Informe provisional - Informe núm. 78, 1965

Caso núm. 360 (República Dominicana) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 15-NOV-63 - Cerrado

1. 171. The complaints by the Autonomous Confederation of Christian Trade Unions (C.A.S.C.), the Latin American Federation of Christian Trade Unionists (C.L.A.S.C.), the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions (I.F.C.T.U.) and the International Federation of Public Service and Postal Employees' Unions are contained in communications sent directly to the I.L.O and dated respectively 15, 19 (two) and 21 November 1963. Two complaints were sent by the National Dominican Confederation of Workers (FOUPSA-CESITRADO), one by its General Secretary (in exile) dated 20 January 1964 and the other by its President dated 31 March 1964. The C.A.S.C sent a new communication on 16 April 1964. All these communications were transmitted to the Government, whose observations dated 29 June 1964 have been received.
2. 172. The Dominican Republic 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. A. The complainants' allegations

• Allegations concerning the Arrest of the Leader Henry Molina
  173. 173 The complaints contained in the communications from the Christian trade union organisations mentioned above accuse the Government of having arrested several leaders of the Christian trade unions and in particular Mr. Henry Molina, who is threatened with deportation.
  174. 174 These communications were transmitted to the Government by a letter dated 28 November 1963, which indicated that this case fell within the category classed by the Governing Body of the I.L.O as urgent. Despite the lapse of time and repeated reminders the Government has still not replied.
  175. 175 The Committee has always emphasised the importance it attaches to the guarantee of due legal process in cases where trade unionists are accused of offences of a political nature or of common law crimes and has declared that the grant to a trade unionist of his freedom on condition that he leaves the country is not compatible with the free exercise of trade union rights.
  176. 176 Not having received information from the Government the Committee recommends the Governing Body to draw the attention of the Government to the principle set forth in the preceding paragraph, to request it to furnish as soon as possible its observations on the present position of Mr. Henry Molina, and to remind the Government again of the urgent nature of this aspect of the case.
• Closure of the National Dominican Confederation of Workers (FOUPSA-CESITRADO), Arrest of the Leader Miguel Soto and Exile of the Leaders Mr and Mrs. Monegro
  177. 177 A communication written in exile by the General Secretary of FOUPSA-CESITRADO and dated 20 January 1964 declares that its premises were raided and various objects belonging to the workers of the Dominican Republic, including documents of the union, were removed. The premises were closed and the leaders were persecuted and deported. The communication states that the President of the Confederation, Mr. Miguel Soto, was held in solitary confinement. Mr. Modesto Américo Monegro, who signs the communication as General Secretary of the Confederation, was transferred by the police, after several days under arrest, to the Embassy of Mexico under a safe conduct order from the Ministry for Foreign Affairs in order to seek asylum but under orders to leave the country. Mrs. Marcia Adaljisa de Monegro, Labour-Management Secretary of the Confederation, was also called upon to leave the country and is now listed as a person to be refused re-entry to her country. On 31 March 1964 the Confederation sent a new communication, this time from Santo Domingo and signed by three leaders, including the President, Mr. Miguel Soto. This makes further reference amongst other things to the destruction of the furniture, the closure of the Confederation's premises and the illegal imprisonment of the President. It also states that the Government interferes with the mail for FOUPSA-CESITRADO and prevents the union from receiving letters and printed matter sent to it.
  178. 178 The C.A.S.C, for its part, having been invited by the Secretary of State for Labour to make any comments it thinks fit concerning the communication sent by Mr and Mrs. Monegro, confirms that the premises of FOUPSA-CESITRADO were broken into by the police and that the union was expelled from them; nothing was known at that date of the fate of the Confederation's documents and furniture. The communication from the C.A.S.C states that Mr. Miguel Soto was detained without just cause for three months before being released because no offence could be proved against him. It declares that the Monegros applied for political asylum in the Embassy of Mexico, which was granted them.
  179. 179 In its communication dated 29 June 1964 the Government sent a number of documents which show that Mr. Miguel Soto was handed over to the police and that the case was suspended on 24 January 1964. He was arrested on charges of acts of terrorism, holding meetings of a subversive nature and incitement to rebellion and disorder. He was never subjected to physical or moral violence nor was he put into solitary confinement, and he is now at liberty.
  180. 180 The Government declares that Mr. Monegro had been sentenced in 1951 and 1952 for criminal offences. Both he and his wife were taken several times to the police station for having incited the workers to start illegal strikes.
  181. 181 The Committee notes that the position regarding the raid and the closure of the union's premises is not sufficiently clear from the documents that have been sent to it. The various complaints agree as to the raid on the premises, the destruction of the furniture, the disappearance of documents and the closing down of the union. The Committee notes, however, that it was the union itself that sent the communication dated 31 March 1964 which had on its letter heading the address of the organisation and included among the signatories of its leaders that of its President, Mr. Miguel Soto. It is thus not clear whether the premises of the union have reopened, or what is their de jure and de facto position.
  182. 182 The Government itself has made no observations concerning this part of the case.
  183. 183 The Committee, while recognising that trade unions, like other associations or persons, cannot claim immunity from search of their premises, emphasises the importance it attaches to the principle that such a search should only be made following the issue of a warrant by the ordinary judicial authority after that authority has been satisfied that reasonable grounds exist for supposing that evidence exists on the said premises material to a prosecution for offence under the ordinary law and provided that such search is restricted to the purposes in respect of which the warrant was issued. The Committee also notes that the Dominican Republic has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), which provides among other things that workers' and employers' organisations shall not be liable to be dissolved or suspended by administrative authority.
  184. 184 In these circumstances, not having sufficient information before it, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to reaffirm the principle set forth in the preceding paragraph and to request the Government to furnish its observations on the allegations concerning the rading and closure of the premises of FOUPSA-CESITRADO and, in particular, on the present de facto and de jure position of that organisation.
  185. 185 As regards the arrest of Mr. Miguel Soto the Committee observes that on many occasions in the past it has pointed out that in all cases in which trade union leaders are preventively detained these measures may involve a serious interference with the exercise of trade union rights and that it would appear necessary that they should be justified by a serious emergency; that, unless accompanied by adequate judicial safeguards applied within a reasonable period, they were open to criticism; and that the policy of every government should be to ensure that human rights are properly safeguarded, particularly the right of all detained persons to receive a fair trial at the earliest possible moment. The Committee has also pointed out that the detention by the authorities of trade unionists concerning whom no grounds for conviction are subsequently found is liable to involve restrictions of trade union rights, and has recommended the Governing Body to request the Government to consider whether the authorities concerned had instructions appropriate to eliminate the danger of detention for trade union activities.
  186. 186 In the present case the Committee notes that Mr. Miguel Soto is at liberty, for he is one of the signatories of the complaint sent on 31 March 1964. It also notes that Mr. Soto was liberated after having been detained for three months because it had not been possible to prove him guilty of the accusation that had been made against him.
  187. 187 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to take note that Mr. Miguel Soto is no longer in prison; to draw the attention of the Government to the restriction of the exercise of trade union rights that may arise from the preventive detention of leaders concerning whom no grounds for conviction are subsequently found; and to request the Government to take steps to ensure that the authorities have appropriate instructions in order to eliminate this danger.
  188. 188 As regards Mr and Mrs. Monegro, who appear to have been compelled to leave their country in order to keep their freedom, the Committee refers to the principle laid down above in paragraph 175 and recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to ascertain the legal situation of these persons and what possibilities exist for them to return to the country legally.
• Complaints concerning the Murder of the Leader Benito Acevedo
  189. 189 The complaint dated 20 January 1964 refers to the murder of Mr. Benito Acevedo, a leader of the works union of the Central Romana Corporation. This took place on 24 or 25 December 1963 and is likewise mentioned in the complaint of 31 March 1964 and the complaint of 16 April 1964. These both state that the circumstances of his death have still not been cleared up and that the Office of the Secretary of State for Justice has ignored requests by various trade union organisations to clear up the crime.
  190. 190 The Government included in its reply the examinations by the authorities of certain persons concerning the death of Mr. Benito Acevedo. It also states that on 30 December it called on the appropriate judge to ascertain the facts of the case and to report on them.
  191. 191 The Committee has always followed the practice of not proceeding to examine matters which were the subject of pending national judicial proceedings where such proceedings might make available information of assistance to the Committee in appreciating whether or not allegations were well founded. It also points out that it has repeatedly asked governments to send information on judicial proceedings and their results.
  192. 192 In these circumstances the Committee notes that, according to the information furnished, this matter is being investigated by the courts and requests the Government to keep it informed as to the outcome of the proceedings now taking place, and meanwhile postpones the formulation of its conclusions on this aspect of the case.
• Other Allegations
  193. 193 In the complaints sent by FOUPSA-CESITRADO dated 31 March 1964 and by the C.A.S.C dated 16 April 1964 reference is also made to other events alleged to be in violation of trade union freedom in the Dominican Republic. The former complaint refers to the murder of the trade union leaders Héctor Porfirio Quezada, Julio Anibal Garcia Dickson and Alberto Laracuent in the region of La Romana, a major sugar-producing area of the country. The same communication also states that the labour programmes of the organisation from the broadcasting stations of Radio Universal, Radio Unión, Radio Tricolor and Radio R.P.Q have been cancelled. Reference is made in the second complaint to the imprisonment and threatened deportation of the leader Rodolfo Sessman and the imprisonment of the leader Luis Polivio Padilla. The C.A.S.C further alleges that on two occasions its radio programmes have been suspended. Another allegation is that a blackleg trade union has been set up by the city council of the national capital. The communication from the C.A.S.C and that from the Monegros declare that the Government supports the Confederation CONATRAL, affiliated to the Inter-American Regional Organisation of Workers of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (O.R.I.T.), whose leaders are the only ones who enjoy a certain measure of protection and that any leader who opposes this body is accused of being a Communist.
  194. 194 The Government has made no observations concerning these allegations but it included in the documents sent on 29 June 1964 a letter from CONATRAL to the Secretary of State for Labour. This shows that at no time has the Government restricted the labour rights of leaders belonging to this organisation when they were devoting themselves exclusively to trade union duties, because it is non-political, non-party and anti-Communist. On the other hand the two Monegros have taken part in matters unconnected with the labour movement and for that reason have had to go into exile.
  195. 195 In these circumstances, in view of the lack of direct information from the Government concerning the allegations referred to in paragraph 193 above and which relate to matters considered as urgent under the procedure in force, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to furnish its observations on these matters as speedily as possible, and, in particular, in respect of the alleged murder or detention of the trade union leaders mentioned above.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 196. As regards the case as a whole the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
   • (a) to take note that Mr. Miguel Soto is no longer in prison, to draw the attention of the Government to the restriction of the exercise of trade union rights that may arise from the preventive detention of leaders concerning whom no grounds for conviction are subsequently found, and to request the Government to take steps to ensure that authorities have appropriate instructions in order to eliminate this danger;
   • (b) to call the attention of the Government to the importance that the Committee attaches to the guarantee of due legal process when trade unionists are accused of offences of a political nature or of common law crimes, and to the fact that the granting of his freedom to a trade unionist on condition that he leaves the country is not compatible with the free exercise of trade union rights; and to request the Government as soon as possible to send its observations on the position of Mr. Henry Molina in view of the urgent nature of this part of the case, and also on the legal position of Mr and Mrs. Monegro and the possibilities they have of returning legally to the country;
   • (c) to reaffirm the principles set forth in paragraph 183 above and to request the Government to furnish its observations on the allegations concerning the raiding and closure of the premises of the National Dominican Confederation of Workers (FOUPSA-CESITRADO) and in particular on the present de facto and de jure position of that organisation;
   • (d) to request the Government, in view of the lack of direct information from it concerning the other allegations referred to in paragraph 193 above, which relate to matters considered as urgent under the procedure in force, to furnish its observations thereon as speedily as possible, and, in particular, in respect of the alleged murder or detention of the trade union leaders named;
   • (e) to take note of the present interim report, it being understood that the Committee will report further to the Governing Body when it has received the additional information requested.