Informe provisional - Informe núm. 85, 1966

Caso núm. 400 (España) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 28-ABR-64 - Cerrado

366. The Committee felt that it would be useful and appropriate to deal in a single document with the cases concerning Spain which it has under consideration and which relate to the various complaints presented.

1. 366. The Committee felt that it would be useful and appropriate to deal in a single document with the cases concerning Spain which it has under consideration and which relate to the various complaints presented.
2. 367. Spain has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).
3. 368. When the Committee last considered these cases at its 38th Session (November 1964) it submitted to the Governing Body provisional reports thereon which appear in its 78th Report, and which were approved by the Governing Body at its 160th Session (November 1964).
4. 369. The Government has supplied additional information in communications dated 4 February and 11 September 1965. The Committee has also obtained information on certain questions relating to the trade union situation in Spain and the texts of some of the judicial decisions requested, through the permanent delegate of Spain accredited to the international organisations in Geneva.
5. 370. The information supplied by the Government on certain questions relating to the trade union situation in Spain, and the allegations which are still pending, are examined by the Committee in the following paragraphs.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

• Councils of Workers and Councils of Employers
  371. 371 The Committee has indicated on previous occasions a that workers should have the right to establish and join organisations of their own choosing without previous authorisation, and that these organisations should have the right to elect their representatives freely. The Government now indicates that the social sections (workers) and the economic sections (employers) of the Spanish trade union organisation have been progressively acquiring independence as regards the negotiation-and/or the nomination of representatives with a view to the negotiation-of collective agreements, this evolution having culminated in the internal regulations of the trade union organisations by means of which councils of workers and councils of employers were set up (Orders Nos. 90 and 91 of 5 November 1964). These councils, which work in plenary and as permanent bodies and which exist both at the provincial and the national levels, are defined and act as " organs for expression, representation and inter-union co-ordination of workers' general and common interests " (Order No. 90 respecting workers' councils, section 1), or ". of employers' general and common interests " (Order No. 91 concerning employers' councils, section 1). Through these councils the employers and the workers enjoy a new means of expression in regard to problems which, being of a general and common interest, affect either all employers as such or all workers as such, whereas questions relating specifically to their sector or branch of activity will continue to be dealt with as in the past by the economic section-as regards employers-and by the social section-as regards workers-of the trade union to which they belong. The provincial councils of employers and of workers which began to be set up in March 1965 are now working normally. The National Council of Workers was established in Valencia on 29 June 1965, and the National Council of Employers was set up in Barcelona on 25 October 1965. Over 7 million workers democratically elected their representatives, both at the provincial level and at the national level, with a view to the establishment of the National Council of Workers. The President of the National Council of Workers has obtained 135 votes from the 273 electors present and voting, other candidates having obtained 89, 27 and 20 votes respectively.
  372. 372 The Committee notes, in addition, that section 7 of Order No. 90 concerning workers' councils provides that " the presidents and vice-presidents of provincial workers' councils shall be elected, from amongst the presidents of the social sections of the provincial trade union bodies, by the corresponding plenary assemblies at their first session and shall be proposed to the Provincial Delegate of Trade Unions, who will then appoint them in his capacity as President of the Provincial Trade Union Council "; the Committee also notes that section 13 of this same text provides that " the President and two Vice-Presidents of the National Council of Workers shall be elected from amongst the members of the Permanent Commission, by its plenary assembly at its first session, and shall be proposed to the National Delegate of Trade Unions, who will then appoint them ".
  373. 373 Having regard to these facts, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to take note of the creation of the councils of workers and councils of employers, which may constitute a preliminary step towards the setting up of independent workers' and employers' organisations, freely established by the workers and by the employers respectively, and that it suggest to the Government the advisability of taking further steps in the direction already being followed with a view to ensuring that all the offices in the councils of workers, without exception, shall be occupied by persons freely elected by all Spanish workers without any disqualification based on their part in or attitude towards past events.
• Amendment of Article 222 of the Penal Code
  374. 374 The Committee has pointed out on various occasions that certain legislative provisions, including in particular section 222 of the Penal Code, could be interpreted as an absolute prohibition of strikes. The Government now states that in June 1965 it approved and submitted to the Cortes a draft amendment of section 222 of the Penal Code. Section 222 in its present form reads as follows:
• The following shall be punished as guilty of sedition:
  1. (1) officials and employees responsible for all types of public services and individuals who, in a professional capacity, render services recognised as essential and incapable of postponement and who, for the purpose of making an attempt against the security of the State, of upsetting its normal activity or of prejudicing its authority or reputation, cease work or impair the regularity of the service;
  2. (2) combinations of employers for the purpose of paralysing work;
  3. (3) strikes by workers.
• Section 222, with the proposed amendment, would read as follows:
• The following shall be punished as guilty of sedition:
  1. (1) officials, employees and individuals responsible for rendering any kind of public services recognised as essential and incapable of postponement who cease their activities or in any way impair the regularity of the service;
  2. (2) employers and workers who, with the object of making an attempt against the security of the State, of upsetting its normal activity, or of prejudicing its authority or reputation, cease or change the regularity of the work.
  375. 375 According to the Government, this text is being examined in plenary by the competent committee in the Cortes, with a view to its final approval at the next session of the Cortes.
  376. 376 Having regard to these facts, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to take note of the proposed amendment to section 222 of the Penal Code, according to which strikes and lockouts are no longer included amongst the acts which constitute offences of sedition, but to point out the danger of the wording employed in clause 2 of the proposed amendment being interpreted in broad terms as prohibiting all types of strike, and to suggest that due regard should be paid to this fact in the formulation by the Cortes of the final text, so as to exclude, without any doubt whatever, from the acts considered as offences of sedition any strikes which might be promoted by workers with a view to furthering and defending their occupational interests.
• Collective Agreements
  377. 377 The Committee has made a number of comments, as regards the system of collective agreements, on the question of the approval of these agreements by the government authorities. The Government now states in this respect that the system governing the regulation of wages, hours of work and other conditions of work has evolved from one of government regulation to one based on free collective agreements and that the success and gradual development of the new system is not open to doubt. As of 1 January 1965, 4,736 collective agreements had been concluded in the last few years in very different sectors, affecting 7,820,822 workers and 1,445,226 undertakings. These agreements were freely concluded by the employers and workers. According to the Government, the approval of agreements by the labour authorities has no purpose other than to ascertain whether there are any major irregularities of form which invalidate them; moreover, it also performs the extremely important function of raising collective agreements (for purposes of citation and use in courts of law) from the status of a mere contractual fact to that of an instrument having the effect of a rule of law; this greatly facilitates the agreement being adduced as evidence and eliminates the burden of proof concerning its contents and reality, since agreements are immediately published in the provincial or state official bulletins. Out of the 4,736 collective agreements it has been considered necessary to submit only 33 for consideration by the Government's Committee for Economic Affairs, and only three have been rejected.
  378. 378 The Committee considers that, bearing in mind the fact that in practice only three of the 33 agreements submitted to it, out of a total of 4,736, have been rejected by the Government's Committee for Economic Affairs, present circumstances would be propitious for the examination by the Government of the possibility of replacing the procedure for the approval of collective agreements, in its present form, by the creation of a system of registration of all collective agreements negotiated in accordance with the terms of the law, so that the simple registration of a collective agreement may have the same effect as now results from government approval; nevertheless, in the case of certain collective agreements the terms of which appeared to conflict with considerations of general interest, it might be possible to envisage a procedure whereby the attention of the parties could be drawn to these considerations to enable them to examine the matter further, it being understood that the final decision thereon should rest with the parties. The setting up of a system of this sort would be in conformity with the principle that trade unions must enjoy the right to endeavour to improve, by means of collective bargaining, the conditions of living and of work of their members and that the authorities must abstain from any interference which might limit this right.
  379. 379 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
       • (a) to take note of the increasing number of collective agreements concluded in Spain as a means of regulating conditions of work for a constantly increasing number of workers;
       • (b) to suggest to the Government that it examine the possibility of replacing the procedure for the approval of collective agreements, in its present form, by the creation of a system for the registration of all collective agreements negotiated in accordance with the terms of the law;
       • (c) to point out, nevertheless, that, in the case of certain collective agreements the terms of which appeared to conflict with considerations of general interest, it might be possible to envisage a procedure whereby the attention of the parties could be drawn to these considerations to enable them to examine the matter further, it being understood that the final decision thereon should rest with the parties.
  380. Jurisdiction in regard to Public Order
  380. 380 The Committee referred in its 74th and 76th Reports to the changes made in the jurisdiction in regard to public order.
  381. 381 According to the supplementary information now supplied by the Government the Act of 2 December 1963 established the Jurisdiction and Court of Public Order. This Act deals explicitly with the jurisdiction formerly assigned to the military courts. Many cases in which proceedings had been instituted prior to the entry into force of the new Act have been transferred to the new Jurisdiction and Court of Public Order and removed from the jurisdiction of the military courts. The Court of Public Order is alone competent, throughout the national territory, to deal with offences commonly referred to as political or contrary to the security of the State, for instance unlawful associations, illegal propaganda, offences against the internal security of the State and offences against the external security of the State. According to the Government the military courts remain competent exclusively with respect to acts of terrorism. The judicial authorities competent with regard to public order consist of a Jurisdiction and Court within the system or ordinary courts and with exclusive competence vis-à-vis other jurisdictions and courts within that system. The Court consists of a president and two magistrates who are career judges. With respect to procedure the Act provides that the Court and Jurisdiction must conform strictly to the provisions of the Act respecting ordinary criminal procedure. Judgments are delivered orally and publicly in a special room of the Madrid Territorial Court of Appeal. The representatives of and counsel for the defence are also governed by the rules of ordinary jurisdiction. Appeals against the judgments given by the Court of Public Order may be lodged with the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice. The Court and Jurisdiction of Public Order have been in operation since 5 February 1964. Up to 31 December 1964 the Jurisdiction of Public Order had examined 267 cases, of which a fair number had already been instituted either with the ordinary courts or the military courts before the Act establishing the jurisdiction of public order came into force. Jurisdiction in these cases was accordingly removed from these bodies. During its first year the Court of Public Order gave 128 judgments, of which approximately 35 per cent resulted in release. As of June 1965 52 judgments had been given.
  382. 382 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to take note of the Government's statement that the military courts remain competent exclusively with respect to acts of terrorism.
• Allegations concerning Arrests Arising out of the 1962 Strikes
  383. 383 The Committee observed, at its 38th Session (November 1964), that, of the 47 persons originally sentenced in connection with the 1962 strikes, 43 had subsequently been set free, but that Mr. Gregorio Rodríguez Gordon, Mr. Ramón Ormazábal Tife, Mr. Antonio Jiménez Pericas and Mr. Agustin Ibarrola Giocoechea were still in prison. It requested the Government to be good enough to keep it informed about any measures that might be taken concerning these persons.
  384. 384 In its communication of 4 February 1965 the Government states that the terms of imprisonment imposed on the above-mentioned persons would expire at dates running from 13 June 1969 to 13 June 1978, but that, with the remission which could be granted if they sought the benefit of the amnesty, they could be released conditionally on dates running from 27 May 1965 to 1 February 1971.
  385. 385 In the circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to take note of the information furnished by the Government and to ask the Government to continue to keep the matter under review and to be good enough to keep it informed as to any measures that may be taken concerning Mr. Ramón Ormazábal Tife, Mr. Gregorio Rodriguez Gordon, Mr. Antonio Jiménez Pericas and Mr. Agustin Ibarrola Goicoechea.
• Allegations concerning the 1963 Strikes
  386. 386 Although the allegations made by I.C.F.T.U and I.F.C.T.U on 24 September 1963 referred only to various acts of persecution and violence arising out of a labour dispute, without supplying any further details about the persons injured thereby, the additional information supplied in the letter of 8 October 1963 gave a number of details, such as the names of the persons alleged to have been ill-treated and tortured (one of whom was stated to have died as a result), together with the assertion that sanctions had been applied to firms which hired workers who had taken part in the strikes.
  387. 387 In its communication of 4 February 1965 the Government states that the careful investigations made at that time showed clearly that the allegations of torture and violence were pure fabrications, since it had been fully proved that there had been no case of death or ill-treatment as alleged. The Government adds that it must state categorically that no miner has died as a result of ill-treatment and that there has never been any prisoner named Rafael González (who, according to the complainants, had died). As regards the other persons mentioned in the allegations, the Government denies that anyone named Silvino Zapico has ever been arrested and states that no person of that name is known in the district concerned, nor is there any trace of such a person in the admission records of any hospital. As regards Mr. Vicente Baragaho García, the Government states that he was arrested on 10 August 1963 and placed at the disposal of the competent judicial authorities on grave suspicion of subversive activities outside the scope of trade union affairs, and that, when examined by the doctors of the Carabanchel prison, where he was being held at that time, he bore no trace of the torture alleged to have been inflicted on him. As regards Mr. Everardo Lastra Pérez, the Government states that he was arrested in 1962 for Communist activities and that, since he already showed symptoms of mental derangement at that time, he was sent to the Oviedo psychiatric hospital; on 10 May 1963 he was again arrested for activities unrelated to labour matters and again sent to the above-mentioned provincial psychiatric hospital because he showed the same marked symptoms of insanity. With respect to the remaining allegations, the Government states that they were either shown also to be unfounded or that they could not be investigated by the Attorney-General's Office because, even if they had been true, they would have related to presumed crimes in regard to which proceedings could have been instituted only at the request of a party legitimately concerned.
  388. 388 The Committee notes that, while the complainants allege that certain persons, whose names they mention, were subjected to ill-treatment and torture as a result of which one of them died, the Government categorically denies that this is so and indeed that certain of the persons named had been arrested at any time. In view of these two entirely contradictory statements and the scant information at its disposal, the Committee finds it impossible to reach any final conclusion based on full knowledge of the facts.
  389. 389 In the circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to take note of the fact that, for the reasons indicated in paragraph 388 above, it is unable to submit final conclusions to the Governing Body concerning the allegations pending with respect to the 1963 strikes.
• Allegations respecting the Arrest of Mr. José Maria Rodriguez Manzano
  390. 390 At its 38th Session (November 1964) the Committee noted that Mr. Rodriguez Manzano had been sentenced by the Court of Public Order because of activities which, according to the complainants, were of a trade union character but which the Government described as political. In accordance with its usual practice the Committee recommended the Governing Body to ask the Government to forward a copy of the verdict and of the reasons adduced therein, together with any other information which might be helpful to the Committee.
  391. 391 In its communication of 11 September 1965 the Government insists once again that the activities attributed to Mr. Rodriguez Manzano were political in character; it adds that this is confirmed by the statements of the leaders of the clandestine political movement against the Spanish State, who avow and proclaim their intention of making use of such conflicts as a means of preparing subversion by violence within the structure of the State. This same political character, according to the Government, is reflected in all the activities of the so-called Workers' Trade Union Alliance and the Basque Workers' Solidarity Movement (S.T.V.). The Government indicates that the Basque Nationalist party itself, through its publication Euzko Gaztedi, confirms the claim that S.T.V is a group belonging to the Basque Nationalist party. The Government adds that proof of the political character of S.T.V may be found in several statements, drawn from different numbers of Lan Deya (clandestine news sheet, five or six numbers of which were brought out, according to the sentence, by Mr. Rodríguez Manzano during the summer of 1963, in Pasajes (Guipúzcoa)). The extracts communicated by the Government are as follows: " It is not necessary to recall that the régime is unlawful as to its origin and, accordingly, in its working " (Lam Deya, No. 9). " S.T.V understands the situation and its line is firmly established; it is only by clandestine measures that our objectives can be achieved. Nevertheless participation in this revolutionary work does not imply necessarily that the Basque brotherhood renounces all lawful opportunities of finding a solution for the worker " (ibid, No. 11). " The Basque country is subject to nationalist domination. The economic policy, demography, class organisation, racial, linguistic and cultural discrimination, and the exploitation of the Basque workers prevent the development and even the mere survival of Basque civilisation, and hence any truly original, free and individual contribution of the Basque genius to universal society and culture. French and Spanish nationalism, the enemy of separatism, divides a single nation made up of 2 million persons by a frontier whose only raison d'être lies in arbitrary colonialism " (ibid, No. 21).
  392. 392 The Committee has also obtained, through the good offices of the permanent delegate of Spain accredited to the international organisations in Geneva, a copy of the sentence handed down by the Court of Public Order in the case against Mr. Rodriguez Manzano and a copy of the sentence given by the Supreme Court on 12 May 1965 by which it rejected the appeal which had been made by Mr. Rodriguez Manzano for breach of form and violation of the law.
  393. 393 It appears from the grounds given in the sentence that the deeds which are stated to have been proved are legally made up of the offences of unlawful association, illegal propaganda and clandestine entry into the national territory. Accordingly, Mr. Rodriguez Manzano was condemned to various terms of imprisonment corresponding to the different offences which were proven.
  394. 394 The Committee notes that two of the three offences of which Mr. Rodriguez Manzano was found guilty may be related to the exercise of trade union rights: those relating to unlawful association and illegal propaganda. The Committee also notes that the person concerned was judged by the Court of Public Order, which is the only court competent to consider political offences, which is composed of a chairman and of two career magistrates drawn from the judicial profession and in which the prosecution is represented by officials of the Public Prosecutor's Office. The Committee also notes that the judgment against Mr. Rodriguez Manzano was delivered orally and publicly, that the person concerned was able to appeal to the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice against the sentence and that this appeal was rejected, by decision dated 12 May 1965.
  395. 395 The Committee considers that, although it cannot be categorically concluded from the sentences in question-in which reference is made solely to the offences of unlawful association and illegal propaganda-that the alleged activities are not related to the exercise of trade union rights, it would appear that the acts of Mr. Rodriguez Manzano exceeded in some ways the normal framework of trade union activities as such.
  396. 396 The Committee therefore recommends the Governing Body to note that Mr. Rodriguez Manzano appealed to the Supreme Court, which confirmed the sentence, and to request the Government to be good enough to keep it informed in the event of any further developments in the matter.
• Allegations relating to the Arrest of Workers Belonging to the Workers' Committee of Vizcaya
  397. 397 By a joint communication of 28 April 1964 I.C.F.T.U and I.F.C.T.U stated that the workers Valeriano Gómez Lavin, Ricardo Basarte Amézaga, Agustin José Begona Sánchez y Corrales, José Maria Echevarria Heppe and David Morin Salgado, members of the Workers' Committee of Vizcaya elected by the workers of Bilbao to negotiate with the authorities regarding the reinstatement of 52 workers who were dismissed during the strikes of the spring of 1962 had been arrested. Subsequently, in a letter of 15 May 1964, the complainants stated that the said persons had been released. On 29 October 1964 I.C.F.T.U and I.F.C.T.U stated that these members of the Workers' Committee of Vizcaya had been tried on 16 October 1964 by the Court of Public Order in Madrid and each had been sentenced to six months' imprisonment.
  398. 398 In its communication of l1 June 1964 the Government stated that it was not correct that the five persons detained were members of a workers' committee and had been elected by the workers of Bilbao. The cause of their detention was not the fact that they claimed a representative function, but their active participation in unlawful acts with the object of disturbing and obstructing the free expression of the workers' wishes in elections. These persons, the Government continued, were placed at the disposal of the appropriate ordinary courts of law, which then decided on their release.
  399. 399 The Committee, at its 38th Session (November 1964), requested the Government to supply information on the contradiction which appeared to exist between the statements communicated and, in any case, to supply the text of the sentences imposed on the persons in question and the reasons adduced therein.
  400. 400 By their communication of 19 January 1965 I.C.F.T.U and I.F.C.T.U transmitted the text of the judgment of the Court of Public Order against the members of the abovementioned Committee, a copy of which was forwarded to the Government.
  401. 401 In its communication of 11 September 1965 the Government states that there was no contradiction between the statement, made in its reply of 11 June 1964 and repeated in its reply of 14 October 1964, that these five persons were at liberty, and the fact that they were subsequently tried by the competent court of law, since under any procedural system the fact of being charged with an offence and the fact of being at liberty until the matter comes before a court are perfectly compatible and indeed this coincidence frequently occurs -as it did in the present case. The Government adds that, according to judgment cited by I.C.F.T.U and I.F.C.T.U, the accused had been provisionally detained by order of the judicial authority on 24 April 1964 and-also provisionally-released on bail on 13 May 1964 until, after the case had been heard, they were sentenced to six months' imprisonment, the period of preventive detention being deducted from the sentence to be served. The Government further states that at the time of the drafting of the reply (11 September 1965) the persons mentioned above were still provisionally at liberty-having appealed to the Supreme Court of Justice against their sentences-until the Supreme Court gave its ruling on the matter. Finally, the Government states that the sentence is equally explicit in the first part of the factual preamble to the sentence where the court found that the persons in question had, apart from other activities, agreed to " boycott trade union elections by refraining from participating in the election of leaders ".
  402. 402 The Committee takes note of the Government's statement, which clears up an apparent contradiction between the statements made by the complainants and those of the Government as to whether or not the five persons in question were at liberty.
  403. 403 As regards the other point in regard to which the Committee had asked for certain explanations, that is the statement that " these persons were arrested for taking part in unlawful acts, with the object of preventing the free expression of the workers' wishes in elections ", the Committee notes that the Government indicates that the reply may be found in the first part of the preamble to sentence of the Court of Public Order, in which it is stated that the persons concerned, apart from other activities, had agreed to " boycott the trade union elections by refraining from participating in the election of leaders ".
  404. 404 The Committee considers that the mere call addressed to workers to abstain from participating in trade union elections does not necessarily imply any intention of obstructing the free expression of workers' wishes in elections, unless the call is accompanied or followed by coercive activities such as to disturb or obstruct the exercise of these trade union rights.
  405. 405 The Committee also notes that the persons in question are still at liberty pending their appeal to the Supreme Court against the sentence handed down.
  406. 406 Accordingly the Committee recommends the Governing Body to note that the workers belonging to the Workers' Committee of Vizcaya are at liberty pending their appeal to the Supreme Court against the sentence, to request the Government to communicate the judgment of the said court on the question, and to decide in the meantime to postpone its examination of this aspect of the case.
• Allegations relating to the Verdicts against Three Trade Union Leaders
  407. 407 The complainants stated in their original allegation that three trade union leaders, Francisco Calle, Agustin Mariano and José Cases, were arrested and brought before the courts for their trade union activities. They indicated subsequently that severe sentences had been handed down against them. The Government, for its part, stated that the persons in question had been arrested not because of trade union activities, but because of subversive political activities and unlawful association, as they had been seeking to disrupt by violence the established order of the Spanish State, and that the court had issued its decision on 6 August 1964 finding the accused guilty of the offences of unlawful association and of subversive propaganda, as defined and declared punishable in the Penal Code.
  408. 408 At its 38th Session (November 1964) the Committee noted that the Government had sent no information on the specific acts motivating the sentences in question and recommended the Governing Body to request the Government to communicate the texts of any judgments given and their grounds and, in any case, information on the facts which led to the indictment.
  409. 409 In its communication of 4 February 1965 the Government repeated the information already supplied and added that it trusted that the objectivity of the Committee would prevent the danger of its maintaining artificially alive an irrelevant problem for which there had never been the least foundation.
  410. 410 The Committee regrets that the Government has not replied in concrete terms to the request for additional information, the purpose of which had been merely to obtain all the necessary information so as to enable the Committee to reach a fully informed and objective decision. The Committee hopes that the Government will find it possible to supply the information in question, as it has already done in regard to other similar questions examined by the Committee (see paragraph 392).
  411. 411 By a communication of 22 March 1965 I.F.C.T.U stated that at the beginning of February the Supreme Court confirmed the sentences against the three trade unionists.
  412. 412 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to request the Government once more, in view of the lack of information on the acts leading to the sentences of Mr. Francisco Calle, Mr. Agustin Mariano and Mr. José Cases, to be good enough to communicate the text of the judgments pronounced against these persons, or, in any case, information on the acts that led to their trial, and to decide in the meantime to postpone further examination of this aspect of the case.
• Allegations respecting the Arrest of Workers in connection with the Strikes of 1964
  413. 413 At its 38th Session (November 1964) the Committee examined the allegations regarding the arrest of workers in Bilbao, Sabadell and the Asturian mines in connection with a number of strikes. The Government had stated in its reply that some of these persons were at the disposal of the competent civil courts, charged with secret and unlawful political activities and unlawful association. In these circumstances the Committee, in accordance with its usual practice, had recommended the Governing Body to ask the Government to supply the texts of the judgments given and their grounds.
  414. 414 In its communication of 11 September 1965 the Government repeats the information given in its previous communications and does not therefore introduce any new element which would enable the Committee to proceed with the examination of this aspect of the case.
  415. 415 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to ask the Government once again to communicate the texts of any judgments given and their grounds, as well as any other element which might be supplied regarding the activities of the persons in question, and to decide in the meantime to postpone its examination of this aspect of the case.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 416. With regard to the case as a whole the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
2. (1) as regards the information furnished by the Government on various questions relating to trade union rights in Spain:
   • (a) to take note of the creation of the councils of workers and councils of employers, which may constitute a preliminary step towards the setting up of independent workers' and employers' organisations, freely established by the workers and by the employers respectively, and to suggest the advisability of taking further steps in the direction already being followed, with a view to ensuring that all the offices in the councils of workers, without exception, shall be occupied by persons freely elected by all Spanish workers, without any disqualification based on their part in or attitude towards past events;
   • (b) (i) to take note of the proposed amendment to section 222 of the Penal Code, according to which strikes and lockouts are no longer included amongst the acts which constitute offences of sedition;
   • (ii) to point out the danger of the wording employed in clause 2 of the proposed amendment being interpreted in broad terms as prohibiting all types of strike, and to suggest that due regard be paid to this fact in the formulation by the Cortes of the final text, so as to exclude, without any doubt whatever, from the acts considered as offences of sedition, any strikes which might be promoted by workers with a view to furthering and defending their occupational interests;
   • (c) (i) to take note of the increasing number of collective agreements concluded in Spain as a means of regulating conditions of work for a constantly increasing number of workers;
   • (ii) to suggest to the Government that it examine the possibility of replacing the procedure for the approval of collective agreements, in its present form, by the creation of a system for the registration of all collective agreements negotiated in accordance with the terms of the law;
   • (iii) to point out, nevertheless, that, in the case of certain collective agreements the terms of which appeared to conflict with considerations of general interest, it might be possible to envisage a procedure whereby the attention of the parties could be drawn to these considerations to enable them to examine the matter further, it being understood that the final decision thereon should rest with the parties;
   • (d) to take note of the Government's statement that the military courts remain competent exclusively with respect to acts of terrorism;
3. (2) as regards the allegations relating to the strikes of 1963, to take note of the fact that, for the reasons indicated in paragraph 388 above, the Committee is unable to submit final conclusions to the Governing Body;
4. (3) as regards the allegations relating to the arrest of Mr. José Maria Rodriguez Manzano, to note that the person concerned appealed to the Supreme Court, which confirmed the sentence, and to request the Government to be good enough to keep it informed in the event of any further developments in the matter;
5. (4) as regards the allegations relating to arrests arising out of the 1962 strikes, to take note of the information furnished by the Government, and to ask the Government to continue to keep the matter under review and to be good enough to keep it informed as to any measures that may be taken concerning Mr. Ramón Ormazábal Tife, Mr. Gregorio Rodriguez Gordon, Mr. Antonio Jiménez Pericas and Mr. Agustin Ibarrola Goicoechea;
6. (5) to note that the workers belonging to the Workers' Committee of Vizcaya are now at liberty pending their appeal;
7. (6) to request the Government to be good enough to furnish the texts, together with the reasons adduced, of the judgments concerning:
   • (a) the sentencing of Messrs. Francisco Calle, Agustin Mariano and José Cases;
   • (b) the appeals to the Supreme Court against the sentence lodged by the workers belonging to the Workers' Committee of Vizcaya;
   • (c) the workers arrested in connection with the strikes of 1964;
8. (7) to take note of the present interim report, it being understood that the Committee will report further to the Governing Body when the information requested from the Government has been received.