now states, in its communication dated 25 April 1963, that this detention on a charge of hooliganism is subsequent to his discharge of a term of two years' imprisonment for an offence punishable under the Penal Code, and, if in fact he was sentenced to a term of two years' imprisonment, to be good enough to furnish a text of the judgment in his case, together with the reasons adduced therein;
   • (f) to deplore that the Government has ignored the request addressed to it by the Governing Body to furnish information on the matters referred to in subparagraphs (g) and (h) of paragraph 93 of the 68th Report of the Committee cited in paragraph 126 above; to request the Government, therefore, yet again to furnish as a matter of urgency, having regard to the principle set forth in subparagraph (d) above, information as to the legal or judicial proceedings taken in respect of the remaining 14 trade unionists, in addition to those pending against Mr. Chuenswasdi and Mr. Sang Pattanothai, or, if proceedings have not been taken, information as to the present situation in the cases in question;
   • (g) to request the Government, having regard to its earlier statement that police records reveal only four of the trade unionists named by the complainants as having been arrested, to be good enough to furnish, as a matter of urgency, the names of the 19 trade unionists stated by the Government to have been detained.
4. 76. The above requests to furnish further information were brought to the notice of the Government by a letter dated 13 June 1963. At subsequent sessions the Committee reiterated these requests. Further information was furnished by the Government in a communication dated 16 March 1965.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

• Allegations relating to the Denial of Freedom of Association
  77. 77 With regard to the legislative situation referred to in paragraph 133 (b) of the Committee's 70th Report, the Government states that it is amending the Announcement of the Ministry of the Interior on the protection of workers and will submit the amendment as a Labour Protection Bill, which will be promulgated as soon as it has been passed by the Legislature, but that a law relating to trade unions " will be considered after the promulgation of the Constitution ".
  78. 78 In reply to the Governing Body's request, contained in paragraph 133 (c) of the Committee's 70th Report, for information as to the steps it intended to take to enable the workers to form organisations of their own choosing in the meantime in order to defend their interests, the Government states that " while the Constitution is still under consideration, steps have been taken by the Labour Advisory Committee to consider form, scope and suitability of said problems for submitting the draft to the Legislature after the promulgation of the Constitution ".
  79. 79 The Committee observes that over six years have now elapsed since the dissolution of the trade unions in Thailand in October 1958 and that still the workers cannot form or join trade unions to protect their interests. On 26 April 1961 the Government said that the text of a new Labour Act had been finalised and would be submitted to the Legislative Assembly as soon as possible, and then, on 25 April 1963, stated that it would be submitted only after a new Constitution had been promulgated. Now the Government states that a trade union law will be considered after the promulgation of the Constitution, although a Labour Protection Bill is to be submitted to the Legislature.
  80. 80 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
      • (a) to draw the attention of the Government once again, as it has done on a number of previous occasions, to the fact that the situation of the workers of Thailand, who, since the dissolution of all the trade unions in Thailand in October 1958, have been unable to form and join trade union organisations for the protection of their interests, is contrary to generally recognised principles relating to freedom of association;
      • (b) to express its disappointment that, after stating on 26 April 1961 that a new Labour Act had been finalised and would be submitted to the Legislative Assembly as soon as possible, the Government now states, almost four years later, that a law on trade unions will not be considered until after the promulgation of a new Constitution;
      • (c) to urge the Government in the meantime to take steps to enable the workers to form trade unions to protect their interests and to request the Government to inform the Governing Body of the measures taken or intended to be taken in this connection;
      • (d) to request the Government to be good enough to furnish a text of the Announcement of the Ministry of the Interior on the protection of workers and to inform it as to the provisions of the Labour Protection Bill which it states is intended to amend the said announcement.
  81. Allegations relating to the Detention -Trade Unionists
  81. 81 The Government annexes to its reply the names of 24 ex-trade unionists among the persons originally or subsequently arrested. This list comprises:
  1. (1) Mr. Suphachai Sristi; (2) Mr. Vira Thanomliang; (3) Mr. Charan Yobanyong; (4) Mr. Chamnong Nuthong; (5) Mr. Narong Sae Tiew; (6) Mr. Saeng Sae Su; (7) Mr. Samutr Phuangbutr; (8) Mr. Visith Sriphatra; (9) Mr. Thongsuk Chiwkhanan; (10) Mr. Kosol Kitchanuvatr; (11) Mr. Thep Khamlucha; (12) Mr. Udorn Attaphant; (13) Mr. Kachorn Vatchanadilok; (14) Mr. Praphas Sukhont; (15) Mr. Prayoon Chuenswasdi; (16) Mr. Prasit Chintanakul; (17) Mr. Sang Phathanothai; (18) Mr. Prasert Khamplumchitr; (19) Mr. Karuna Kuslasai; (20) Mr. Thongbai Thongpound; (21) Mr. Vichitr Mahasin; (22) Mr. Chamnong Harith; (23) Mr. Prakob Tolaklam; (24) Mr. Yunfa Sae Lau.
• Of the last 17 persons named, Messrs. Chiwkhanan, Sukhont and Kuslasai do not appear to have been mentioned specifically by the complainants, but the remaining 14 were in the lists of detainees submitted by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (I.C.F.T.U.) in October and November 1962.
  82. 82 The Government states that the ex-trade unionist Mr. Suphachai Sristi was executed, but gives no further details. The Committee, therefore, recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to furnish a copy of the judgment in accordance with which Mr. Suphachai Sristi was executed, together with the reasons adduced therein.
  83. 83 The Government states that Messrs. Vira Thanomliang, Charan Yobanyong, Chamnong Nuthong, Narong Sae Tiew and Saeng Sae Su were released after questioning on 3 July 1962, that Mr. Samutr Phuangbutr was released after questioning in 1960, that Mr. Visith Sriphatra was released after questioning on 20 November 1963, that the Prosecutor withdrew the case against Messrs. Thongsuk Chiwkhanan, Kosol Kitchanuvatr, Thep Khamlucha, Udorn Attaphant and Kachorn Vatchanadilok on 7 May 1964 and that he withdrew the case against Mr. Praphas Sukhont on 3 October 1961.
  84. 84 The Committee recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to state whether it is correct in assuming that all the persons named in the preceding paragraph are now at liberty.
  85. 85 With its reply the Government furnishes a copy of a judgment of the Criminal Court, dated 16 October 1959, sentencing to two years' imprisonment Mr. Prayoon Chuenswasdi, former Assistant General Secretary of the Thai National Trades Union Congress, Mr. Prasit Chintanakul (referred to by the Government as an ex-trade unionist), and two other persons not mentioned in the complaints or elsewhere in the Government's observations. They were found guilty of offences against the security of the State by reason of having participated in the preparation and distribution of two leaflets. The copy of the first leaflet cited accused the Revolutionary Junta of being governed by personal interests, covering up frauds, ignoring economic dangers and seeking to bring Thailand under the control " of Red China ". The second leaflet, as cited, accused the Junta of dictatorship and brutal and reckless arrests and resulted, according to the judgment, in the public being incited to commit disorder in various places. In conclusion, the judgment stated, the sentence of two years would be reduced to one year's imprisonment, because the accused had confessed. In an annex to its observations, the Government states that Mr. Chuenswasdi and Mr. Chintanakul were " released after serving the sentence on 16 March 1964 ".
  86. 86 The Committee therefore recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to be good enough to state whether it is correct in assuming that these two former trade unionists are now at liberty.
  87. 87 Finally, in its communication dated 16 March 1965, the Government states that court proceedings have been pending since 5 October 1962 against the following eight persons, who are still in custody and all of whom except the last-named were referred to as trade unionists in the I.C.F.T.U communications of October and November 1962: Mr. Sang Phathanothai, former President and later General Secretary of the Thai National T.U.C, Mr. Prasert Khamplumchitr, Mr. Thongbai Thongpound (referred to by the complainants as belonging to the Journalists' Union), Mr. Vichitr Mahasin, Mr. Chamnong Harith, Mr. Prakob Tolaklam (referred to by the complainants as belonging to the Free Workers' Association), Mr. Yunfa Sae Lau and Mr. Karuna Kuslasai. Of these the Government maintains that only Messrs. Tolaklam and Sae Lau are former trade unionists.
  88. 88 The Committee therefore recommends the Governing Body:
      • (a) to reaffirm yet again the importance which the Governing Body has always attached to the principle of prompt and fair trial by an independent and impartial judiciary in all cases, including cases in which trade unionists are charged with political or criminal offences which the Government considers have no relation to their trade union functions, and to draw the attention of the Government to its view that the continued detention of Mr. Sang Phathanothai and the other persons named in paragraph 87 above, against whom, after a long period of previous detention, court proceedings began on 5 October 1962 and are still pending, is incompatible with the said principle;
      • (b) to request the Government to be good enough to inform the Governing Body, as a matter of urgency, as to when it is anticipated that the pending proceedings against the persons in question will be concluded, and to furnish a copy of the judgment and of the reasons adduced therein

The Committee's recommendations

1. 89. In all the circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
   • (a) to draw the attention of the Government once again, as it has done on a number of previous occasions, to the fact that the situation of the workers of Thailand, who since the dissolution of all the trade unions in Thailand in October 1958 have been unable to form and join trade union organisations for the protection of their interests, is contrary to generally recognised principles relating to freedom of association;
   • (b) to express its disappointment that, after stating on 26 April 1961 that a new Labour Act had been finalised and would be submitted to the Legislative Assembly as soon as possible, the Government now states, almost four years later, that a law on trade unions will not be considered until after the promulgation of a new Constitution;
   • (c) to urge the Government in the meantime to take steps to enable the workers to form trade unions to protect their interests and to request the Government to inform the Governing Body of the measures taken or intended to be taken in this connection;
   • (d) to request the Government to be good enough to furnish a text of the Announcement of the Ministry of the Interior on the protection of workers and to inform it as to the provisions of the Labour Protection Bill which it states is intended to amend the said announcement;
   • (e) to request the Government to state whether the Governing Body is correct in assuming that all the persons named in paragraphs 83 and 85 above are now at liberty;
   • (f) to reaffirm yet again the importance which the Governing Body has always attached to the principle of prompt and fair trial by an independent and impartial judiciary in all cases, including cases in which trade unionists are charged with political or criminal offences which the Government considers have no relation to their trade union functions; and to draw the attention of the Government to its view that the continued detention of Mr. Sang Phathanothai and the other persons named in paragraph 87 above, against whom, after a long period of previous detention, court proceedings began on 5 October 1962 and are still pending, is incompatible with the said principle;
   • (g) to request the Government to be good enough to inform the Governing Body, as a matter of urgency, as to when it is anticipated that the pending proceedings against the persons in question will be concluded, and to furnish a copy of the judgment and of the reasons adduced therein.