Informe definitivo - Informe núm. 190, Marzo 1979

Caso núm. 858 (Ecuador) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 27-AGO-76 - Cerrado

1. 82. The Committee has already examined this case at its November 1977 session, when it submitted an interim report.
2. 83. Ecuador has ratified both 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

1. 84. In a telegram sent in August 1976, the Latin American Federation of Farmworkers alleged that the Government had intervened during the Congress of the FENOC (Federation of Farmworkers of Ecuador), and that 250 delegates had been arrested.
2. 85. In its reply, sent in September 1977, the Government stated that it was public knowledge in Ecuador that the FENOC had organised a subversive meeting directed against the regime. This action was deemed to be illegal by the authorities, since under the law demonstrations of a political nature jeopardising the security of the State were totally prohibited. In consequence, a number of persons had been arrested, and once penalties had been imposed upon them for breaches of public order they were immediately released.
3. 86. The Government added that it had not taken over control of any trade union organisation, and that all workers' organisations were carrying on their activities normally. According to the Government, there were splits in certain trade union associations because of ideological and political differences among their leaders.
4. 87. At its November 1977 session, the Committee observed that the Government had not indicated the reasons why the congress organised by the FENOC had been held to be subversive. Nor had the Government specified the type of penalties imposed upon the persons arrested, nor the nature of the body which had imposed them. In this connection the Committee recalled that where trade unionists were accused of political or criminal offences which the Government considered to have no relation to their trade union functions, the persons concerned should be given a prompt and fair trial by an independent and impartial judiciary.
5. 88. In these circumstances the Governing Body, on the Committee's recommendation, noted with interest that the trade union delegates arrested were now at liberty. It also requested the Government to supply particulars as to the reasons why the FENOC Congress had been considered to be subversive, to specify the type of penalties imposed and the nature of the body which had imposed them, and to furnish the texts of the judgements handed down, if any, together with the reasons adduced therefor.
6. 89. At its sessions in May and November 1978 the Committee had not yet received the observations and information requested from the Government. Pressing appeals were thereupon made to the Government to transmit them as a matter of urgency. The Committee further pointed out in November 1978 that, in accordance with the procedure set out in paragraph 17 of its 127th Report and approved by the Governing Body, it might present, at its next session, a report on the substance of the matter even if the information or observations requested from the Government had not been received in the meantime.
7. 90. Since then, the Government has sent a communication dated 13 December 1978 in which it merely states that it has already replied in respect of these matters and appends a copy of its letter of September 1977.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 91. In these circumstances, the Committee must express its regret that, despite repeated appeals, the Government has failed to supply the detailed particulars requested of it, thus preventing the Committee and the Governing Body from examining the case in full knowledge of the facts. The Committee considers it appropriate in this connection to recall the observation it made in paragraph 31 of its First Report, where it stated that the purpose of the whole procedure was to promote respect for trade union rights in law and in fact, and expressed its confidence that, if it protected governments against unreasonable accusations, governments on their side would recognise the importance for the protection of their own good name of formulating for objective examination detailed replies to the allegations put forward.
2. 92. The Committee notes that the allegations relate to intervention by the authorities during a congress - said by the Government to be due to the subversive character of the meeting in question - and the arrest of trade union delegates on that occasion.
3. 93. In the absence of information as to the reasons why the FENOC Congress was held to be subversive, the Committee is unable to examine whether, on that occasion, the federation in question had overstepped the bounds of the basic objectives of a trade union organisation, which should be the promotion and defence of the interests of its members. The Committee wishes, however, to emphasise, as it has frequently done in the past, that freedom of assembly for trade union purposes constitutes one of the fundamental elements of trade union rights. Freedom from government interference in the proceedings of trade union meetings is an essential prerequisite for the free exercise of the right of assembly, and the public authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof.
4. 94. As concerns the arrest of delegates to the Congress - who were subsequently released - the Committee has no information as to the nature of the body which imposed the penalties to which the Government has referred. The Committee feels bound to recall in this connection that the detention of trade unionists, even for reasons of internal security, may involve serious interference with the exercise of trade union rights unless attended by appropriate judicial safeguards.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 95. In these circumstances, the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
   • (a) to express its regret that, despite repeated appeals, the Government has failed to supply the detailed particulars requested of it, thus preventing the Committee and the Governing Body from examining the case in full knowledge of the facts;
   • (b) to recall in this connection that the purpose of the Committee's procedure is to promote respect for trade union rights in law and in fact, and that, if it protects governments against unreasonable accusations, governments on their side should recognise the importance for the protection of their own good name of formulating for objective examination detailed replies to the allegations put forward;
   • (c) to draw the Government's attention to the principles and considerations set forth in paragraph 90 above with regard to the right of assembly, and to recall, in particular, that freedom of assembly for trade union purposes constitutes one of the fundamental elements of trade union rights;
   • (d) to point out to the Government that the detention of trade unionists, even for reasons of internal security, may involve serious interference with the exercise of trade union rights unless attended by appropriate judicial safeguards.