Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 142, 1974

Cas no 678 (Espagne) - Date de la plainte: 14-FÉVR.-72 - Clos

1. 172. The Committee examined this case at its February 1973 Session, when it submitted an interim report contained in paragraphs 187 to 194 and 195(e) of its 135th Report, which was approved by the Governing Body at its 189th Session held in February-March 1973.
2. 173. Spain has not ratified either 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).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 174. The Committee recalls that the complainants alleged on the one hand that the following trade union leaders and workers had been arrested for trade union activities: Carmen Frías Arroyo, Angel de la Cruz Bermedo, José Maria Zufiaur Narvaiza, José Luis Longarte Fernández, José Luis Zunzarren Aberasturi, Manuel Zaguirre Cano, Antonio Martinez Ovegero, Nicolás David Mora, José Luis Aldasoro, Isidoro Gálvez García and José Maria de la Hoz; and on the other hand that the police had intervened in a demonstration at El Ferrol during a strike causing the death of two workers. Numerous persons had been wounded and arrested during this demonstration.
2. 175. The Government replied in various communications that the persons arrested had in no way been arrested for trade union activities but were accused of furthering a subversive organisation or of having engaged in activities tending to create a subversive organisation. These persons had been released provisionally and the judicial proceedings were in progress. As for the events which had occurred at El Ferrol, the Government replied that they were before the courts of justice that were trying the persons concerned in them.
3. 176. During its session of February 1973 the Committee recommended the Governing Body with respect to the allegations relating to the arrest of persons for the crime of illegal association and other trade union activities to take note of the fact that these persons had been released provisionally and to request the Government to send the text of any judgements which might be rendered in these cases as well as the reasons therefor; and with respect to the events of El Ferrol, to request the Government to be kind enough to supply information concerning the result of the proceedings initiated with a view to establishing the facts and determining responsibility and to communicate the text of the judgement with reasons in this case as well.
4. 177. The Government has not yet supplied the information or texts requested.
5. 178. The complainants have sent additional information concerning the case of persons arrested for the crime of illegal association in a communication from the International Metalworkers' Federation dated 5 April 1973. This additional information was transmitted to the Government to enable it to make observations thereon.
6. 179. New allegations have reached the ILO in communications from the International Metalworkers' Federation dated 7 February and 28 September 1973 and from the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions dated 7 February 1973. These new allegations and information were sent to the Government, which sent its observations in communications dated 4 and 24 October 1973.
7. 180. In its communication of 7 February 1973 the International Metalworkers' Federation reports the arrest of five Spanish workers from the shipyards "Astilleros españoles" in the suburbs of Olaveaga. The IMF also reports that Nicolás Redondo and José Antonio Sarazibal were sentenced without trial to fines of 200,000 and 100,000 pesetas respectively being accused of having belonged to the General Workers' Union and to works Committees and having participated in clandestine meetings with three other persons concerning problems of industrial relations.
8. 181. The ICFTU reports in its communication of 7 February 1973 that the workers of the shipyards of Olaveaga and of Sestao as well as other factories in Vizcaya had organised meetings and stoppages in order to obtain better working conditions in their new collective agreements. According to the ICFTU the employers adopted measures suspending employment and wages against 2,900 workers in Olaveaga and instituted a lockout of workers in Sestao from the end of January until 13 February. The ICFTU adds that pursuant to the powers conferred upon the administrative authorities by the Public Order Act an unspecified number of workers, including Nicolás Redondo and José Antonio Sarazibal, were arrested for discussing the current collective disputes. These two persons have not paid the fines imposed upon them and according to the ICFTU will have to remain in prison. The ICFTU appends a copy of the notification addressed by the Directorate-General of Security to Nicolás Redondo. According to the ICFTU, the administrative authorities accuse the detained persons of belonging to the "Communist Organisation". The ICFTU denies this statement and maintains that the persons concerned are detained because of their trade union activity.
9. 182. The International Federation of Metal Workers reports in its communication of 28 September 1973 that Nicolás Redondo had been dismissed for unjustified absence whilst he was in prison.
10. 183. In its communication of 4 October 1973 the Government reiterates the reservations it formulated in its statement of 29 February 1972 and its communication of 13 May 1972 and states that "the fact that the Government replies to a request for information on a specific complaint does not imply that the Government recognises the accuracy or - even less - the validity of the complaint but merely that it is co-operating with the Committee and with the Governing Body".
11. 184. According to the Government the real facts do not correspond to the communications addressed by the complainants. The Government declares that according to the statements made by one of the detained men, the persons concerned had received the order to establish contacts with communist elements in order to plan joint action against public order in that region. With this end in view, they met with leaders of the communist subversive movement of the province of Vizcaya and were seized during that meeting. According to the Government, of the five workers mentioned in the complaint four do not belong to the "Astilleros españoles". The Government adds that they are agitators who have made use of the events occurring in that undertaking for purely political ends. The detained persons have been punished for subversive activities and accused of encouraging acts against public order. Moreover, the Government points out that there was a possibility of appeal against the fines imposed upon them and that the persons concerned did not make use of that possibility. As regards the dismissal of Nicolás Redondo, the Government states, in its communication of 24 October 1973, that on 9 October the Labour Court pronounced this dismissal improper.
12. 185. The persons named in these complaints appear to have been sentenced by virtue of the Public Order Act of 30 June 1959, amended on 21 July 1971. With respect in particular to Nicolás Redondo the notification sent to him by the Directorate-General of Security shows that he was sentenced by virtue of section 2, paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (f), (h) and (i) of that Act. These provisions set out that among acts-considered to be against public order are also those which disturb the rights recognised in the fundamental laws of the nation; acts which affect public security, the normal operation of public services, the regularity of supply and prices; collective work stoppages and unlawful suspension or closure of undertakings; acts by which subversion is advocated or provoked or which advocate violence; acts which tend to encourage the nor-respect of standards relating to public order and disobedience to authority; acts which disturb public peace. Administrative authorities may punish by fine persons who have violated these provisions. An appeal may be made against such sanctions to the administrative authority which has imposed them and to the authority immediately above it. However, such an appeal may be lodged only if one-third of the fine has been deposited except in cases of material impossibility recognised as such by the administrative authority. When the final decision has been taken the administrative authorities may decree the arrest of the persons concerned in case of non-payment of the fines.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 186. The Committee notes that it would appear that the five persons mentioned in the complaint have been condemned to a heavy fine by an administrative authority and that, having failed to pay it, they have been imprisoned.
2. 187. In this connection the Committee recalls that it has always emphasised the importance which it attaches to 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.
3. 188. The Committee also notes that Nicolás Redondo was con-condemned, in particular, by virtue of section 2(c) of the Public Order Act which lists "collective work stoppages and unlawful suspension or closure of undertakings" as acts considered contrary to public order.
4. 189. The Committee has always taken the view that questions relating to the right to strike are not outside its competence in so far as they concern the exercise of trade union rights. It has recalled that the right to strike by workers and their organisations is generally recognised as a legitimate means of defending their occupational interests. The Committee has also considered that where legislation directly or indirectly places an absolute prohibition on strikes such a prohibition may constitute an important restriction of the potential activities of trade unions, which would not be in conformity with the generally recognised principles of freedom of association.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 190. In these circumstances the Committee recommends to the Governing Body:
   • (a) to draw the attention of the Government to the principles set out in paragraphs 187 and 189 above;
   • (b) to take note of the present interim report, it being understood that the Committee will submit a new report to the Governing Body when it has received the information requested of the Government.