ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
ILO-en-strap

Governing Body

GB.276/7/2
276th Session
Geneva, November 1999

SEVENTH ITEM ON THE AGENDA

319th Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association

Contents

I. Introduction

II. Cases examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association

III. Complaint concerning the non-observance by Colombia of 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), made by delegates to the 86th (1998) Session of the Conference under article 26 of the Constitution of the ILO

I. Introduction

1. The Committee on Freedom of Association, set up by the Governing Body at its 117th Session (November 1951), met at the International Labour Office, Geneva, on 4, 5 and 12 November 1999, under the chairmanship of Professor Max Rood.

Pending cases

2. The Committee had before it several complaints concerning the violation of freedom of association in Colombia, presented by a number of trade union organizations (Cases Nos. 1787, 1948, 1955, 1962, 1973, 2015, 2046 and 2051) -- the last three of these having been presented since the last examination of cases on their merits concerning Colombia by the Committee in March 1999 -- and a complaint concerning the non-observance by Colombia of 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), made by several Workers' delegates to the 86th Session (1998) of the Conference under article 26 of the ILO Constitution. At its meeting of March 1999, the Committee had already examined Cases Nos. 1787, 1948, 1955, 1962, 1964 and 1973 [see 314th Report, paras. 1-128, drawing interim conclusions].

3. In conformity with the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 273rd Session (November 1998) and at its 274th Session (March 1999), the Committee submits for the Governing Body's approval a report on the pending cases (with the exception of Case No. 2046 for which it has just received a partial reply from the Government and Case No. 2051 in respect of which it has not yet received the Government's reply) and on the complaint presented under article 26 of the ILO Constitution.

Effect given to the recommendations of the
Committee and the Governing Body

4. In Case No. 1925 which was the subject of a definitive report of the Committee [see 309th Report, paras. 106-119], the Government indicates, in a communication dated 27 September 1999, that it accepts that the information furnished by the company Avianca be considered as part of the Government's reply. Furthermore, the complainant, the National Union of Employees of Avianca (SINTRAVA), recently transmitted further information to the Committee. The Committee requests the Government to furnish its observations on this most recent communication of the complainant. It will examine the whole case in the framework of the follow-up given to its recommendations when it will have all the elements of the case at its disposal.

II. Cases examined by the Committee on
Freedom of Association

Case No. 1787

Interim report

Complaints against the Government of Colombia
presented by
-- the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU)
-- the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT)
-- the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU)
-- the Single Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CUT)
-- the General Confederation of Democratic Workers (CGTD)
-- the Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CTC) and
-- the Trade Union Association of Civil Servants of the
Ministry of Defence, Armed Forces, National Police
and Related Bodies (ASODEFENSA)

Allegations: Murder and other acts of violence against trade union
officials and members and anti-union dismissals

5. The Committee last examined this case at its March 1999 meeting [see 314th Report, paras. 4-41]. The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) sent new allegations in communications dated 28 April, 29 July, 9 and 11 August and 3 September 1999. The Single Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CUT) sent new allegations in communications dated 27 April, 10 June, 27 July and 31 August 1999. The World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) sent additional information on 9 June 1999. The World Confederation of Labour sent communications dated 17 February and 2 March 1999 in support of the earlier communications by CLAT. The Single Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CUT), the General Confederation of Democratic Workers (CGTD) and the Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CTC) sent a joint communication dated 9 April 1999. The Government sent its observations in communications dated 4 and 23 March, 2 June, 12 August and 23 September 1999. At its meeting for the adoption of its report, the Committee was informed that a communication from the Government was received in the ILO on 11 November 1999. In conformity with its usual practice, the Committee did not take this communication into consideration at its present meeting as it was received too late.

6. Colombia 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. Previous examination of the case

7. During the previous examination of the case, the Committee dealt with the pending allegations concerning the murder of and other acts of violence against trade union officials and members, as well as anti-union dismissals. The Committee made the following recommendations [see 314th Report, para. 41]:

B. New allegations and additional information

General situation

8. The trade union confederations of Colombia (CUT, CGTD and CTC), in a communication of 9 April 1999, declare that the situation as regards human rights violations has worsened in recent months. In support of their claim, they allege the following:

9. Finally, the trade union confederations state that there is no peace process in Colombia and that contacts for initiating dialogue between the Government and the guerrillas can be achieved only with considerable difficulty.

Specific allegations

10. Specifically, the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) in communications of 28 April, 29 July and 9 and 11 August 1999, the Single Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CUT) in communications of 27 April, 10 June and 27 July 1999 and the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU), in a communication of 9 June 1999, present new allegations.

Murders of trade union officials and trade union members

11. The following murders are reported:

Attempted murders

12. The following attempted murders are reported:

Death threats

13. The following cases of death threats are reported:

Disappearances

14. The following disappearances were reported:

Detentions

Unlawful detention

Persecutions

Anti-union acts

15. The ICFTU was informed by its associate, the International Graphical Federation, which in turn was informed by FENALGRAP, its Colombian member, of the continued and flagrant violations of trade union rights targeted at the trade union officials and workers of the Brinks company in Colombia. These violations consist of a unilateral decision to increase from 40 to 48 hours the working week in violation of the provisions of the company's internal labour rules; violation of the collective agreement in respect of promotions, transfers, staff contracts, memoranda and disciplinary action, etc. The use of coercive methods was also reported, such as pressure through visits to workers' homes by social workers, who examined inside the houses and stated that those workers who did not agree to the increased working week would lose certain rights contained in the collective agreement, or their jobs; the refusal on the part of the executive committees to accept the increased hours angered the management of the company, and immediately after these events telephone calls were made insulting the union leaders and threatening them with death. Insulting calls were received by John Walter, the union chairperson, Alex Romero, the treasurer, and Rafael Romero, a member of the executive committee. Additionally, workers were watched and photographed from cars.

The Government's reply

16. In its communication dated 12 August 1999, the Government draws attention to the fact that certain of the recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association relating specifically to the present case are linked directly to the phenomenon of violence from which Colombia is suffering and that no change in the Committee's position has been noted even though the Government has sent a detailed report on the violence in Colombia, presenting many of the State's actions to counteract the phenomenon and that of impunity. It adds that it would be very grateful to the Committee on Freedom of Association if, when producing conclusions and recommendations on the present case, it would take into account and consider at length the information submitted by the Government of Colombia in January 1999, which definitively and specifically presents the Colombian State's concern to counteract the phenomena of violence and impunity.

General situation

17. The Government, in response to the trade union confederations' claim that there is no peace process in Colombia, reiterates that there is a process in active existence, headed by the President of Colombia, Dr. Andrés Pastrana Arango, directed towards a political solution to the conflict with the majority of the guerrilla groups operating in Colombia. It insists that failure to be aware of this process on the part of the trade union leaders is not compatible with the real situation in Colombia, and that the attempt to diminish its importance is futile and harmful. It considers that careful and thorough study of the real situation in Colombia makes it possible to deduce that the indiscriminate violence gripping the country is not directed specifically against trade union bodies, but that it is striking all social sectors indiscriminately. The sorry statistics of the tragic violence show similar numbers of victims in enterprises, among the peasantry, ordinary citizens, religious communities, and, most particularly, among civil servants and judges, who pay, often with their blood, for their resistance and their energetic and heroic vocation to consolidate the rule of law in Colombian society. This is the result of the situation of generalized violence originating in multiple, diverse and to a degree opposing sources of aggression towards Colombian society: subversion, organized crime motivated by drugs trafficking, paramilitary activities and common criminality. Hence, the Government maintains that only the restoration of political peace through the elimination of the major source of violence can provide a solid and workable base for effective exercise of the basic rights and thus permanent respect for trade union rights.

18. It adds that the national and international communities have unanimously recognized the significance of the process itself and have applauded and supported the courage with which the national Government is advancing it. The Government details the mechanisms and measures aimed at curbing the activities of the self-styled "self-defence forces" and the guerrilla forces and putting a stop to impunity.

I. Combating the self-defence forces

19. The Government reports that the national policy against the self-defence forces is a state policy. It revolves around two complementary axes, the first of which aims to combat their actions directly and effectively and the second, a deterrent, aims to remove the factors which influence the emergence and development of such groups. The policies directed against the self-defence forces include:

(a) The Coordination Centre for Combating the Self-Defence Forces: a centre has been established to coordinate management of intelligence from the military (the Army, the Navy and the Air Force), the National Police, the Office of the Procurator-General, the Office of the Attorney-General, the Ministry of the Interior and the DAS. The role of the Coordination Centre is to identify the self-defence forces in terms of location and to collaborate in designing the appropriate military plan of action, to be carried out by the operative and tactical units responsible for the region. The Centre has a database and statistical and geographical analysis capacities in addition to the necessary logistical and administrative capacities. It possesses a central committee for coordination, monitoring and control under the chairmanship of a politician of the highest level.

(b) Support of the work of the Office of the Procurator-General: greater support has been provided to that institution, and particularly to its Human Rights Unit, through the allocation of funds and accompanying staff for the investigation of cases involving members of self-defence forces. A complementary anti-self defence group combat force has been established in the form of an operative support group under the Office of the Procurator-General which is responsible for carrying out arrests under warrant and is composed of specialist personnel from the military, the National Police and the DAS.

(c) An early-warning system for high-risk areas in order to prevent massacres.

(d) Humanitarian agreements: the Government considers it important, in order to alleviate the suffering of the population, to retain the possibility of signing agreements of a humanitarian nature with the self-defence forces, since these, together with the guerrilla forces, are the main violators of international humanitarian law.

20. According to the report of the High Commissioner for Peace, the following results have been registered:

II. The peace process with FARC-EP

21. The Government reports the following significant developments in this process:

III. The peace process with the National Liberation Army (ELN)

22. The Government has also reached agreements with the National Liberation Army. This was the purpose of Resolution No. 83 of 9 October 1998, which declared the peace process open and recognized the political nature of that organization.

A peace process amidst the difficulties

23. In its communication of 23 September 1999, the Government sends observations in order to provide additional information on the peace process and the difficulties which it is encountering, as well as on new elements in state policy concerning the installation of peace in Colombia.

24. Since the Government has been unable to persuade the guerrilla groups to agree to a ceasefire or truce in order to begin and develop the negotiations for peace, as mentioned in the report of 30 July, there was no other option but to agree to the peace process while the conflict continues.

25. It was of course anticipated that on the establishment of the Common Agenda, the guerrillas (FARC) would give some demonstration of their desire for peace, but instead, adopting the tactic of a show of strength with the aim of improving their bargaining position, they are redoubling their aggression against small cities in various regions, leaving death and destruction in their wake. They targeted police stations and banks and ended up destroying private homes and murdering hundreds of civilians. The horrific images shown by the media show scenes of destruction identical to those left by an earthquake. In some settlements, where the guerrillas were confronted by the Colombian military, the insurgents suffered hundreds of losses, including child guerrillas who were taking part in the fighting.

26. The ELN, for its part, is also developing its own strategy, consisting of mass civilian kidnappings, which are believed to be for political purposes in order to improve its bargaining power. These mass kidnappings cause shock and dismay among the national and international communities, particularly the hijacking of the Avianca aeroplane with dozens of passengers and the kidnapping of over 100 people in a Catholic church in Cali, a city of 2 million inhabitants. All of the victims were taken to ELN bases in the Colombian forests. One of the people kidnapped from the aeroplane died in captivity and another victim, from the church, was killed because he resisted being kidnapped.

27. The response of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights was as follows:

28. Certain of the released hostages carried messages to the Government, which were of a political nature and laid down conditions for the peace process. The most serious and unacceptable factor, however, is that payment of enormous ransoms was demanded for the release of the remaining hostages, which forced the Government to suspend all dialogue with the ELN.

29. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights once again expressed its concern:

Kidnappings in Colombia

30. The latest report of the Presidential Programme for Defence of Personal Freedom, which gives a statistical analysis of the phenomenon of kidnapping over the past four years, notes an alarming increase: where 947 economically motivated kidnappings were reported in 1996, 1,100 cases were reported by 31 July this year, over a period of only seven months. Between 1 January 1996 and 6 September 1999, a total of 6,957 people were kidnapped; 1,854 remain in captivity. An average of eight people are kidnapped per day. To our shame, Colombia registers 45 per cent of all kidnappings in the world.

31. Of the insurgent groups, it is FARC that has kidnapped the most people: 224 civilians and 488 military and police personnel, a total of 712. The ELN holds 280 persons in captivity. The self-defence forces have kidnapped 42 people. Nobody is spared from this crime, not even the Colombian hierarchy of the Catholic Church. At present, the bishop of Tibú (a town in the north of the country), Monsignor José de Jésus Quintero, is being held by the Popular Liberation Army (EPL).

32. Various workers are being held by the guerrillas, including two Spanish citizens working in Colombia. The trade union confederations published the following public statement on this in El Tiempo, the country's main newspaper:

The self-defence forces against the civilian population

33. As if the above were not enough, the self-defence forces (United Self-Defence Forces of Colombia -- AUC) have developed their criminal activities in various regions of the country with alleged guerrilla presence or influence and murdered dozens of poor settlers and peasants, forcing hundreds of survivors to flee their homes. Likewise, the self-defence forces have extended their crime wave to the big cities, carrying out selective murders and making death threats against individuals and social groups.

34. Nothing seems to escape their fatal touch, even certain Colombian public universities which are now infiltrated by their criminal activities and, what is worse, their intimidatory pamphlets come from university insiders (AUC sympathizers or militants who apparently have access to the registers of students, teachers and administrative staff). They justify their criminal activities by alleging the presence of guerrillas or their sympathizers in the universities.

35. In view of this serious situation, the national Government is, in concert with the local and university authorities, adopting measures to guarantee the protection of the university community and a return to normal academic life, including the abolition of the self-defence units inside the universities and punishment of the guilty persons.

36. On this subject, we must express our indignation at the recent murders of: Hernán Henao, lecturer, and Gustavo Marulanda, student leader, of the University of Antioquia; Darío Betancurt, lecturer at the National Pedagogical University, and Jesús Antonio Bejarano, lecturer at the National University. Mr. Bejarano was murdered on the 15th of this month as he was entering the Faculty of Economics to give a class. He was Adviser on Peace in the Government of César Gaviria from 1990 to 1994 and President of the Business Association and the Farmers' Union of Colombia (SAC). In this case there is also speculation that the FARC, which had declared him a "military objective", was responsible for his death.

37. On 13 August, Jaimé Garzón, a national figure involved in television and radio as a journalist and comedian, who was conducting humanitarian work for victims of guerrilla kidnapping and for the peace process, was murdered. In principle, the self-defence forces are blamed for this crime. The national Government is offering large rewards to persons providing information on the murders of Garzón and Bejarano.

38. In addition, the self-defence forces are distributing intimidatory leaflets in small towns which they consider to have a guerrilla presence. For the purposes of illustration, we reproduce the leaflets distributed in Yumbo (an industrial town 12 kilometres from Cali):

39. By way of a glossary: "M19" (19 April Movement) is a guerrilla organization whose members abandoned their arms and returned to civilian life in 1990. The Mayor of Yumbo was the head of the movement. "Jaime Bateman" is an M19 splinter group which took up arms once more under the name of the leader of M19, killed in an air accident. "UP" (Patriotic Union) is a political organization created on the proposal of FARC in 1985 during the truce in order to negotiate with the Government of the time. The majority of its members are Communist Party militants.

40. Likewise, in connection with the organization and implementation of the national strikes of 31 August and 1 September 1999, the organizers received on the eve an intimidatory leaflet from the self-defence forces and publicized it as follows:

41. It should be noted that, before this national strike was announced, the national Government called upon the leaders to channel their demands through the mechanisms for social dialogue and collaboration, but found no desire for dialogue on the part of the organizers, who declared that the step was irreversible, but that it would be developed in a peaceful manner. The Government then instructed the police to act with restraint, but to be firm if there was any violence, in fulfilment of its legal obligation to protect the life, honour and property of the citizens. Unfortunately, the protest exceeded the organizers' estimates and there were provocative and violent acts, especially in the outer suburbs of the large cities and mainly in Santa fé de Bogotá, including stone-throwing, barricading of streets and looting of commercial premises and trucks. Sadly, a 10 year-old girl was killed during the rioting when she was hit by a shot fired by a trader attempting to stop the looting.

42. Once the strike was over, the national Government agreed with the organizers to hold 12 thematic negotiating sessions on the items in the list of demands. It is envisaged that negotiations will be concluded at the beginning of October.

43. Among the "reasons and objectives of the strike", we would like to emphasize the statement in favour of the peace process, which coincides with the Government's position and is worded as follows:

Colombia's response

44. One important fact which deserves attention is the Colombian people's response to all of the kidnappers and people of violence: dignified demonstrations in all of the cities, numerous discussion forums and awareness campaigns are part of day-to-day life in Colombia.

45. The people's response has met with many demonstrations of solidarity on the part of the international community.

The Government reiterates its desire for peace

46. Despite the wave of violence unleashed by the guerrilla groups and self-defence forces, the national Government insists on the need to begin, as soon as possible, negotiation on the Common Agenda agreed and signed in conjunction with FARC on 6 May 1999. It has even dropped its demand that FARC submit to a verification commission in the zone of détente in order to prevent it continuing to murder and subject to violence the civilian population of the region. FARC denies that it agreed to this as a condition for the beginning and development of the peace process. In addition, it is now demanding that the start of negotiations should be preceded by the passing of a law on continuous exchange of soldiers and politicians held by it for guerrilla fighters in state prisons.

47. Despite all of this, the national Government reiterates its desire to find a political solution to the armed conflict in order to put a stop to the killing by Colombians of their brother Colombians and to put all of the State's efforts into economic growth with equality, that is to say with social justice. These are not mere empty words: the super-project entitled "Plan Colombia" is made up of the development plan "Change to Build Peace" together with programmes for social investment and for the administrative spending needed for national development.

48. The Plan Colombia involves prioritized, focused activities for regions where violence has reached a critical level and is associated with factors such as forced displacement and the cultivation of illegal crops. It is recognized that there is a need here to develop a state policy and not simply a government policy in order to ensure continuity over time, and not to be dependent on the situation surrounding the armed conflict and the negotiations, but to rise above these in a way that allows progress in the structuring of conditions more conducive to peace.

49. It begins by recognizing that violence in Colombia is deeply rooted in economic and political exclusion and in the exercise of democracy with inequality and poverty; and that it is also spurred on by the cultivation of illegal crops. Investment, both private and public, should contribute to the creation of conditions for the construction of peace and the reinforcement of democracy, the present weakness of which is demonstrated by the various types of violence. The policy of investment and an adequate institutional framework should thus make it possible to meet the present and future requirements of the peace-building process and not simply solve the problem of guerrilla confrontation of the State.

50. The violence and armed conflict have a general impact on the entire country, but their consequences are more serious in certain areas (mainly affecting a separate section of the population) where the objective factors of the conflict are interrelated. The lack of real opportunities for large sections of the population to make progress and the unequal geographical provision of human and social capital are subjective factors directly related to poor social cohesion, diminished institutional legitimacy, lack of respect for the appointed authorities and lack of state presence.

51. The Plan Colombia was designed by the Government as the focal point for the different strands of the peace policy according to the type of conflict and the particular characteristics of the areas in which the conflict is to be found. It is based around five action areas: production, infrastructure, humanitarian issues, institutions and the environment. In addition, the Plan will be expanded by activities and investments in two areas: firstly, sectoral strategies through priority short, medium and long-term measures to promote development in the agricultural sector, strengthen civil society, develop the infrastructure and once more make justice institutionalized and the country safe.

52. The Plan Colombia will be financed and implemented using effective, new and participatory mechanisms, with investments totalling 7.5 billion dollars over the next three years. The State will provide 4 billion dollars for the Plan, with the remainder being provided by international cooperation and the private sector.

Progress in state control and administration of justice

53. The national Government has made the Vice-President, Dr. Gustavo Bell Lemus, in his capacity as High Councillor for Human Rights, responsible for coordinating the many efforts and the tasks carried out by various state agencies in order to guarantee, protect and defend basic rights. A broad coordination effort is making progress towards formulating a state policy on human rights and international humanitarian law, ensuring that all the institutions involved observe unity in criteria and breadth in commitments. It is intended that the policy would be integrated with efforts on the part of civil society.

54. The Office of the High Councillor for Human Rights established the Observatory on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law, which issued the following information:

55. The Office of the President recently issued the following "presidential directive" for the development of preventive action and the protection of the human rights of members of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and social organizations:

Strategies and activities for promotion and protection

56. Additionally, in the very near future, the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, which coordinates the Inter-Institutional Commission for the Promotion and Protection of Workers' Human Rights, will propose and submit for the approval of the members of the Commission the "Strategies and Activities for the Promotion and Protection of Workers' Human Rights" in the following terms:

57. With regard to the remaining aspects, the Government reports the following:

Killings

58. Since specific information has not yet been received from the Office of the Procurator-General, the Government forwards information obtained from other sources concerning the following cases:

59. Concerning the eight murder cases where the Office of the Procurator-General has ordered that investigations be adjourned (Ernesto Emilio Fernández Pezter, official of ADUCESAR, murdered in the municipality of Pailitas, César, by persons believed to be hired assassins; Libardo Antonio Acevedo, president of FESTRALVA (CTC), Tuluá, Valle, murdered on 7 July 1996; Magaly Peñaranda, member of SINTRAMUNICIPIO, Ocaña, Santander, murdered on 27 July 1997; David Quintero Uribe, president of SINTRACUACESAR, Aguachica, César, murdered on 7 August 1997; Aurelio Arbeláez, member of SINTRAFRONMINES, Segovia, Antioquia, murdered on 4 March 1997; José Guillermo Asprilla Torres, member of SINTRAINAGRO, Apartadó, murdered on 23 July 1997; Carlos Arturo Moreno López, leader of the farmworkers' committee, murdered in 7 July 1995 in Apartadó, Urabá, apparently by members of commando groups; and Luis Abel Villa León, member of SINTRAMINEROS, Antioquia, murdered in Amagá, Antioqiuia on 21 July 1997), the Government reports that the Colombian Penal Code provides that if within three months no new elements have come to light which allow the investigation to proceed, the work is to be shelved until such time as new clues or evidence justify reopening the case. However, the adjournment of investigations should not be regarded as an abandoning of the case, which would imply impunity.

Attempted murders

60. Concerning the allegations of the attempted murders, the Government reports:

61. Concerning this case, the metropolitan police of Santiago de Cali, judicial and investigatory police unit, reports as follows:

62. It should be noted that the report states that Mr. González Luna arrived at the scene of the incident later. His other bodyguards also arrived with him. The Administrative Security Department (DAS), Valle section, gives the following account of the incident:

63. Finally, we consider it important to inform the Freedom of Association Committee that, on the request of Mr. González Luna, the Government paid his family's removal costs from Cali to Bogotá and then the costs of its departure from Colombia.

64. In addition, the Government states that it is conducting investigations into the following cases of attempted murder:

Harassment

65. Concerning the complainants' allegation that Mr. Oscar Amaury Ardila Guevara is being victimized by the military authorities, who keep at military premises descriptions of him as a "member of a subversive organization", the national Government took appropriate corrective action when it was informed of the situation. In view of the fact that Mr. Ardila Guevara is on the list of workers of the Tolima hydroelectric station and resident in Ibagué, the Government has attempted to ensure that the management of the enterprise keeps him on permanent leave with the benefit of a grant in order that he may pursue his university studies in Bogotá. The committee for the evaluation and protection of persons at risk, coordinated by the Ministry of the Interior, has been following Mr. Ardila Guevara's situation closely. In particular, the latter has asked for no other protection beyond the possibility to remain in Bogotá and pursue his studies. When he needs to go to Ibagué, some protection is arranged for him.

Threats

66. The Government states, on the basis of information submitted by the Office of the Procurator-General of the Nation, that investigations are being conducted regarding the following trade unionists:

Protection of individuals who have been threatened

67. The Government reports that it has stepped up the Ministry of the Interior protection programme for individuals who have been threatened, making a budgetary contribution of the equivalent of US$5.5 million. This programme includes help for threatened trade unionists.

68. The Government has forwarded a list of trade unionists benefiting from protection:

69. The Government reports also that the protection mechanisms offered by the above programme are adapted to the level of risk faced by the official according to technical assessment carried out by the state security organs, and supplies the list of officials and unions on which risk studies have been carried out.

Detentions

70. The Government reports that detentions among trade unionists include a number of USO (oil industry union) members who were being prosecuted for "rebellion, terrorism and conspiracy to commit crime", namely Edgar Riaño Rojas, Marcelino Buitrago, Felipe Mendoza, Monerje Sánchez, Guillermo Cárdenas, Rafael Estupiñan, Hernán Vallejo, Leonardo Mosquera and Fabio Liévano.

71. These individuals were released on 29 July 1999 together with other members of the same union who were detained for the same reason: Jorge Estupiñan, Reinel Sánchez, Alvaro Solano, Francisco Cadena, Leonardo Díaz and Constantino Carrillo.

72. Concerning the alleged detention of Luis David Rodríguez Pérez, it has been established after investigation that his union (SINTRADIN) has no knowledge of such a detention and still less did it make such an allegation.

73. Concerning Elder Fernández and Gustavo Minorta, reportedly members of the ECOPETROL company union USO, detained in December 1996, the relevant inquiries were made of USO and ECOPETROL, who denied knowledge of the men, still less of their detention.

Anti-union acts

74. Regarding the anti-union acts at the Andino, Citibank, Sudameris and Anglo Colombiano banking corporations, the Government considered it important to listen to the complaints of the trade unionists. They were twice contacted by letter but did not reply to the invitations.

Dismissals

75. Concerning the court cases pending sentence with regard to three dismissals at the TEXTILIA Ltd. company, the following is reported.

76. In the case brought by Arnulfo Cruz Mora, a verdict was issued at second instance upholding the rejection of all of the claims brought against the company by Mr. Cruz Mora.

77. Concerning the other two cases pending, the first, brought by Mr. Germán Bulla before the 14th circuit labour court of Santa Fe de Bogotá, is at the documentary stage; and the second, brought by Mr. Darío Ramirez, was heard before the 16th circuit labour court of Santa Fe de Bogotá and because of defects was declared inadmissible at the first hearing.

Final declarations

78. In its communication of 23 September 1999, the Government through the Minister for Labour and Social Security, by way of a final declaration, stated the following.

79. The body of information submitted to the ILO for study and analysis by the Freedom of Association Committee and its respective subdivisions, and the statements by previous Ministers for Labour and Social Security at Conferences and meetings of the ILO Governing Body not only provide a detailed picture of the real situation in Colombia but also bear witness to our responsibility and great desire to reveal the truth, however painful, to the international community.

80. At a recent conference, Mr. Robert Kogod Goldman, a member of the Inter-American Institute of Human Rights (IIDH), which is monitoring Colombia, said that it was clear that the Colombian Government, for reasons connected with the armed conflict and the peace process, no longer retained effective control over certain areas of the national territory and the population. However, the Institute had already made it clear that it did not paint the State and the armed dissident groups with the same brush. The State possessed a unique status under international law and this implied certain rights and obligations. For example, in its capacity as a party to the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights and other human rights treaties, the Colombian State had freely assumed the fundamental responsibility and duty to respect and guarantee the human rights protected in those instruments for all of the people under its jurisdiction. This duty and responsibility could not be relinquished by the State during civil conflict or any other situation of emergency. The fact that the standards of humanitarian law were equally binding on the State and the dissident armies could in no way alter the status of the parties to the conflict and therefore could not be interpreted as legitimizing the cause for which the dissidents had taken up arms or, still less, acknowledging their aggression. It meant simply that the rival parties had the same obligation to observe the restrictions and prohibitions relevant to the conduct of hostilities.

81. The CIDH had noted that few member States of the Organization of American States had made such a public declaration of their acceptance of international humanitarian law as Colombia. Equally few States had sought, as had Colombia with the invaluable assistance of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), genuinely to inform its security forces, the other parties to the conflict and the general public of the basic precepts of international humanitarian law. The Colombian Government and broad sections of civil society considered observance of the basic rules of humanitarian law essential in order to "humanize" the conflict and thus contribute to the creation of suitable conditions for negotiations between the rival parties and an eventual return to peace.

82. "... Perhaps the most tragic and cruel consequence of the Colombian conflict to affect part of the civil population in recent years was the phenomenon of internal displacement. The scale of the internal displacement problem in Colombia was currently no less than a humanitarian catastrophe. Figures from different studies of the displaced population in Colombia placed it at between 700,000 and 1,200,000 persons. Both figures were higher than the number of persons displaced by the recent Kosovo conflict."

83. We are obliged to face the judgement passed by the ILO's monitoring mechanisms on the many types of violence from which Colombia is suffering, in the certainty and sureness that, as stated by my immediate predecessor as Minister for Labour and Social Security, Dr. Hernando Yepes, none of them

84. Our primary responsibility is with the 40 million people of Colombia, for in the end it is they who suffer directly from the atrocities of the illegally armed minority with its great ability to destabilize, which uses barbarism as an instrument to pursue perverse aims of economic profit in accordance with their political purposes. The people of Colombia are committed to the development of democracy, believe in their institutions and rise up to defend them. The democratic institutions are created of the will of the electorate and the Government honours this will, an expression of the sovereignty of the people. To summarize, Colombia is a social State ruled by law, with a Government which respects and is committed to guaranteeing the citizens' basic rights and the institutional base in its entirety.

85. We are a part of the world community of the United Nations, the founder of the ILO, and are respecters of international standards and the principles of brotherhood and solidarity among peoples. This has been recognized by all Governments, which reach out to us in these difficult times and declare their support for our peaceful cause.

86. We take up Colombia's defence before the ILO authorities as a matter of principle, for the premises on which the judgement of liabilities is based stem from a mistaken interpretation of reality: the criminal activities which are bringing suffering to all Colombians, without a single exception, are being associated with a supposed violation of ILO Conventions Nos. 87 and 98. In Colombia, despite the incipient development in production and the cyclical crises of our economy, workers' collective rights are respected and observed. It is significant that trade unions which suffer from the violence because they are located in areas of acute armed conflict are able to carry out in a normal way their activities connected with upholding rights. In addition, the public sector trade union movement accounts for 70 per cent of the unionized workers in Colombia and it is precisely that group which most vociferously denounces the lack of facilities for its organization. The national strike in Colombia, as may easily be seen, was led and initiated by the public sector trade union movement.

87. The armed conflict has killed over 30,000 people in the past decade. Of these, some 700 were involved in trade unions and some 190 were trade union officials. These figures are terrifying and we respond with shame and indignation, but they are very different from the statistics given to the international organizations: documents and forums continue to repeat that the number of trade unionists killed over that time was 2,000 and that in the past eight years 1,083 have met with a violent death; according to documents produced by the ILO, 865 of these were trade union officials. For the same period (1991-98) the databank of the Human Rights Assessment Group of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, which, it should be said, is one of the most complete records in the country, registered 627 killings, of which 180 were of trade union officials.

88. In the Human Rights File Bulletin No. 5 of the National Trade Union Institute, the source of information for the ILO and other international organizations, there is a reference to 39 trade union officials murdered in 1997 (page 33). Checking of this information with the Trade Union Registry and with the unions themselves reveals that only 15 were in fact trade union officials; the other 24 were not. A considerable difference. In addition, the account was provided by a person not identified as a trade union official.

89. Whatever the figures for murders of trade union members and officials, they are similarly repugnant, but presenting absolute figures of 2,000 trade unionists murdered without giving their names produces a reaction of shock and consternation in the reader or hearer and, more seriously, those who have no access to the original information have no alternative but to believe the figure. The handling of figures is extremely important: recently two letters arrived, both dated 20 August 1999 and addressed to the President, the first from PACE (the Paper, Allied Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers' International Union), referring to 3,000 murders of trade unionists in the past ten years, and the second from the Union of Workers in the Mineral and Metal Extraction Industry of Minaco-GO, a member of the Brazilian Single Confederation of Workers, referring to 3,000 trade union officials murdered by the police.

90. We request the Freedom of Association Committee to reproduce this report in full for all members of the ILO Governing Body.

D. The Committee's conclusions

91. The Committee notes that the allegations presented by the complainants refer to extremely serious acts of violence against trade union officials and trade union members (murders (more than 100), attempted murders, disappearances, physical aggression, death threats) and acts of anti-union discrimination. The Committee expresses once more its serious concern in relation to these incidents and particularly those which caused the loss of life, the first premise of all rights.

92. In respect of the general situation in the country, the Committee takes note of the complainants' statements that the situation in terms of violation of human and labour rights has worsened in recent months and that there is no peace process in Colombia and that contacts for initiating dialogue between the Government and the guerrillas can be achieved only with considerable difficulty. Regarding labour rights, the Committee takes note of the complainants' particular allegation that the Government is preparing a new reform for greater labour flexibility without taking into account the workers' point of view or possible alternatives that they might offer. They also allege, although not necessarily attributing them to anti-union motives, mass dismissals both in the central administration and in regional authorities and delays in payment of wages and social benefits to workers, including extreme cases of delays in wage payment of up to 12 months.

93. The Committee notes that the Government, in response to the complainants' allegations on the non-existence of a peace process, asserts that there is a process directed towards a political solution to the conflict with the majority of the guerrilla groups operating in Colombia. The FARC affirms the existence of compromises with the ELN and considers that the murders and other violations of basic rights are not directed specifically against trade union bodies but against other groups as well. The Committee notes that the Government adds that the national and international communities have recognized the significance of the process itself and have applauded and supported the courage with which the national Government is advancing it, and takes note of the various mechanisms listed by the Government as measures to curb the violence: (1) a national policy of combating the self-defence forces through a Coordination Centre for Combating the Self-Defence Forces, support to the Office of the Procurator-General, an early-warning system and humanitarian agreements; (2) a peace process with FARC-EP with the establishment of a Joint Agenda for Change towards a New Colombia; and (3) a peace process with the ELN, with a resolution declaring the peace process open and recognizing the political nature of that organization.

94. The Committee also notes that the Government points to countless difficulties amidst which the process has to proceed: the activities of the FARC, to improve its bargaining position, has increased its aggression against small cities in various regions and left death and destruction in its wake; the activities of the ELN with its strategy of mass civilian kidnappings, an activity, which according to the Government, has been condemned on several occasions by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights; the AUC (United Self-Defence Forces of Colombia), which has developed its criminal activities in various regions of the country with alleged guerrilla presence or influence, murdered dozens of poor settlers and peasants, forced hundreds of survivors to flee their homes and extended its crime wave to the big cities, carrying out selective murders and making death threats against individuals and social groups; the fact that the violence and the armed conflict affect the whole country generally, but that its consequences are more serious in certain regions (affecting mainly a specific sector of the population) where all the objective factors of the conflict are present; the fact that, for reasons related to the armed conflict and the peace process, the Government no longer exercises effective control over some parts of the national territory and population; the fact that the Colombian conflict has created the phenomenon of the internal displacement of persons which affects between 700,000 and 1,200,000 persons. The Committee notes that despite all of this, the national Government reiterates its desire to find a political solution to the armed conflict in order to put a stop to the killing by Colombians of their brother Colombians and to put all of the State's efforts into economic growth with equality, that is to say with social justice. The Committee notes the Government's observations on the "Plan Colombia" which has the objective of eradicating violence while focusing on its most fundamental clauses and which is aimed at creating more favourable structural conditions to achieve peace. The Committee takes notes of the Government's policy in favour of preventive action and protection of human rights of members of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and social organizations. The Committee notes the Government's statement that none of the different forms of violence that Colombia is suffering may be imputed to the State as its policy or as the conduct of its responsible organs and agents. Thus, if occasionally, by way of an exception, persons in state service should have become involved in conduct in violation of human rights, deviating from their duties and going against the permanent instructions of those responsible for guiding the actions of public servants, their crime has invariably met with strong censure from society and an inexorable response from the State in terms of punishment. The Government indicates that according to the information provided by the Office of the High Counsellor for Human Rights that the majority of human rights violations come from self-defence groups followed by members of the paramilitary forces and subversives. The Committee takes note of the intimidatory pamphlets reproduced in the Government's reply in which the self-defence forces threaten trade union activists and leaders. It also takes note of the data furnished by the High Commissioner for Peace on the convictions, detentions and trials against the members of these self-defence forces. Finally, the Committee takes notes of the Government's statement that the armed conflict has killed over 30,000 people in the past decade of whom some 700 were involved in trade unions and some 190 were trade union officials and that these figures are very different from the statistics provided by the complainants.

95. While taking note of the important difficulties encountered by the Government and its efforts in accelerating the peace process and eliminating violence, the Committee deplores the fact that, since the previous examination of the case in March 1999, more acts of violence have been committed against trade union officials and members (13 murders, three attempted murders, disappearances and death threats) and more acts of anti-union discrimination. Additionally, the Committee deeply deplores the fact that none of the investigations under way has identified the perpetrators, which confirms the existence in Colombia of a climate of impunity favouring further acts of violence and the fact that holding trade union office involves risk to the safety of the individuals involved particularly in regions where the conflict is more acute. The Committee also regrets to note that the Government has only sent observations on part of the allegations, failing to reply to the vast majority of the prior requests for information.

96. The Committee reiterates that "the killing, disappearance or serious injury of trade union leaders and trade unionists requires the institution of independent judicial inquiries in order to shed full light, at the earliest date, on the facts and circumstances in which such actions occurred and in this way, to the extent possible, determine where responsibilities lie, punish the guilty parties and prevent the repetition of similar events" and that "the absence of judgements against the guilty parties creates, in practice, a situation of impunity, which reinforces the climate of violence and insecurity, and which is extremely damaging to the exercise of trade union rights"[see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition, 1996, paras. 51 and 55].

97. In these circumstances, noting that the situation remains alarming, the Committee urges the Government to take immediate measures to determine where responsibilities lie, try and punish the guilty parties, and prevent the repetition of acts of violence and anti-union acts against union leaders and unionists.

Acts of violence concerning which the Committee
requested at its March 1999 meeting to be kept
informed of the development of investigations

98. Concerning the allegations regarding which the Government had reported at the March 1999 meeting or earlier that investigations and legal proceedings were under way, the Committee regrets to note that the Government has not sent any new information on the development of proceedings concerning the individuals mentioned in the following two paragraphs and urges the Government to provide information in that respect without delay.

Murders

99. (1) Antonio Moreno Asprilla (12 August 1995); (2) Manuel Ballesta (13 August 1995; (3) Francisco Mosquera Córdoba (February 1996); (4) Carlos Arroyo de Arco (February 1996); (5) Francisco Antonio Usuga (22 March 1996); (6) Pedro Luis Bermúdez Jaramillo (6 June 1995); (7) Armando Umanes Petro (23 May 1996); (8) William Gustavo Jaimes Torres (28 August 1995); (9) Jaime Eliacer Ojeda; (10) Alfonso Noguera Cano; (11) Alvaro Hoyos Pabón (12 December 1995); (12) Néstor Eduardo Galíndez Rodríguez (4 March 1997); (13) Erieleth Barón Daza (3 May 1997); (14) Jhon Fredy Arboleda Aguirre; (15) William Alonso Suárez Gil; (16) Eladio de Jesús Chaverra Rodríguez; (17) Luis Carlos Muñoz (7 March 1997); (18) Nazareno de Jesús Rivera García (12 March 1997); (19) Héctor Gómez (22 March 1997); (20) Gilberto Casas Arboleda; (21) Norberto Casas Arboleda; (22) Alcides de Jesús Palacios Casas (11 February 1997); (23) Argiro de Jesús Betancur Espinosa (11 February 1997); (24) José Isidoro Leyton (25 March 1997); (25) Eduardo Enrique Ramos Montiel (14 July 1997); (26) Libardo Cuéllar Navia (23 July 1997); (27) Wenceslao Varela Torrecilla (29 July 1997); (28) Abraham Figueroa Bolaños (25 July 1997); (29) Edgar Camacho Bolaños (25 July 1997); (30) Félix Avilés Arroyo (1 December 1997); (31) Juan Camacho Herrera (25 April 1997); (32) Luis Orlando Camaño Galvis (20 July 1997); (33) Hernando Cuadros Mendoza (1994); (34) Freddy Francisco Fuentes Paternina (18 July 1997); (35) Víctor Julio Garzón (7 March 1997); (36) Isidro Segundo Gil Gil (9 December 1996); (37) José Silvio Gómez (1 April 1996); (38) Enoc Mendoza Riasco (7 April 1997); (39) Luis Orlando Quiceno López (16 July 1997); (40) Arnold Enrique Sánchez Maza (13 July 1997); (41) Camilo Suárez Ariza (21 July 1997); (42) Mauricio Tapias Llerena (21 July 1997); (43) Atilio José Vásquez (July 1997); (44) Odulfo Zambrano López (27 October 1997); (45) Alvaro José Taborda Alvarez (8 January 1998) (mentioned in the allegations as having disappeared); (46) Elkin Clavijo (30 November 1997); (47) Alfonso Niño (30 November 1997); (48) Luis Emilio Puerta Orrego (22 November 1997); (49) Fabio Humberto Burbano Córdoba (12 January 1998); (50) Osfanol Torres Cárdenas (31 January 1998); (51) Fernando Triana (31 January 1998), (52) Francisco Hurtado Cabezas (12 February 1998), (53) Misael Díaz Ursola (26 May 1998); (54) Sabas Domingo Socadegui Paredes (3 June 1997); (55) Jesús Arley Escobar Posada (18 July 1997); (56) José Raúl Giraldo Hernández (25 November 1997); (57) Bernardo Orrego Orrego; and (58) José Eduardo Umaña Mendoza (18 April 1998).

Disappearances

100. (1) Rodrigo Rodriguez Sierra (16 February 1995); (2) Ramón Osorio Beltrán (15 April 1997); (3) Alexander Cardona (14 July 1998); and (4) Mario Jiménez (27 July 1998).

Acts of violence outstanding at the March 1999
meeting of the Committee concerning which
the Government sent observations

101. Concerning the allegations which remained outstanding at the examination of this case in March 1999, the Committee notes that the Government reports that it has opened judicial investigations into the following cases: murders: José Vicente Rincón (murdered on 7 January 1998 in Barrancabermeja); Jorge Boada Palencia (murdered on 18 April 1998); Jorge Duarte Chávez (murdered in Barrancabermeja on 9 May 1998); Carlos Rodríguez Márquez (murdered on 10 May 1998); Arcángel Rubio Ramírez Giraldo; Orfa Ligia Mejía (murdered on 7 October 1998); Macario Herrera Villota; Víctor Eloy Mieles Ospino and Rosa Ramírez; attempted murders: Virgilio Ochoa Pérez; Eugeniano Sánchez; Benito Rueda Villamizar. The Committee expresses its grave concern and repudiates these acts and requests the Government to keep it informed as a matter of urgency on the results of the investigations and prosecutions under way.

102. Concerning the allegations of the attempted murders of the trade union leaders Tarcisio Mora, Jesús Antonio González Luna and José Domingo Tovar Arrieta, the Committee notes that the Government refutes the allegations of these incidents and denies, in the three cases, that such attacks took place, presenting police reports which support its position.

Recent acts of violence concerning which
the Government is awaiting information

103. As concerns the alleged murders of trade union leaders and members regarding which the Government reports that it is awaiting specific information from the Office of the Procurator-General (Oscar Artunduaga Nuñez, Jesús Orlando Arévalo, Moisés Canedo Estrada, Gladys Pulido Monroy, Oscar David Calandón Gonzales, Oswaldo Rojas, Julio Alfonso Poveda, Pedro Alejandrino Melchor Tapasco and Manuel Avila Ruiz), the Committee notes that concerning Jesús Orlando Arévalo, Julio Alfonso Poveda, Víctor Eloy Mieles Ospino and Rosa Ramírez, the Government discounts any connection between the murders and the trade union activities of the deceased. In order to be able to pronounce itself in this regard, the Committee urges the Government without delay to ensure that investigations have been opened and to keep it informed in this respect.

Acts of violence into which the investigations
have been adjourned

104. Concerning the eight murder cases where the investigations have been adjourned by the competent Procurator's Office (Ernesto Emilio Fernández Pezter, murdered on 20 November 1995; Libardo Antonio Acevedo, murdered on 7 July 1996; Magaly Peñaranda, murdered on 27 July 1997; David Quintero Uribe, murdered on 7 August 1997; Aurelio Arbeláez, murdered on 4 March 1997; José Guillermo Asprilla Torres, murdered on 23 July 1997; Carlos Arturo Moreno López, murdered on 7 July 1995; and Luis Abel Villa León, murdered on 21 July 1997), the Committee notes that the Government reports that, under the Colombian Penal Code, if within three months no new elements have come to light which allow the investigation to proceed, the work is to be shelved until such time as new clues or evidence justify reopening the case, and that the adjournment of investigations should not, however, be regarded as an abandoning of the case, which would imply impunity. The Committee requests the Government to initiate new investigations on these cases and to inform it in this respect.

Alleged threats

105. The Committee notes with interest the Government's statement that it has stepped up the Ministry of the Interior's protection programme for individuals who have been threatened, the number of trade union leaders benefiting from protection, and the risk studies carried out for individuals and trade union organizations. Specifically, the Committee notes that the Government is providing protection to the following trade unionists: Hernando Hernández Pardo, president of the USO; Gabriel Alvis, vice-president of the USO; César Carrillo, treasurer of the USO; Jorge Gamboa, attorney to the USO; María Clara Baquero, president of ASODEFENSA; Jesús Antonio González Luna, human rights director of the CUT; Wilson Morja Díaz, president of FENALTRASE; Jesús Bernal Amorocho, president of SINTRACREDITARIO; Rafael Baldovino Pérez, president of SITTELECOM; Tarcisio Mora Godoy, president of FECODE; Héctor Fajardo Abril, secretary-general of the CUT; Percy Oyola Paloma, president of UTRADEC; Jorge Mario Vergara, treasurer of SITTELECOM; Nelson Berrio, USO peace assembly; Domingo Tovar Arrieta, vice-president of the CUT; Apecides Alvis Fernández, president of the CTC; Julio Roberto Gómez, secretary-general of the CGTD; Carlos Cely, president of ATT; Yuli González Villadiego, UNEB official; Francisco Ramírez Cuéllar, president of SINTRAMINERCOL; and Rangel Ramos Zapata, president of the Union of the Department of Antioquia. In addition, the Committee notes that investigations have been opened into the threats against the trade unionists Alexander López M., Robinson Emilio Masso Arias, Luis Eduardo Garzón Héctor Fajardo Abril, and Hernando Fernández. The Committee urges the Government to take measures to protect trade unionists and unions at risk and to keep it informed of all new measures adopted in that regard.

106. With regard to the death threats alleged to have been received recently by Pablo Emilio Calvo, vice-president of the Workers' Union of Cartago Municipality; members of the Colombian Lawyers' Commission and the José Alvear Attorneys' Collective; José Anibal Quiroga, vice-president of the national committee of the Brinks company; and trade union leaders participating in the Single National Command calling the national strike on 31 August 1999, the Committee regrets to note that the Government has not sent observations concerning these and urges it to take measures immediately to provide protection to the individuals threatened and to carry out investigations to identify the perpetrators.

107. Finally, the Committee observes that the Government has not sent information on the development of the investigations concerning the death threats received by certain trade unionists (1) Oscar Aguirre Restrepo; (2) Alberto Arango Alvaro; (3) Horacio Berrio Castaño; (4) Martha Cecilia Cadavid; (5) Jorge Humberto Franco; (6) Héctor de Jesús Giraldo; (7) Jairo Humberto Gutiérrez; (8) Carlos Hugo Jaramillo; (9) José Luis Jaramillo Galeano; (10) Rangel Ramos Zapata; (11) Luis Norberto Restrepo; (12) Jorge Sliecer Marín Trujillo; and (13) Víctor Ramírez. The Committee requests the Government to send it information concerning the development and results of these investigations.

Allegations of detentions

108. At its meeting in March 1999, the Committee examined a large number of allegations concerning detentions. Regarding the detentions of Edgar Riaño Rojas, Marcelino Buitrago, Felipe Mendoza, Monerje Sánchez, Guillermo Cárdenas, Rafael Estupiñan, Hernán Vallejo, Leonardo Mosquera and Fabio Liévano, Jorge Estupiñan, Reinel Sánchez, Alvaro Solano, Francisco Cadena, Leonardo Díaz, Constantino Carrillo, Luis David Rodríguez Pérez, Elder Fernández and Gustavo Minorta, the Committee notes that the Government reports that: (1) Edgar Riaño Rojas, Marcelino Buitrago, Felipe Mendoza, Monerje Sánchez, Guillermo Cárdenas, Rafael Estupiñan, Hernán Vallejo, Leonardo Mosquera and Fabio Liévano, Jorge Estupiñan, Reinel Sánchez, Alvaro Solano, Francisco Cadena, Leonardo Díaz and Constantino Carrillo, who were being prosecuted for "rebellion, terrorism and conspiracy to commit crime", were released on 29 July 1999; (2) concerning Luis David Rodríguez Pérez, it has been established that his union (SINTRADIN) has no knowledge of such a detention and did not make such an allegation; (3) concerning Elder Fernández and Gustavo Minorta, the unions to which they supposedly belonged (USO and ECOPETROL) claimed not to know of the men, still less of their detention; and (4) Luis Rodrigo Carreño has not been detained. Concerning Luis David Rodríguez Pérez, Elder Fernández and Gustavo Minorta, the Committee again asks the Government to inform it of the results of the investigations into their detention.

Allegations of harassment

109. Concerning the allegation by the ICFTU that Mr. Amaury Ardila Guevara is being victimized by the military authorities, who keep at military premises descriptions of him as a "member of a subversive organization", the Committee notes that the national Government reports having taken appropriate corrective action and that the Committee for the Evaluation and Protection of Persons at Risk, coordinated by the Ministry of the Interior, has been following Mr. Ardila Guevara's situation closely.

Allegations on which the Government did not send observations

110. Concerning the new allegations presented by the complainants concerning murders and attempted murders, disappearances, detentions, persecutions and unlawful imprisonment (see annex), the Committee regrets to note that the Government did not send observations. Additionally, the Committee regrets to note that the Government did not send any observations on many of the pending allegations concerning murders, disappearances and death threats involving trade unionists and trade union leaders. In the circumstances, the Committee urges the Government to communicate without delay its observations on all of the allegations in the annex to this case, to take urgent measures to have investigations carried out in order to shed light on the incidents, determine where responsibility lies and punish the guilty parties, and to keep it informed of all developments in this respect.

Anti-union acts

111. In respect of the allegations concerning anti-union acts at the Andino, Citibank, Sudameris and Anglo Colombiano banking corporations, the Committee observes that from the information sent by the Government it appears that, in the case of the Banco Anglo Colombiano, the Colombian Association of Banking Employees made a request on 31 May 1999 to labour inspection No. 24 for the complaint to be shelved, since it had received a positive reply from the bank. The Committee observes also that the Government indicates with respect to the other cases that it considered it important to allow the trade unionists to detail their complaints and that they were twice contacted by letter but did not reply to the invitations. In the circumstances, the Committee invites the complainants to explain the reasons for which they did not reply to the government invitations.

112. The Committee notes the allegations relating to violations of trade union and labour rights targeted at the trade union officials and workers of the Brinks company in Colombia, specifically an increase of the working week from 40 to 48 hours in violation of the provisions of the company's internal labour rules; violation of the collective agreement in various respects, the use of coercive methods to make workers agree to the increased working week would lose certain rights contained in the collective agreement, or their jobs; and telephone calls insulting the union managers and threatening them with death in order to exert pressure towards the same end. Observing that these allegations were presented recently, the Committee requests the Government to send observations on the matter with all urgency.

113. Concerning the court cases pending sentence with regard to three dismissals at the TEXTILIA Ltd. company, the Committee notes that the Government reports that: (1) a verdict was issued at second instance against Arnulfo Cruz Mora, upholding the rejection of the case against the company; (2) the case brought by Mr. Germán Bulla is at the documentary stage; (3) the case brought by Mr. Darío Ramirez was declared inadmissible because of defects. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the results of the cases brought by Germán Bulla and Darío Ramirez.

Raids on trade union headquarters, telephone tapping
and surveillance of trade unionists

114. The Committee regrets to note in addition that the Government did not send observations with respect to the following pending allegations concerning raids on trade union headquarters, telephone tapping and surveillance of trade unionists:

(1) raiding of the headquarters of the Single Agricultural Trade Union Federation (FENSUAGRO), tapping of the telephones of the trade union headquarters and the members and surveillance by armed persons of the president of FENSUAGRO, Luis Carlos Acero (the Government declares that this was not reported to the Colombian authorities);

(2) on 6 February 1998, at 12.45, 15 individuals bearing weapons, exclusive to the armed forces, came to the premises of the executive subcommittee of the CUT-Atlántico in the centre of Barranquilla, broke in and pointed a revolver at Ms. Lydis Jaraba, member of the present national executive committee and the executive board of the subcommittee of the CUT-Atlántico. The individuals, who were not carrying any identification or search warrant, inspected all of the offices and then left (the Government reports that the Colombian authorities were not informed of the incident).

115. In these circumstances, the Committee urges the Government without delay to communicate its observations concerning these incidents, to take urgent measures to have investigations carried out, and to keep it informed of all developments in this connection.

The Committee's recommendations

116. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:

(a) Concerning the allegations in regard to which the Government had reported at the March 1999 meeting or earlier that investigations and legal proceedings were under way, the Committee regrets to note that the Government has not sent any new information on the development of proceedings concerning the individuals mentioned and urges the Government to provide information in that respect without delay.

(b) Concerning the allegations of murders and attempted murders in regard to which the Government reports that it has opened judicial investigations (murders: José Vicente Rincón (murdered on 7 January 1998 in Barrancabermeja); Jorge Boada Palencia (murdered on 18 April 1998); Jorge Duarte Chávez (murdered in Barrancabermeja on 9 May 1998); Carlos Rodríguez Márquez (murdered on 10 May 1998); Arcángel Rubio Ramírez Giraldo; Orfa Ligia Mejía (murdered on 7 October 1998); Macario Herrera Villota; Víctor Eloy Mieles Ospino and Rosa Ramírez; attempted murders: Virgilio Ochoa Pérez; Eugeniano Sánchez and Benito Rueda Villamizar). The Committee expresses its grave concern and repudiates these acts and requests the Government to keep it informed as a matter of urgency on the results of the investigations and prosecutions under way.

(c) As concerns the alleged murders of trade union leaders and members regarding which the Government reports that it is awaiting specific information from the Office of the Procurator-General (Oscar Artunduaga Nuñez, Jesús Orlando Arévalo, Moisés Canedo Estrada, Gladys Pulido Monroy, Oscar David Calandón Gonzales, Oswaldo Rojas, Julio Alfonso Poveda, Pedro Alejandrino Melchor Tapasco and Manuel Avila Ruiz), the Committee observes that the communicated information does not make it possible to establish whether an investigation is under way and again urges the Government without delay to toke measures to have investigations opened and to keep it informed in this respect.

(d) Concerning the eight murder cases where the investigations have been adjourned by the competent Procurator's Office (Ernesto Emilio Fernández Pezter, murdered on 20 November 1995; Libardo Antonio Acevedo, murdered on 7 July 1996; Magaly Peñaranda, murdered on 27 July 1997; David Quintero Uribe, murdered on 7 August 1997; Aurelio Arbeláez, murdered on 4 March 1997; José Guillermo Asprilla Torres, murdred on 23 July 1997; Carlos Arturo Moreno López, murdered on 7 July 1995; and Luis Abel Villa León, murdered on 21 July 1997), the Committee asks the Government to initiate new investigations on these cases and to keep it informed in this regard.

(e) Concerning the Ministry of the Interior's protection programme for individuals who have been threatened, the Committee notes with interest the Government's statement that it has been stepped up together with the number of trade union leaders benefiting from protection, and the risk studies carried out for individuals and trade union organization; in addition, the Committee notes that investigations have been opened into the threats against the trade unionists Alexander López M., Robinson Emilio Masso Arias, Luis Eduardo Garzón Héctor Fajardo Abril and Hernando Fernández. The Committee urges the Government to take measures to protect trade unionists and unions at risk and to keep it informed of all new measures adopted in that regard.

(f) With regard to the death threats enumerated in the annex, the Committee urges the Government to take measures immediately to provide protection to the individuals threatened and to carry out investigations to identify the perpetrators.

(g) Concerning the allegations of death threats mentioned in paragraph 107 with respect to which the Government has not sent information regarding the development of the investigations, the Committee requests the Government to send it information on the development and results of these investigations.

(h) Concerning the allegations of detentions, the Committee requests the Government to inform it of the results of the investigations into the detention of Luis David Rodríguez Pérez, Elder Fernández and Gustavo Minorta.

(i) Concerning the new and pending allegations of murders and attempted murders, disappearances, detentions, persecutions and unlawful imprisonment in respect of which the Government did not send observations, the Committee urges the Government to communicate without delay its observations on all of the allegations in the annex to this case, to take urgent measures to have investigations carried out in order to shed light on the incidents, determine where responsibility lies and punish the guilty parties, and to keep it informed of all developments in this respect.

(j) In respect of the allegations concerning anti-union acts at the Andino, Citibank, Sudameris and Anglo Colombiano banking corporations, the Committee invites the complainants to explain the reasons for which they did not reply to the Government invitations.

(k) Regarding the allegations relating to violations of trade union and labour rights of trade union officials and workers of Brinks Colombia, the Committee, observing that these allegations were presented recently, requests the Government to send observations on the matter with all urgency.

(l) Concerning the court cases pending sentence with regard to three dismissals at the TEXTILIA Ltd. company, the Committee notes that the Government reports that: (1) a verdict was issued at second instance against Arnulfo Cruz Mora, upholding the rejection of the case against the company; (2) the case brought by Mr. Germán Bulla is at the documentary stage; (3) the case brought by Mr. Darío Ramirez was declared inadmissible because of defects. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the results of the cases brought by Germán Bulla and Darío Ramirez.

(m) With respect to the pending allegations in respect of which the Government has not sent information, concerning raids on headquarters, telephone tapping and surveillance of trade unionists at the premises of the Single Agricultural Trade Union Federation (FENSUAGRO) and of the executive committee of the CUT-Atlántico in the city of Barranquilla, the Committee urges the Government without delay to communicate its observations regarding these incidents, to take urgent measures to have investigations carried out, and to keep it informed of all developments in this connection.

Annex

Allegations concerning acts of violence on which the
Government has not sent information or has sent
insufficient information for it to be established
whether an investigation has been opened

Murders

  1. Manuel Francisco Giraldo, member of the executive committee of the National Union of Agricultural Workers (SINTRAINAGRO), murdered on 22 March 1995.
  2. Twenty-three workers who were members of SINTRAINAGRO, murdered on 29 August 1995.
  3. Alvaro David, member of the workers' committe of the "Los Planes" farm, affiliated to SINTRAINAGRO, murdered on 22 March 1996.
  4. Eduardo Ramos, trade union leader of "El Chispero" farm, Apartadó, Urabá, Antioquia, murdered on 14 July 1997.
  5. Marcos Pérez González, member of the Electrical Trade Union of Colombia (SINTRECOL), murdered on 10 October 1998.
  6. Jorge Ortega García, vice-president of the CUT, murdered on 20 October 1998 (Mr. Ortega García had presented new allegations connected with this case hours before his death).
  7. Ms. Hortensia Alfaro Banderas, vice-chairperson of SIDESC, on 24 October 1998 in the municipality of Manure, César administrative district.
  8. Jairo Cruz, president of the Union of Workers in Edible Oils, murdered on 26 October 1998 in the municipality of San Alberto, César administrative district.
  9. On 12 February 1999, in San Diego, César administrative district, the teachers Luis Peroza and Numael Vergel were murdered after having been kidnapped and tortured by unidentified armed groups. They were members of the César Association of Teachers.
  10. On 15 February 1999, Gilberto Tovar Escudero, official of the Workers' Union of Cartago municipality, Valle administrative district, was murdered.
  11. On 22 March, after having disappeared on 19 March, the trade union official Albeiro de Jesús Arce Velazquez was found dead in the river Cauca close to La Virginia municipality, Risaralda.
  12. Ricaurte Pérez Rengifo was kidnapped on 20 February in Medellín from the school where he taught and was found dead on 25 February on the outskirts of the city.
  13. The teacher Antonio Cerón Olarte del Hulla was murdered.

Attempted murders

  1. Gilberto Correño, leader of the Trade Union of Workers (USO), on 7 December 1996.
  2. César Blanco Moreno, president of the executive subcommittee of the Trade Union of Workers (USO), on 11 May 1998.
  3. On 5 April 1999, at 11 p.m. in Barranquilla, an attempt was made to murder three members of the national executive council of the Workers' Union of the Social Security Institute: Fernando Morales, now leader of the CUT, Alberto Pardo and Esaú Moreno.

Physical aggression and political repression

  1. Political repression against employees of public enterprises in Cartagena during a peaceful demonstration on 29 June 1995 (the Government reports that the Colombian authorities were not informed of the incident).
  2. A police assault, causing injuries, upon trade unionists César Castaño, Luis Alejandro Cruz Bernal and Martha Janeth Laguizamon, who were participating in an information day organized by the National Association of Transit Agents (ANDAT) on 6 January 1997.
  3. Mario Vergara and Heberto López, trade union officials of SITTELECOM, were brutally beaten by the police.
  4. On 13 October 1998, the police violently charged SITTELECOM workers, several of whom were injured.
  5. On 20 October 1998, in the city of Bogotá, on Carrera 7 between Calle 24 and Calle 27, riot police assaulted workers who were beginning a peaceful march to Plaza Bolívar, and on 22 October 1998, the police assaulted demonstrators who had gathered in Plaza Bolívar from all over the country.

Disappearances

  1. Jairo Navarro, trade unionist (6 June 1995).
  2. Rami Vaca, ECOPETROL union leader (27 October 1997).
  3. Misael Pinzón Granados, member of SINTRAINAGRO, kidnapped by persons believed to be members of the paramilitary forces in the municipality of Puerto Wilches, Santander, on 7 December 1997. According to information supplied by the DAS, it was found that the wife of the missing individual had submitted an appeal of habeas corpus to the judicial authorities after the case had been shelved for lack of evidence on which to proceed.
  4. Justiniano Herrera Escobar, working for the municipality of Antioquia, who formerly worked for Shellmar of Colombia, disappeared on 30 January 1999.

Death threats

  1. Ms. Bertina Calderón (vice-chairperson of the CUT).
  2. The members of the executive committee of FENSUAGRO
  3. Pedro Barón, president of the Tolima branch of the CUT, threatened by certain members of the security forces after having participated in a protest strike on 19 July 1995.
  4. The members of the executive committee of the Workers' Union of the Titán Corporation, Yumbo municipality, who received death threats from a paramilitary group named "Colombia Sin Guerrilla" --- COSINGER (Colombia without guerrillas) on 26 October 1995 and 17 May 1996:
  5. The members of the executive committe of the Association of Agriculturalists of Southern Bolívar (Justo Partor Quiroz, secretary, Roque León Salgado, treasurer and Bersaly Hurtado, attorney).
  6. The National Executive Committee of the CUT, Messrs. Jesús Antonio González Luna (director of the human rights department) and Domingo Rafael Tovar Arrieta (director of the administrative department).
  7. Oscar Arturo Orozco, Hernán de Jesús Ortiz, Wilso García Quiceno, Henry Ocampo, Sergio Díaz and Fernando Cardona.
  8. Jairo Antonio Cardona Mejía, president of the Workers' Union of Cartago Municipality and other executives (Albeiro Forero, Gilberto Tovar, Hernando Montoya, Marino Moreno and Gilberto Nieto Patiño, councillor).
  9. Clara Vaquero Sarmiento, chairperson of the Trade Union Association of Civil Servants of the Ministry of Defence, Armed Forces, National Police and related bodies, who received threats on 27 March 1998.
  10. Pablo Emilio Calvo, vice-president of the Workers' Union of Cartago municipality, was threatened by death in a pamphlet.
  11. Threats were made to individuals linked to the work of the trade union movement, including the Colombian Lawyers' Commission and the José Alvear Attorneys' Collective.
  12. José Anibal Quiroga, vice-president of the national committee of the Brinks company, received death threats in telephone calls urging him to abandon his trade union activities. His father also received threats.

Detentions

Unlawful imprisonment

Cases Nos. 1948 and 1955

Interim report

Complaints against the Government of Colombia
presented by
-- the Single Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CUT) and
-- the Trade Union of Workers of the Bogotá Telecommunications
Enterprise (SINTRATELEFONOS)

Allegations: Acts of anti-union discrimination

117. The Committee last examined these cases at its meeting in March 1999 [see 314th Report, paras. 42-77]. The Trade Union of Workers of the Bogotá Telecommunications Enterprise (SINTRATELEFONOS) presented new allegations in a communication dated 4 June 1999.

118. The Government sent its observations on these cases in communications dated 12 August and 15 September 1999.

119. Colombia 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. Previous examination of the cases

120. In its previous examination of the cases, when it considered allegations of acts of anti-union discrimination, the Committee made the following recommendations [see 314th Report, para. 77(a), (b), (d) and (e)]:

B. New allegations

121. In its communication of 4 June 1999, the Trade Union of Workers of the Bogotá Telecommunications Enterprise (SINTRATELEFONOS) states that the Government has not implemented the recommendation made by the Committee at its meeting in March 1999, in which it requested the Government to take measures with a view to furthering the reinstatement of the 23 SINTRATELEFONOS members who were dismissed by the Bogotá Telecommunications Enterprise (ETB) in November 1997. The complainant also alleges that on 27 January and 10 March 1999, 11 other members of the union (five workers at the Engativá Exchange and six from the commercial section) were dismissed by the company. Lastly, the complainant states that on 20 November 1998 the Attorney-General's Office ordered the dismissal of the proceedings against the union officers Mr. Víctor Manuel Bautista Ramírez and Ms. Sandra Patricia Cordero Tovar and declared closed the criminal proceedings that had been initiated against them for alleged acts of violence against an official.

C. The Government's reply

122. With regard to the Committee's request that measures be taken to further the reinstatement of the 23 members of SINTRATELEFONOS who were dismissed by the ETB in November 1997, the Government states in its communications of 12 August and 15 September 1999 that, as it had pointed out in its communication of 15 January 1999, the workers in question can apply to the ordinary labour courts competent to rule on legal disputes arising directly or indirectly from employment contracts and in particular to examine cases relating to trade union immunity of public employees, officials and individuals. Similarly, workers with trade union immunity who are dismissed without judicial review of the reasons given for dismissal can also initiate proceedings to secure their reinstatement and payment of any wage arrears that are owed to them. Owing to the division of powers which is a feature of any State based on the rule of law, it would be inappropriate for the Government of Colombia to favour the reinstatement of workers; in order to enforce those rights which the workers consider to have been infringed, they can apply to the ordinary labour courts or, as an interim measure, they can bring an action for protection (Acción de Tutela). The workers dismissed by the ETB have availed themselves of all the legal avenues available to them under Colombian law; despite this, and without waiting for the outcome of their applications to the courts, they presented a complaint based on the same allegations to the International Labour Organization.

123. The Government states that, although the competence of the Committee on Freedom of Association to examine the allegations does not require that all the available domestic remedies be exhausted, it is nevertheless the case that the Committee must take this into account when examining such a case, as the ILO itself has indicated (cf. ILO Law on freedom of association: Standards and procedures, Geneva, 1995, page 131, paragraphs 31, 32, 33). This applies in the context of the ETB which informed the Committee on 15 January 1999 that national law provided for the possibility of applying to independent courts, in this case the ordinary labour courts and, on an interim basis, for an action for protection (Acción de Tutela). The workers dismissed by the company thus lodged applications with the ordinary labour courts and with the judges for protection (jueces de tutela) who have already ruled in a number of cases, and in most of these cases the ruling was favourable to the workers (the Government supplies the names of the 15 workers whose reinstatement was ordered by the courts, as well as those of other workers whose cases are still pending).

124. As regards the dismissal of members of the union SINTRAELECOL at the Cundinamarca Power Company (14), the EPSA company in Cali (13) and the Bogotá Power Company (1), the Government states that the EPSA enterprise ordered the closure of thermal power-generation facilities on the grounds that they were totally uneconomical, and set up a voluntary severance and compensation programme. The Government adds that some workers did not join the programme and were dismissed in accordance with internal regulations which allow the dismissal with compensation of a certain proportion of the workforce without a reason being given, subject to payment of compensation. This was how the 13 dismissals referred to by the complainant came about. The Government states that the trade union SINTRAELECOL declared days of protest in other companies in the sector in order to defend the rights of the dismissed workers at the EPSA enterprise. In the case of the Cundinamarca Power Company, the stoppages resulting from the days of protest were declared illegal, since no collective bargaining was taking place and, furthermore, the service affected was an essential public service (within the meaning of Act No. 142/93). For these reasons the company dismissed 14 workers. The Government states that the dismissal of a worker in the Bogotá Power Company was based on discretionary powers and took place at a time when the company employed more than 4,000 workers. As regards the dismissal of Mr. Elías Quintana and Mr. Carlos Socha, the Government states that it requested information on the matter from the company, but that the company required more information in order to identify these workers on its payroll.

125. As regards the allegation concerning the dismissal of five trade union members at the Engativá Exchange of the ETB on 27 January 1999, the Government states that, in the case of employees Ms. Gladys Pérez and Mr. Jorge Alejandro Sánchez, the company decided unilaterally to terminate their contracts of employment, in accordance with clause 19.a, paragraph c, of the collective agreement in force at the time and section 6 of Act No. 50 of 1990. The former, which concerns stability of employment, states that:

Section 6 of Act No. 50, which concerns the termination of employment contracts without just cause, states that "Every contract of employment shall include a provision for rescission for non-compliance with the terms agreed, which shall provide for compensation for any damages at the expense of the party responsible for the non-compliance. This compensation shall cover both any loss of earnings and consequential damages". The Government rejects the view put forward by SINTRATELEFONOS, which portrays the dismissals as violations of trade union rights, freedom of association and collective bargaining, while the complainants have manifestly disregarded provisions of the collective agreement to which they had agreed. It is clear that the ETB dismissed its workers in accordance with the law in force at the time, which makes it liable to pay compensation to the workers concerned. The Government adds that if workers did not agree with the amount of compensation or with the manner in which a contract of employment was terminated, legal mechanisms are available to enforce rights which they may consider to have been infringed.

126. As regards the allegation concerning the dismissal of six workers employed in the commercial division of the ETB on 10 May 1999, the Government states that if the workers do not agree with the reasons given for the dismissals, ordinary labour law provides for ways of enforcing the rights which they believe have been infringed.

127. As regards the allegation concerning accusations and investigations by public bodies and the ETB covering some 800 workers, the Government notes that according to the company the Anti-Corruption Office is proceeding with case No. 069-97 involving about 500 workers for alleged stoppages on different days. According to the Government, the case in question has been initiated under the terms of Act No. 200 of 1995 (the Single Disciplinary Code) and is currently at the investigatory stage. The Government adds that Act No. 200 sets out the basic disciplinary provisions applicable to all public employees. It establishes the disciplinary control authority of bodies such as the National Public Prosecutor, legal representation bodies (personerías) and internal disciplinary monitoring offices. It ordered the creation of higher level offices within each state establishment to examine as a body of first instance any disciplinary proceedings against workers in the establishments in question. In accordance with this instrument, in 1997 the Bogotá Telecommunications Company set up its Anti-Corruption Office which carries out the functions specified in Act No. 200 of 1995, among others. The existence of this office does not impose any limitation on the disciplinary control authority of other bodies (the Public Prosecutor and the district representation bodies) which exercise disciplinary authority at their respective levels.

128. This explains how it is possible for disciplinary proceedings to be under way against workers in the Bogotá Telecommunications Company in both the Anti-Corruption Office and in various disciplinary bodies, provided that the different proceedings never relate to the same facts, i.e. actions can be initiated against a single official in any of the three bodies but for different reasons. Lastly, in exercising disciplinary authority at their respective levels, both the Public Prosecutor and the district representation offices can withdraw authority over disciplinary proceedings from the Anti-Corruption Office, which must then hand over the case as it currently stands. The action initiated by the Anti-Corruption Office in no way implies an accusation against a company employee but is simply undertaken in compliance with an order issued by an administrative authority. Nevertheless, by the discretionary powers available to the Ministry of Labour and Social Security (labour inspectorate) an investigation will be conducted into the disciplinary proceedings now under way with a view to determining whether or not there really is an anti-union campaign in the ETB.

129. Lastly, with regard to the criminal charges brought against trade union officers Mr. Víctor Manuel Bautista Ramírez and Ms. Patricia Cordero Tovar, the Government states that Prosecution Office No. 209, which specializes in cases of acts against the public administration and justice, declared the investigation closed on 12 January 1999.

C. The Committee's conclusions

130. The Committee notes that the allegations that had been left pending at its last examination of the case in March 1999 related to the dismissal of 28 members of the trade union SINTRAELECOL (14 at the Cundinamarca Power Company, 13 at the EPSA enterprise in Cali and one at the Bogotá Power Company), to the dismissal of Mr. Elías Quintana and Mr. Carlos Socha of the Bogotá Telecommunications Enterprise (ETB) and to the accusations and investigations by public bodies and the ETB covering some 800 workers. In addition, the Committee had requested the Government to inform it of any ruling handed down concerning the criminal charge against union officers Mr. Víctor Manuel Bautista Ramírez and Ms. Patricia Cordero Tovar. The Committee also notes the statements of the complainant SINTRATELEFONOS to the effect that the Government has not implemented the recommendation made by the Committee at its meeting in March 1999 in which it requested the Government to take measures with a view to furthering the reinstatement of the 23 SINTRATELEFONOS workers dismissed by the ETB enterprise in November 1997, and that the company dismissed another 11 trade unionists in January and March 1999.

131. As regards the allegations of the dismissal of members of SINTRAELECOL at the Cundinamarca Power Company, the EPSA in Cali and the Bogotá Power Company, and the dismissal of two union officers at the ETB enterprise, the Committee notes that, according to the Government: (1) the 13 workers at the EPSA enterprise in the city of Cali were dismissed in accordance with internal company regulations which allow the dismissal with compensation of a certain proportion of the workforce without just cause, after they had failed to join the voluntary severance programme started up by the company following the closure of thermal power-generation facilities considered to be totally uneconomical; (2) the 14 workers at the Cundinamarca Power Company were dismissed following the declaration by SINTRAELECOL of days of protest which were declared illegal because no collective bargaining was under way and the service affected was an essential public service; (3) the dismissal of a worker in the Bogotá Power Company was based on discretionary powers and occurred at a time when the company employed more than 4,000 workers; and (4) the ETB said that it required more information in order to identify the union officers Mr. Elías Quintana and Mr. Carlos Socha on its payroll. In this regard, the Committee regrets that the Government has not provided detailed information which would allow it to determine whether the workers in question were dismissed because of their trade union membership or legitimate trade union activities. Under these circumstances, the Committee urges the Government to provide information on the following points: (i) the total number of workers, divided by members and non-members of SINTRAELECOL, who were dismissed at the EPSA enterprise in Cali after failing to join the voluntary severance programme; (ii) the duration and nature of the days of protest declared by SINTRAELECOL (e.g. total interruptions of services, partial stoppages, failure to consider the needs of the public, etc.), and which body declared these actions to be illegal and thus precipitated the dismissal of workers at the Cundinamarca Power Company; and (iii) the reasons for the dismissals of the SINTRAELECOL member at the Bogotá Power Company and of the union officers Mr. Elías Quintana and Mr. Carlos Socha at the ETB (who, according to the complainant, enjoyed immunity by virtue of their trade union status). The Committee requests the Government to send this information without delay.

132. As regards the allegation that the Government has failed to implement the recommendation made by the Committee on the occasion of its last examination of the case in March 1999, which stated that the Government should take measures with a view to furthering the reinstatement of the 23 trade unionists who were dismissed in November 1997 at the ETB, the Committee notes that according to the Government, the courts have ordered the reinstatement of 15 of the 23 workers concerned and that court proceedings are under way with regard to the remaining workers. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that the 15 workers whose reinstatement has been ordered are actually reinstated, and expresses the hope that the other workers will be reinstated in the near future.

133. As regards the new allegations presented by the complainant SINTRATELEFONOS concerning the dismissal of 11 other members of this organization at the ETB in January and March 1999 (five workers at the Engativá Exchange and six in the commercial division), the Committee notes that according to the Government: (1) with regard to the workers dismissed at the Engativá Exchange, the company decided unilaterally to terminate the contracts of employment of Ms. Gladys Pérez and Mr. Jorge Alejandro Sánchez under the terms of clause 19 of the collective agreement in force at the time (according to the Government, the collective agreement permits dismissal without just cause on the payment of compensation) and of section 6 of Act No. 50 of 1990 (concerning the payment of compensation by the party which fails to comply with the terms of a contract of employment); and (2) as regards the dismissals in the commercial division, the Government indicates that if the workers do not accept the reasons given for these dismissals (the complainant maintains that the workers were dismissed supposedly because of low productivity), there are remedies available under ordinary labour law to enforce the rights which they consider to have been infringed. In this respect, the Committee regrets that the Government has confined itself to providing general information which does not enable it to determine whether the dismissals in question were motivated by anti-union considerations, irrespective of whether or not the collective agreement allowed dismissal of workers without just cause or whether legislation provides for the possibility of applying to the courts for redress. Under these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that an investigation is carried out into this matter and, if the workers concerned are found to have been dismissed on the grounds of their trade union membership or legitimate trade union activities, to ensure that they are reinstated immediately in their posts. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in this regard.

134. As regards the criminal charges brought against trade union officers Mr. Víctor Manuel Bautista Ramírez and Ms. Patricia Cordero Tovar for alleged acts of violence against an official, the Committee notes that, according to the complainant SINTRATELEFONOS and the Government, the Attorney-General's Office ordered the dismissal of the proceedings against the union officers in question and declared the case closed.

135. As regards the allegation concerning accusations and investigations by public bodies and the ETB covering some 800 workers, the Committee notes that according to the Government, the Anti-Corruption Office has initiated proceedings in connection with alleged stoppages involving 500 workers which are currently at the investigatory stage, and that the Ministry of Labour and Social Security has used its discretionary power to order an investigation into the proceedings currently under way with a view to determining whether or not they constitute an anti-union campaign. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to inform it of the specific charges brought against the workers by the Anti-Corruption Office and to keep it informed of the outcome of the investigation planned by the Ministry of Labour with a view to determining whether or not there is an anti-union campaign in the ETB enterprise.

The Committee's recommendations

136. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:

(a) With regard to the dismissals of members of the trade union organization SINTRAELECOL at a number of undertakings, the Committee urges the Government to provide information without delay on the following points: (i) the total number of workers, divided by members and non-members of SINTRAELECOL, who were dismissed at the EPSA enterprise in Cali after failing to join the voluntary severance programme; (ii) the duration and nature of the days of protest declared by SINTRAELECOL (total interruptions of services, partial stoppages, failure to consider the needs of the public, etc.), and which body declared these actions to be illegal and thus precipitated the dismissal of workers at the Cundinamarca Power Company; and (iii) the reasons for the dismissals of the SINTRAELECOL member at the Bogotá Power Company and of the union officers Mr. Elías Quintana and Mr. Carlos Socha at the Bogotá Telecommunications Enterprise (ETB).

(b) With regard to the request made to the Government during the Committee's March 1999 meeting to take measures with a view to furthering the reinstatement of the 23 members of the trade union SINTRATELEFONOS who were dismissed in November 1997 at the ETB enterprise, the Committee requests the Government to ensure the full implementation of the reinstatement order handed down by the Supreme Court in respect of 15 of the dismissed workers, and expresses the hope that the remaining trade unionists will be reinstated in the near future.

(c) As regards the alleged dismissal of members of the trade union organization SINTRATELEFONOS at the ETB enterprise in January and March 1999 (five workers at the Engativá Exchange and six in the commercial division), the Committee requests the Government to investigate the matter and, if it is established that the workers in question were dismissed on grounds of their trade union membership or legitimate trade union activities, to ensure that they are immediately reinstated in their posts. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in this regard.

(d) As regards the accusations and investigations by public bodies and the ETB covering some 800 workers, the Committee requests the Government to inform it of the specific charges against the workers named by the complainants -- 500, according to the Government -- by the Anti-Corruption Office. The Committee also requests the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the investigation planned by the Ministry of Labour with a view to determining whether or not there is an anti-union campaign in the ETB enterprise.

Case No. 1962

Interim report

Complaint against the Government of Colombia
presented by
-- the Single Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CUT)
-- the General Confederation of Democratic Workers (CGTD) and
-- the Public Works Trade Union (SINTRAMINOBRAS)

Allegations: Dismissals connected with restructuring,
in breach of a collective agreement

137. The Committee examined Case No. 1962 most recently at its March 1999 meeting [see the Committee's 314th Report, paragraphs 78 to 96].

138. The CUT supplied additional information in communications dated 10 November 1998, 17 March, 25 and 29 June, 15 July, 4 August, and 3 September 1999. The CGTD sent new information in communications dated 17 March, 20 April and 18 May 1999. The Public Works Trade Union SINTRAMINOBRAS sent new allegations in a communication dated 14 April 1999.

139. The Government sent its observations in communications dated 12 August and 3 September 1999.

140. Colombia 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. Previous examination of the case

141. In its previous examination of the case, when it considered allegations relating to dismissals connected with restructuring, in breach of the collective agreement, the Committee made the following recommendations:

B. New allegations

142. In a communication dated 10 November 1998, the CUT alleges that what had appeared to be an isolated instance of the labour courts disregarding the right of workers to reinstatement in the case of unjust and illegal dismissals has in fact been applied to all the unionized workers who were dismissed and sought reinstatement. The CUT refers specifically to the principle enunciated by the Supreme Court of Justice according to which "if the employer, in breach of the law, proceeds to carry out a partial or total closure of an undertaking resulting in the termination of employment contracts, there is no legally enforceable claim to reinstatement, even if such a right exists in legislation or in a collective agreement or accord" (ruling of 2 December 1997, Reg.10.157, Alvaro Vargas Gutiérrez and others versus the Municipality of Neiva). The CUT alleges that as a result of this, there is no longer any guaranteed right to reinstatement under the terms of a collective agreement, since it suffices for an employer to illegally close down his undertakings for the applicable collective agreement to be deprived of any legal force. The CUT cites as an example two rulings given by the Labour Chamber of Cassation in which the principle in question was set out, namely: the ruling of 30 April 1998 in case No. 10.425; and the ruling of 17 July 1998 in case No. 10.779.

143. In communications dated 17 March and 20 April 1999, the CUT and CGTD respectively indicated that in February and March 1999, the Disciplinary Chamber of the Sectional Council of the Huila judiciary gave two rulings ordering the Neiva High Court (Chamber for Civil Labour Affairs) to re-examine the actions initiated by the trade union leadership in the Municipalities of Neiva and Pitalito on the grounds that the Chamber erred in law. Consequently, according to the CGTD, the reinstatement of the dismissed workers might be possible. An appeal was lodged against the ruling relating to the Municipality of Pitalito by the magistrates concerned and the municipal authorities.

144. The CGTD in a communication of 18 May 1999 also states that the High Council of the Colombian Judiciary gave a ruling on 22 April 1999 ordering the High Court of Neiva to re-examine the case within 48 hours, taking into account the principle of benefit of penal law embodied in article 53 of the Political Constitution, which could imply the reinstatement of the Pitalito workers. The CGTD alleges that the ruling in question suggests that there was indeed a flagrant violation of labour standards by the municipal authorities and some judges.

145. The union SINTRAMINOBRAS in its communication of 14 April 1999 alleges that Mr. Hernando Oviedo Polo, Mr. Fernando Leyva Zuleta and Mr. Omar Muñoz Cabrera, who were members of the Public Works Trade Union SINTRAMINOBRAS Executive Board, were dismissed at the end of December 1994, although the Ministry of Transport had not obtained the authorization required for such action under sections 405 and 406 to 411 of the Labour Code. Proceedings were initiated to obtain the reinstatement of the trade unionists in question and the labour court judge ruled that they enjoyed legal protection by virtue of their trade union office. This was confirmed by the Chamber for Civil Labour Affairs which, however, also found that the dismissals had been in keeping with a constitutional mandate and with the wishes of the Law Ministry and did not require judicial authorization. It is also alleged that other trade union officials in Barranquilla, Neiva and Santafé de Bogotá, who were dismissed in similar circumstances, have been reinstated.

146. The CUT alleges that Mr. Oscar de Jesús Martinez Quintero, Mr. Alvaro Rojas Tovar, Mr. Hernando Cortes Yate, Mr. Isauro Lasso Vargas and Mr. Ascencio Gutierrez Chala, all of whom were members of the Public Works Trade Union at the Institute of Hydrology, Meteorology and Land Development (HIMAT, now INAT), were unjustly and illegally dismissed in August 1993 and received compensation below the statutory amount. In particular, the principle according to which replacement of the employer does not in itself render a contract of employment void, was disregarded and no account was taken, when compensation was calculated, of time spent working in INCORA, the entity replaced by HIMAT, which resulted in a failure to make the appropriate payments. Likewise, they failed to pay for overtime.

C. The Government's reply

147. The Government of Colombia reiterates that in the past it has been willing to consult the social actors in formulating state restructuring policies and procedures at all levels of the public administration. It cites the examples of the programmes that have been implemented to prepare workers not included in new staffing plans by enhancing their employment mobility through training in skills, occupations and technologies which should help them to find suitable employment. It adds that these initiatives have been and continue to be financially supported by the State and have helped workers to become independent. It also adds that the advisability of holding consultations on all labour policies was established in constitutional and legal terms (article 56 of the Constitution and Act 278/96). The Government also states that the President of the Republic issued Circular No. 02 in March 1999 welcoming the Committee's recommendation that there should be consultation on state restructuring with the workers concerned.

148. As regards the allegation of failure to comply with a collective agreement by the municipal authorities of Neiva, the Government explains that the workers who were dismissed as a result of the restructuring of the Public Works Department in the Municipality of Neiva lodged a complaint of violation of a clause in the collective agreement which according to them gave them complete stability of employment. The Ministry of Labour, (Labour, Inspection and Monitoring Division, Regional Labour Directorate of Huila) as the authority of first instance fined the Municipality for violating clause No. 3 of the collective agreement; the decision was upheld by the Ministry of Labour, as the authority of second instance. In the third and final administrative appeal, the two previous rulings were upheld, giving the sanctions imposed by the Government on the Municipality of Neiva the status of a definitive judgement.

149. As regards the alleged dismissals of officials of HIMAT (now INAT), the Government states that they occurred under the terms of an interim mandate of the national Constitution (article 20) which required the Government to "abolish, merge and restructure entities in the executive branch, public institutions and mixed-economy national companies"; to that end, in accordance with this mandate, the Government issued Decrees Nos. 2135/92 and 1598/93, ratified by Agreement No. 53 of 1993 of the HIMAT Executive Board, and proceeded with the abolition of posts which led to the complaint. The Government maintains that the Institute was restructured in accordance with legal and constitutional provisions in force at the time. It adds that the workers concerned (Mr. Hernando Bonilla Buendía, Mr. Jesús Antonio Mejía Díaz and Mr. José Antonio Alarcón), in a September judgement, obtained compensation for infringement of certain economic rights, but the judges found that their dismissals were lawful although without a just cause, and that they would therefore not be reinstated but would receive compensation including retirement benefits as a sanction for the employer. The Government is sending information on the status of the proceedings initiated by Mr. Hernando Bonilla and others, Mr. Ascencio Gutiérrez Chala and others, Mr. Cesar Augusto Ramírez and others, Mr. Fernando González Grande and others, and Mr. Idalid Tafur Calderón, against the INAT.

D. The Committee's conclusions

150. The Committee notes that the allegations made by the complainants relate to dismissals of workers and trade union officials in the Municipalities of Neiva and Pitalito, at the Institute of Hydrology, Meteorology and Land Development (Neiva section) and in the Ministry of Public Works and Transport and National Highway Districts.

151. As regards the abolition of the Public Works Office in the Municipality of Neiva which resulted in the dismissal of 155 workers, the Committee recalls that in its previous recommendations concerning these allegations it reminded the Government of the importance which it attaches to "the principle that Governments consult with trade union organizations to discuss the consequences of restructuring on the employment and working conditions of employees". In this regard, the Committee takes note of Presidential Circular No. 02 of March 1999, in particular the provision according to which procedures for restructuring state bodies should be broad and involve all persons affected and should above all allow participation of the trade unions. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that this is implemented so as to allow consultations with trade union organizations on the consequences of restructuring for employment and working conditions.

152. As regards the alleged failure of the Neiva municipal authorities to comply with the stability of employment clause in the collective agreement by dismissing the 155 workers referred to in the preceding paragraph, the Committee notes that according to the Government, at every instance the Ministry of Labour (Labour, Inspection and Monitoring Division, Regional Labour Directorate of Huila) fined the Municipality for violating the clause in question. The Committee notes that, according to the CUT in its previous allegations [see 314th Report of the Freedom of Association Committee, para. 81], the Supreme Court of Justice in this specific case ruled that reinstatement of the workers concerned was not legally possible, given that the posts had been abolished, that the municipal authority was not exonerated from paying compensation for the dismissals but that, under the terms of the ruling, such compensation had not been granted because it had not been requested. The Committee considers that the collective agreement which guaranteed stability of employment of the workers was violated, which constitutes a violation of the principles of freedom of association. Under these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring about the reinstatement in the public administration in question, without loss of pay of the 155 workers who were dismissed. If this is not practicable, given the considerable time that has elapsed since the dismissals, the Committee requests the Government to take steps to ensure that the workers receive full compensation without delay.

153. As regards the alleged dismissals without prior judicial authorization of trade union officials of HIMAT (now INAT) (Alberto Medina Medina, José Antonio Alarcón, José Antonio Mejía Díaz, Alvaro Cabrera Achury, Hernando Bonilla Buendía), the Committee notes that according to the Government, the dismissals in question were carried out under the terms of provisional constitutional mandate (provisional article 20) ordering the Government to "abolish, merge and restructure entities in the executive branch, public institutions and mixed-economy national companies", and that the Institute was restructured on the basis of legal and constitutional provisions in force at the time. The Committee notes the ruling, a copy of which has been provided by the Government, in which the Third Labour Tribunal of Neiva (court of first instance) ruled that the dismissals were legal but without just cause and for this reason it would not reinstate the workers but would compensate them. The Committee recalls that in one case in which a government considered the dismissal of nine workers to be part of state restructuring programmes, the Committee emphasized "the advisability of giving priority to workers' representatives with regard to their retention in employment in case of reduction of the workforce, to ensure their effective protection" [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition, 1996, paragraph 961]. Under these circumstances, the Committee urges the Government to take measures to bring about the reinstatement of the dismissed trade union officials and, in the event that it is not practicable to do so, given the considerable time that has elapsed since the dismissals, to ensure that they receive full compensation without delay.

154. With regard to the new allegations concerning inadequate compensation paid by the HIMAT (now INAT) to Mr. Oscar de Jesús Martínez Quintero, Mr. Alvaro Rojas Tovar, Mr. Hernando Cortes Yate, Mr. Isauro Lasso Vargas and Mr. Ascencio Gutierrez Chala, all of whom were members of the Trade Union of Public Servants and Employees of HIMAT and were dismissed in 1993 by the Institute of Hydrology, Meteorology and Land Development, the Committee notes that the information supplied by the complainants does not include anything that would lead to the conclusion that the matter is linked to the exercise of trade union rights. Under these circumstances, the Committee is unable to express an opinion on these allegations.

155. As regards the ruling, which has been criticized by the complainant, rejecting the reinstatement of the SINTRAMINOBRAS officials (Hernando Oviedo Polo, Fernando Leyva Zuleta and Omar Muñoz Cabrera), who were dismissed at the end of December 1994 without the previous judicial authorization required under law, the Committee notes that the Government has sent no observations on the matter and therefore urges the Government to reply without delay to the allegation and to provide a copy of any rulings handed down in this regard.

The Committee's recommendations

156. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:

(a) As regards the restructuring which led to the dismissal of 155 officials in the Municipality of Neiva, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that Presidential Circular No. 02 is implemented with a view to ensuring that consultations are held with trade union organizations on the consequences of restructuring for employment and working conditions.

(b) As regards the alleged failure to apply the collective agreement in the Municipality of Neiva, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring about the reinstatement without loss of pay of the 155 dismissed workers in the public administration in question. If this is not practicable given the considerable time that has elapsed since the dismissals, the Committee requests the Government to take steps to ensure that the workers receive full compensation without delay.

(c) As regards the alleged dismissal of officials of HIMAT (now INAT), the Committee urges the Government to take measures to bring about the reinstatement of the dismissed union officials and, in the event that it is not practicable given the considerable time that has elapsed since the dismissals, to ensure that they receive full compensation without delay.

(d) As regards the ruling, criticized by the complainant, rejecting the reinstatement of SINTRAMINOBRAS officials, the Committee urges the Government to reply without delay to the allegation and to provide a copy of any ruling handed down in this regard.

Case No. 1964

Interim report

Complaint against the Government of Colombia
presented by
the Trade Union of Glass and Allied Workers of Colombia
(SINTRAVIDRICOL)

Allegations: Anti-union interference and discrimination,
acts of intimidation and non-compliance with the terms
of a collective agreement

157. The Committee examined this case at its March 1999 meeting and submitted an interim report to the Governing Body [see the Committee's 314th Report, paras. 97 to 113, approved by the Governing Body at its 274th Session in March 1999].

158. Subsequently, the Government sent new observations in communications dated 12 August and 3 September 1999. In a recent communication dated 2 October 1999, the complainant presented new allegations and information.

159. Colombia 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. Previous examination of the case

160. At the Committee's March 1999 meeting, when it examined the present case, a number of allegations of anti-union interference and discrimination, and of failure by CONALVIDRIOS S.A. to comply with clauses in the relevant collective agreement, remained pending. Specifically, the complainant had alleged the following [see 314th Report, paras. 100 to 102]:

161. The Committee takes note of the Government's statements to the effect that the complainant had not brought any of these allegations to the attention of the authorities and that there were administrative and legal measures available in cases of violation of the law, including provisions requiring the reinstatement of workers dismissed in violation of trade union law. The Government explains that the fact that an administrator at the undertaking in question subsequently obtained a post at the Ministry of Labour is not illegal or objectionable, although once it was informed of the allegations it brought them to the attention of the competent authority. The Government also indicated that the human rights aspects of the complaint will be investigated by the Inter-Institutional Human Rights Office of the Ministry of Labour [see 314th Report, para. 111].

162. The Committee made the following recommendation [see 314th Report, para. 113]:

B. The Government's reply

163. In its communication of 12 August 1999, the Government reiterates what it had already said in its observations of 15 January 1999, since no complaint concerning the specific allegations made by SINTRAVIDRICOL had been lodged with the Ministry of Labour and Social Security. The information supplied is not of a general nature but is very grave and not consistent with the information available to the Government. Since SINTRAVIDRICOL has still not communicated to the Government the information which it has presented to the Committee, the Government has ordered that an inquiry be carried out and indicated that, with regard to the dismissals, owing to the division of powers, the allegations should be brought to the attention of the labour courts, just as any criminal allegations must be brought to the attention of the prosecution service and the criminal courts.

164. In its communication of 3 September 1999, the Government reiterates that, as it had maintained in its observations of 15 January, the Government had ordered an investigation into the allegations presented to the ILO, since the Ministry of Labour had not been notified of them. The Government refers to the report submitted on 9 August 1999 by the Head of the Inspection and Monitoring Division of the Bogotá and Cundinamarca Regional Labour Department, according to which, "On 6 July 1999 a report was sent to the Technical Directorate of Labour stating that the application made by SINTRAVIDRICOL to the ILO's Committee on Freedom of Association has been closed at the request of Mr. Argelio Vargas Rodríguez, the union's legal representative". The Government considers that, in view of the fact that the complainant has withdrawn the complaint, the Committee should regard the case as closed.

C. New information and allegations from the complainant

165. In its communication dated 2 October 1999 the complainant presents new allegations. It also states that it is withdrawing its complaint only with regard to aspects relating to economic benefits and trade union membership dues.

D. The Committee's conclusions

166. The Committee notes that the complainant denies that it has withdrawn its complaint in its entirety and that it has done so only with regard to the matter of economic benefits and trade union membership dues.

167. Under these circumstances, noting that the authorities have closed the investigation in the present case on the basis of erroneous information to the effect that the complainant had withdrawn its complaint in its entirety, the Committee reiterates its request to the Government to ensure that a thorough investigation is carried out into each of the allegations presented by the complainant (except for those concerning economic benefits and trade union membership dues) and to inform it in this respect without delay.

168. The Committee also requests the Government to send its observations on the recent new allegations contained in the complainant's communication of 2 October 1999.

The Committee's recommendations

169. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:

(a) The Committee requests the Government to ensure that a thorough investigation is carried out into each of the allegations presented by the complainant (except for those concerning economic benefits and trade union membership dues) and to inform it in this respect without delay.

(b) The Committee requests the Government to send its observations on the recent new allegations contained in the complainant's communication of 2 October 1999.

Case No. 1973

Interim report

Complaint against the Government of Colombia
presented by
The Association of Managers and Technical Staff of
the Colombian Petroleum Industry (ADECO)

Allegations: Favourable treatment of a particular trade union organization,
violation of the right to collective bargaining, discrimination against members
of an organization, interference by an employer and anti-union practices

170. The Committee last examined this case at its March 1999 meeting [see 314th Report, paras. 114-127]. The Government sent its observations in communications dated 12 August and 3 September 1999.

171. Colombia 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. Previous examination of the case

172. The Committee observes that in this case the complainant had alleged that in the process of collective bargaining, the trade union USO and the enterprise ECOPETROL had excluded ADECO and entered into a collective agreement (the legality of which was questioned by the complainant) which was also being applied to members of ADECO, despite the fact that the other union (USO) did not represent more than 50 per cent of the workforce at the enterprise (a legal prerequisite for negotiating on behalf of all the workers). According to the complainant, this situation had: (1) caused ADECO members to lose the acquired rights which they had enjoyed under the terms of an agreement concluded in 1997 with the management of ECOPETROL (which ADECO claims to be valid); (2) resulted in discrimination against them in terms of the entitlements and benefits enjoyed by the other workers; (3) led to the loss by ADECO of trade union safeguards such as trade union immunity, union leave, etc.; and (4) forced members of ADECO to pay dues to USO. At the same time, the complainant had stressed that the Ministry of Labour had not conducted the trade union census which it had requested to determine the representativeness of the two unions operating at the enterprise, and emphasized that USO had not complied with an accord with ADECO which guaranteed not only that a joint list of demands for negotiation would be put forward but also that an ADECO negotiator would be allowed to participate in the talks. Lastly, ADECO alleged that when the collective agreement had been signed, representatives of the company had put pressure on workers to leave the union, which had resulted in a large number of resignations by members. In this context, the Committee had noted: (1) the Government's statement that instructions had been given to start an inquiry immediately into the allegations in question, given that ADECO had not made any complaints to the Ministry of Labour concerning many of the issues raised; and (2) that ADECO on 8 October 1998 had withdrawn its request to the competent authority for a trade union census at ECOPETROL.

173. In this respect, at its March 1999 meeting, the Committee had formulated the following recommendations [see 314th Report, para. 128]:

B. The Government's reply

174. In its communications dated 12 August and 3 September 1999, the Government states that the vast majority of the points at issue in the allegations before the Committee were examined and resolved through Decision No. 002967 of 9 December 1997 issued by the head of the Inspection Division of the Regional Directorate of Labour and Social Security of Bogotá and Cundinamarca, from which it is clear that the Government has made considerable administrative efforts and hence given due attention to this case. Lastly, the Government points out that it is clear from the abovementioned decision that the trade union organization ADECO has not lodged any complaint against ECOPETROL or the trade union organization USO with the Inspection Division of the Regional Labour Directorate which could have led to an administrative inquiry by the labour authorities, since, as has already been pointed out, the infringements reported to this department by the abovementioned trade union have been duly examined and a decision taken in conformity with the law and pursuant to the competence prescribed by law.

C. The Committee's conclusions

175. The Committee observes that in its previous examination of the case it had requested the Government to communicate without delay the outcome of the inquiry that had been conducted into the different aspects of this case according to the Government, which should cover all of the allegations made by the complainant (specifically, the complainant had alleged that in the process of collective bargaining, the trade union USO and the enterprise ECOPETROL had excluded ADECO and entered into a collective agreement which had: (1) caused ADECO members to lose the acquired rights which they had enjoyed under the terms of an agreement concluded in 1997 with the management of ECOPETROL (which ADECO claims to be valid); (2) resulted in discrimination against ADECO members in terms of the entitlements and benefits enjoyed by the other workers; (3) led to the loss by ADECO of trade union safeguards such as trade union immunity, union leave, etc.; (4) forced members of ADECO to pay dues to USO; and (5) when the collective agreement had been signed, representatives of the company put pressure on workers to leave the union, which had resulted in a large number of resignations by members.

176. In this respect, the Committee notes that the Government states that: (1) the vast majority of the allegations had been examined and resolved through Decision No. 002967 of 9 December 1997 issued by the head of the Inspection Division of the Regional Directorate of Labour and Social Security of Bogotá and Cundinamarca; and (2) it is clear from this decision that the trade union organization ADECO has not lodged any complaint against ECOPETROL or the trade union organization USO that could have led to an administrative inquiry, since the infringements reported by ADECO had been duly examined and a decision taken in conformity with the law.

177. The Committee deeply deplores the fact that the information communicated by the Government does not include the text of the administrative decisions that have been handed down and that it cannot be deduced from the information provided that the inquiry initiated by the administrative authorities covered all of the allegations made by the complainant. In any case, the Committee observes that the Government does not provide any information on the outcome of the inquiry into the alleged acts of discrimination against the trade union organization ADECO and its members. In these circumstances, the Committee once again urges the Government to take immediate steps to initiate an inquiry into all of the allegations and, on the basis of the information obtained, to communicate detailed observations in this respect, and to send the text of all the administrative decisions handed down to date.

178. Lastly, as regards the allegation that the Ministry of Labour did not carry out the trade union census requested by ADECO to determine the representativeness of the two trade unions operating in the enterprise, the Committee recalls that at its March 1999 meeting it had requested the complainant to provide additional information concerning the withdrawal of the request for a trade union census. In this respect, noting that the complainant has not communicated the information requested, the Committee will not continue its examination of this allegation.

The Committee's recommendation

179. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendation:

Case No. 2015

Interim report

Complaint against the Government of Colombia
presented by
the Association of Public Servants employed by the Health Service
of the Armed Forces and National Police (ASEMIL)

Allegations: Non-compliance with a collective agreement; challenges
to trade union statutes; suspension of deductions of trade union membership
dues; assault against trade union officials; illegal deductions
for days of strike action; refusal to negotiate

180. The complaint in the present case is contained in a communication dated 23 February 1999 from the Association of Public Servants employed by the Health Service of the Armed Forces and National Police (ASEMIL). ASEMIL sent additional information in a communication dated 16 April 1999.

181. The Government sent partial observations in a communication dated 15 September 1999.

182. Colombia 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. The complainant's allegations

183. In its communication of 23 February 1999, the Association of Public Servants employed by the Health Service of the Armed Forces and National Police (ASEMIL) states that it represents workers employed by the health service used by the armed forces and the national police. It adds that on 7 May 1997, the Ministry of Defence and representatives of ASEMIL signed an agreement containing provisions relating to employment stability, prohibition of reprisals, wages, rights of association and the creation of a committee to follow up these measures. Most of the provisions in the agreement were disregarded by the Government. This was reflected in a failure to implement a pay harmonization review, interference with the right of association and refusal to grant trade union licences.

184. The complainant indicates that the Deputy Minister of Defence announced on 20 April 1998 the dismissal of the trade union's officers and, in another act of interference, challenged the Association's new statutes (the Ministry of Labour dismissed the challenge) and suspended deductions from wages of union membership dues, thereby creating economic difficulties for the organization. It adds that while the deductions have been restored, the administration has done nothing with regard to the outstanding dues.

185. In this regard, the complainant alleges that from early April 1998 onwards, following the failure to implement the agreement and pay cuts, ASEMIL launched a series of national protests and sent letters to various authorities which led to continuous harassment of the union members and officials through the deployment of the military at workplaces from 1 April onwards. This took the form of verbal abuse of anyone participating in the protests, threats of disciplinary action against trade unionists for their legitimate union activities, the dissemination and display of defamatory statements regarding trade union activists and incitement of the general public to action against them, and the release of addresses of private residences and consulting centres to which only hospital authorities and the police have access. These acts were particularly serious in Cartagena.

186. Specifically, ASEMIL states that on 20 and 21 May a nationwide protest took place with a particularly large turnout at the Naval Hospital at Cartagena and at the Central Military Hospital in Bogotá. The Government immediately deployed military personnel at these centres, deploying armed soldiers at facilities including operating theatres; demonstrating workers were physically assaulted, tear gas was used indiscriminately, causing harm to hospital patients as well as demonstrators. ASEMIL emphasizes that the stoppage did not affect essential services and was confined to purely administrative activities and elective care which in no case affected the lives or safety of patients.

187. According to the complainant, the Director of the Central Military Hospital petitioned the Ministry of Labour to declare illegal what it called the "stoppage or cessation of activities", requested authorization to dismiss any workers who had participated in the stoppage, and sought the removal of the trade union privileges which protected some individuals and the freedom to remove all workers who persisted in the stoppage for whatever reason. Similar requests were made by the Cartagena Naval Hospital.

188. ASEMIL states that the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, through resolutions Nos. 1293 and 1320 of 1998, declared the stoppages at the Central Military Hospital and the Cartagena Naval Hospital to be illegal, but rejected the other claims made by the applicants, i.e. the dismissals were not authorized. According to the complainant, the resolutions declaring the stoppages to be illegal were issued without any guarantee of due process and disregarded the evidence of inspectors' reports indicating that emergency services, cardiology, oncology and other areas were not affected and essential services were maintained. They also disregarded the fact that in certain areas the army prevented workers from entering the premises.

189. The complainant adds that during the trade union actions of 20 and 21 May and those during subsequent days and weeks, other serious violations occurred. These are summarized as follows: (i) military occupation of workplaces by armed soldiers whose presence disturbed patients and disrupted the work of essential service staff; (ii) placards referring to the protest (inside the Central Military Hospital) were destroyed in the early morning of 22 May by marines who verbally and physically attacked some of the union's members; and (iii) there was harassment of trade unionists who remained in the encampment outside the Central Military Hospital compound and of trade unionists who organized protest marches inside. During the harassment actions, military police units made indiscriminate and reckless use of water cannons and tear gas not only against the trade unionists but also against visitors, causing harm to some of the patients. As a result of these actions the following union members were injured: Gloria Arias Arias; Angela Rocío Ramírez; José Noé Montenegro Sánchez; Ofelia González Pulido; Luz Mary Tusso Beltrán and Luz Castañeda Orjuela. Forty-two union members in all were injured and as a result 100 staff days were lost due to incapacity.

190. The complainant alleges that the union's entire executive board was dismissed and all the dismissed workers were denied access to the premises, the purpose of this action being to isolate them from union bases. (The complainant supplies the names and job titles of the union officials concerned).

191. Lastly, the complainant indicates that in dismissing the union officials and members, the Government violated Conventions Nos. 87 and 98 and that: (1) the dismissals of the ASEMIL members were based on the resolutions of illegality issued by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security; (2) at the Cartagena Naval Hospital more than 60 of the union's members were docked one month's pay, although according to the Ministry's resolution the stoppages lasted only two days; (3) at the Central Military Hospital, more than 200 union members were docked up to one week's wages which was not in compliance with the Ministry's resolution; (4) many of the workers whose wages were docked in this way went on working precisely because they were involved with essential services; and (5) these actions of interference, as well as other forms of pressure and threats, led to many resignations from the union.

192. In its communication of 16 April 1999, ASEMIL alleges that the Ministry of Defence is still refusing to discuss the demands of the more than 1,000 people employed in the country's 144 dispensaries who are represented by ASEMIL, arguing that it is not obliged to do so because the employees concerned are public employees; in doing so, it is disregarding ILO Convention No. 98 and Act No. 411 of 1997 approving Convention No. 151, which expressly gives such workers the right of negotiation.

193. As regards the dismissal of 14 members of the union's national executive and the Cartagena branch executive, ASEMIL states that although the Constitutional Court reviewed three of the 14 actions for protection (tutela) brought by the union and ruled in favour of the workers by ordering their immediate reinstatement, the Ministry of Defence and the Director of the Central Military Hospital have refused to consider reinstating the other union officials, thereby adding violation of the fundamental right of equality to the many other abuses that have occurred.

194. The complainant also alleges that it has been declared a "military object" by armed groups and that, thus far, there has been no effective response to the grave threats that have been made. ASEMIL adds that on 22 February last, an attempt was made on the life of Dr. María Clara Baquero, President of ASODEFENSA (an industry trade union organization in the Ministry of Defence), who was wounded in the attack. (This allegation is examined in the context of another allegation against the Government of Colombia, in Case No. 1787).

B. The Government's reply

195. In its communication of 15 September 1999, the Government states that the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, through resolution No. 000076 of 22 January 1999, reserved judgement on the alleged violation of section 400 of the Substantive Labour Code (concerning deductions of trade union dues), leaving it to the parties concerned to seek a resolution through the ordinary courts. In accordance with the decision (auto) of 26 July of this year, the ruling became enforceable to the extent to which the trade union privileges argued come under the exclusive jurisdiction of the ordinary courts.

196. Resolution No. 000076 of 22 January 1999 contains the following provisions regarding trade union membership dues: (a) the Ministry reserves judgement on the allegations made by ASEMIL against the Ministry of Defence (Health Service of the Armed Forces and Central Military Hospital); following the closure of the National Institute of Health it was not possible to determine if its obligations were passed on to the armed forces' health service, given that the reforms of ASEMIL statutes was notified in March 1998; (b) the resolution stated that the bodies in question did not violate the right of association by requiring that their regulations be observed by ASEMIL officials in order to enter the premises; on 25 February of this year, this ruling became enforceable; (c) as regards the non-implementation of the pay review, this was communicated to the Central Hospital which maintains that the review has been implemented but that it has not been possible to include the support and general service workers whose jobs cannot be covered by Decree No. 194 of 30 January 1997; and (d) in the face of the alleged refusal to negotiate, through resolution No. 2942 of 21 December 1998, it was stated that there was no such refusal. The decision became definitive through resolution No. 001011 of 10 May 1999.

197. In conclusion, the Government maintains that all the issues raised by the complainant have been resolved in accordance with Colombian labour laws and regulations, with the exception of the matter of the wage review which is still pending. The next report should confine itself to that question, in the absence of convincing reasons not to do so.

C. The Committee's conclusions

198. The Committee notes that in the present case the complainant alleges that from April 1998 onwards, it launched a series of national protest actions following non-implementation of an agreement and pay cuts, which in turn resulted in continuous harassment of trade union members and officials. Specifically, the complainant alleges that: (1) the Ministry of Defence failed to implement an agreement signed with ASEMIL on 7 May 1997 containing provisions relating to employment stability, prohibition of reprisals, wages, etc.; (2) the Ministry of Defence challenged the new statutes of ASEMIL (the complainant states that the Ministry of Labour dismissed the challenge); (3) deductions from wages of union membership dues were temporarily stopped; (4) workplaces at the Cartagena Naval Hospital and the Central Military Hospital in Bogotá were occupied by the military during the days of national protest (20 and 21 May 1998); (5) placards referring to the protest movement were destroyed at the Central Military Hospital in Bogotá and trade unionists were assaulted with the result that 42 of them were injured (the complainant supplies the names of six of these workers and gives details of the injuries and resulting loss of production capacity); (6) members of the union's executive board were dismissed (the complainant supplies the names and job titles of 14 of these) following the ruling that the stoppages in the Central Military Hospital and the Cartagena Naval Hospital were illegal (the Constitutional Court ordered the reinstatement of three of the dismissed workers); (7) more than 60 union members at the Cartagena Naval Hospital were docked one month's wages and 200 members at the Central Military Hospital were docked one week's wages, although the stoppages lasted only two days; and (8) the Ministry of Defence refused to discuss the demands of more than 1,000 dispensary workers.

199. As regards the allegation regarding the temporary suspension of trade union membership dues, the Committee notes that according to the Government, the Ministry of Labour and Social Security issued a resolution reserving judgement on the alleged violation of section 400 of the Substantive Labour Code (concerning deduction of union membership dues), given that, following the closure of the National Institute of Health, it was not possible to determine whether its obligations were passed on to the armed forces' health service, and that it would leave it to the parties concerned to apply to the courts for a ruling. In this regard, the Committee notes that the deductions of union membership dues for the complainant organization have been restored and requests the Government to take measures to ensure that in future the employer does not decide unilaterally to suspend deductions of union membership dues of ASEMIL members.

200. Lastly, the Government refers to a ministerial resolution in which it denies that there was any refusal to negotiate. In this context, the Committee deplores that the Government has not communicated its observations concerning the other allegations presented and any information which it has supplied has been insufficiently detailed (for example, it does not provide a copy of the text of the resolutions mentioned in its replies, nor does it indicate to which specific allegation each reply refers). Under these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to send without delay its observations on all the pending allegations.

The Committee's recommendations

201. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:

(a) The Committee requests the Government to take measures to ensure that in future the employer does not decide unilaterally to suspend deductions of trade union membership dues of ASEMIL members.

(b) Deploring that the Government has not communicated its observations on a certain number of allegations, the Committee requests the Government to send without delay its observations on all the pending allegations.

III. Complaint concerning the non-observance by Colombia of
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), made by delegates to the
86th (1998) Session of the Conference under article 26
of the Constitution of the ILO

A. Introduction

202. During the 86th Session of the Conference, the Director-General of the ILO received a letter dated 17 June 1998, signed by Mr. W. Brett, Workers' delegate from the United Kingdom and Chairman of the Workers' group, in his own name and in the name of the following Workers' delegates: Mr. C. Agyei (Ghana), Mr. A. Alvis Fernández (Colombia), Mr. K. Ahmed (Pakistan), Mr. L. Basnet (Nepal), Mr. M. Blondel (France), Mr. U. Edström (Sweden), Ms. U. Engelen-Kefer (Germany), Mr. R. Falbr (Czech Republic), Mr. S. Ito (Japan), Mr. Y. Kara (Israel), Mr. I. Mayaki (Niger), Mr. J. Miranda de Oliveira (Brazil), Mr. P. Mpangala (United Republic of Tanzania), Ms. P. O'Donovan (Ireland), Mr. J.C. Parrot (Canada), Mr. W. Peirens (Belgium), Mr. F. Ramírez León (Venezuela), Mr. Z. Rampak (Malaysia), Mr. I. Sahbani (Tunisia), Mr. A. Sánchez Madariaga (Mexico), Mr. M. Shmakov (Russian Federation), Mr. G. Sibanda (Zimbabwe), Mr. L. Trotman (Barbados), Mr. T. Wojcik (Poland) and Mr. J. Zellhoefer (United States), presenting a complaint under article 26 of the Constitution, to the effect that the Government of Colombia had failed to adopt measures to ensure the satisfactory implementation of 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). The text of this communication and its appendices are appended. The Director-General informed the Governing Body, during its 272nd Session, that he had received the complaint.

203. Article 26 of the ILO Constitution provides as follows:

204. 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), were ratified by Colombia on 16 November 1976 and thus have been in force for that country since 16 November 1977. All the authors of the complaint were Workers' delegates of their respective countries to the 86th Session of the Conference on the date of filing the complaint. They accordingly had the right to file a complaint, under article 26, paragraph 4, of the Constitution, if they were not satisfied that Colombia was securing the effective observance of these Conventions.

205. The authors of the complaint requested that it be referred to a commission of inquiry, as provided for in article 26, paragraph 3, of the Constitution. It is for the Governing Body to decide on this request.

B. Text of the complaint under article 26 of the
Constitution of the ILO

206. The text of the complaint and of the corresponding appendices is reproduced below.

Mr. M. Hansenne,
Secretary-General,
86th Session of the
International Labour Conference.

Geneva, 17 June 1998

Yours sincerely,

W. Brett,
Chairman of the Workers' group,
86th Session of the
International Labour Conference.

Director-General
of the International Labour Office,
Geneva.

Geneva, 12 June 1998

Dear Sir,

The undersigned Workers' delegates to the 86th Session of the International Labour Conference file a complaint under article 26 of the Constitution against the Government of Colombia for its failure to adopt appropriate measures for the satisfactory observance of Conventions No. 87 (on freedom of association and the right to organize) of 1948 and No. 98 (on the right to organize and collective bargaining) of 1949.

Colombia has been a Member of the ILO since 1919 and, as such, has been bound to comply with the Constitution of the Organization since that time. It has also been party to Conventions Nos. 87 and 98 since their ratification in 1976.

The facts underlying the complaint are as follows:

FIRST: In regard to ILO Convention No. 87 on freedom
of association and protection of the right to organize

Cases reported to the Committee on Freedom of Association

Since 1988, the Committee on Freedom of Association has been informed of 26 cases of violation of this instrument. Some of these cases also involve violations of Convention No. 98.

The violations of freedom of association reported to the Committee include numerous cases of violence endangering the lives and physical integrity of union members and against their freedom and right not to be transferred.

In 1987, the Committee examined Case No. 1343. In its conclusions, it advised the Government of Colombia that trade union rights can only be exercised in a context of respect for basic human rights, "... in a climate free of violence, pressure, fear and threats of any kind".(1) 

Cases Nos. 1434, 1477, 1761 and 1787 likewise related to violence against trade union members.

In 1989, the Committee's 265th Report stated that "... without doubt, it finds itself confronted with one of the most serious cases it has received concerning the respect for the right to life... , and that the dramatic situation of violence facing Colombia impedes the full exercise of trade union activities".

In 1997 alone, violent action had caused the death of 156 trade union members and officials, the forced disappearance of ten, the obligatory forced transfer of 342, the kidnapping of nine and a further nine attempts against the life of trade union members and officials. The figures for the period of 1998 that has elapsed are equally discouraging. On 27 February, Jesús María Valle Jaramillo, President of the Human Rights Committee of Medellín, a well-known defender of trade union and other popular leaders, was murdered in the offices of his legal practice in that city; on 18 April the lawyer Eduardo Umaña Mendoza, who was defending a number of officials of the Workers' Trade Union (USO) who are currently being tried by the so-called faceless justice system, was murdered in his home in Bogota. A few days prior to Umaña's murder, María Arango, formerly an activist of popular causes, was murdered by hired assassins in her home; over the last three months, ten massacres have taken place, for the most part of rural workers.

In its 309th Report, corresponding to its first meeting of 1998, the Committee on Freedom of Association stated that the Colombian case (No. 1787), as it related to freedom of association, was one of the most serious in the world.

The above demonstrates that the Government of Colombia has not in fact taken the necessary and appropriate measures to guarantee the free exercise of freedom of association and has allowed crimes against trade union members and officials to go unpunished, with continued threats, forced transfers, murders, disappearances and other violations which render impossible the free exercise of this right, thereby failing to comply with its duty to provide protection and guarantees.

The observations of the Committee of Experts on the
Application of Conventions and Recommendations

For over a decade, the Committee of Experts has been dealing with Convention No. 87 and has made repeated observations and direct requests with a view to encouraging the Government of Colombia to bring its domestic legislation into conformity with this instrument.

In 1987, the Committee of Experts stated that "... it would be grateful if the Government would indicate in its next report the measures it could adopt to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention in the light of the above comments".

In 1989, the Committee of Experts "concludes that the legislation is contrary to the provisions of the Convention on many points".

In 1990, the Committee noted that "... the assurances given by the Government in its last report concerning the creation of a special committee to examine the whole of the legislation, which is now outdated in the light of its comments, in order to bring the legislation into conformity with ILO Conventions".(2) 

In 1991 and 1992, workers in general and the Committee of Experts were interested to learn of the promulgation of the new Constitution of the Republic of Colombia, article 53 of which provided for the incorporation into domestic legislation of duly ratified labour agreements, and article 93 of which stated that the instruments of international law -- which could not be curtailed or suspended in states of emergency -- took precedence over domestic law. However, since the Government has failed to take the necessary steps to harmonize Colombian legislation with the Conventions, the expectations engendered by the entry into force of the new Constitution have subsequently evaporated.

Despite the mandate embodied in the Constitution, national legislation has still not been brought into conformity with international law. The Bills drafted by the Government -- some with the assistance of ILO technical missions -- have in some cases been shelved during the legislative process in the absence of any steps by the Government to employ the instruments provided for by the Constitution to promote them. Other Bills, such as that relating to the definition of essential services in connection with the right to strike, have not been submitted to Congress for its consideration, seven years after the entry into force of the new Constitution.

The report of the Committee of Experts to the 86th Session of the Conference noted developments relating to the draft reform of the Code, prepared by the direct contacts mission in 1996, stating that "... the Committee therefore stresses the need to amend or repeal with the utmost dispatch the above-mentioned provisions of the Substantive Labour Code in order to bring the legislation into compliance with the Convention".(3) 

In the light of the above, it may readily be concluded that ILO Convention No. 87 is systematically violated.

SECOND: Regarding Convention No. 98 (on the
right to organize and collective bargaining)

Cases before the Committee on Freedom of Association

As stated in the first part, of the 26 cases that have been brought to the attention of the Committee since 1987, a considerable number involve violations of Convention No. 87, for which reason we will make specific reference only to Case No. 1916 and Case No. 1925 which are among those most recently examined. In the former instance, the Committee has urged the Government to reinstate 209 workers who were dismissed for participating in a strike at a municipal-level state enterprise and asked it to take measures to ensure that declarations on the legal status of strikes are made by an independent body and not by the administrative authority. Despite the fact that the Government has been aware of these decisions since early March 1998, it has failed to take the necessary steps to comply on the pretext that municipal autonomy must be respected.

This is not the first time that the Government has failed to comply with decisions of this type, as it will be possible to verify during the Commission of Inquiry.

The Government has likewise failed to take any steps to comply with the decision of the Committee in regard to Case No. 1925. Many trade union organizations in Colombia have been destroyed on the basis of the so-called "non-unionization" statute which provides better conditions to workers who are not covered by collective agreements. The Government has the duty to ensure that legislation is amended in order to prevent this practice. Likewise, it should take administrative steps with a view to imposing sanctions on employers who obstruct the right to collective bargaining.

It may readily be inferred from these cases that the Colombian Government does not comply with its duty to protect and guarantee rights relating to freedom of association and collective bargaining.

The observations of the Committee of Experts

As stated in its most recent report, to the 86th Session of the Conference, the Committee of Experts has for many years been concerned by the divergence between domestic legislation and Convention No. 98, and has insisted that the appropriate steps should be taken to bring legislation into compliance. The points most frequently raised in observations and direct requests refer to the right of public servants to bargain collectively, and the right of federations and confederations to bargain collectively and to take strike action, the right to strike in public services which are not essential in the strict sense.

Despite the sustained endeavours of the Committee of Experts to urge the Colombian Government to comply with the Convention and to promote the necessary reforms, the situation today is as it was ten years ago. The Government continues to fail in its duty to adhere to Convention No. 98.

THIRD: The deliberations of the Conference

Briefly, we would like to draw attention to the fact that over the past decade, the Conference's Committee on the Application of Standards has repeatedly invited the Government to discuss difficulties in complying with Conventions Nos. 87 and 98 and has twice devoted a section specifically to the Government of Colombia, most recently in 1990. The involvement of the Conference and of the Committee of Experts have not succeeded in persuading successive governments to heed the requests of the international community in these areas to which this complaint refers.

The ILO's interest in contributing to improving the situation in regard to freedom of association has prompted it to send three direct contacts missions to Colombia over the last ten years, resulting in commitments by the Government which have subsequently not been fully carried out.

Legal basis of the complaint

The undersigned base this complaint on article 26, paragraph 4, of the Constitution and act in the capacity of delegates to the 86th Session of the Conference.

Since the Government of Colombia has ignored the recommendations of the ILO Governing Body's Committee on Freedom of Association and those of the Committee of Experts, we request that the complaint should be examined by a commission of inquiry which would draw up its report as provided in article 26, paragraph 3, of the ILO Constitution. We further request that the matters pending before the Committee on Freedom of Association and before the Committee of Experts should be dealt with by the Commission of Inquiry.

We append a 17-page appendix containing the report submitted by the Colombian workers to the 86th Session of the International Labour Conference, and which should be considered as part of the complaint.

Report of the union confederations to the 86th International
Labour Conference (sent as an appendix to the complaint
made under article 26 of the Constitution of the ILO)

Introduction

The Colombian trade union delegation to the 86th International Labour Conference, composed of the Single Confederation of Workers (CUT), the Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CTC) and the General Confederation of Democratic Workers (CGTD), has agreed to submit for the consideration of the 86th Session of the International Labour Conference, a report on freedom of association in our country, which focuses on demonstrating the lack of political will on the part of the Colombian State and of commitment on the part of successive governments to complying with the obligations assumed by Colombia as a member of the International Labour Organization and as State party to Conventions Nos. 87 and 98. For many years, the Organization's supervisory bodies have issued decisions requiring the Government to take concrete action, in response to which the Government representatives to the Conference have made a commitment to take action which is never honoured.

This report focuses on the matter of the impunity of the perpetrators of violations of the rights of trade union members and officials. Violence against trade union officials and members is certainly the main factor obstructing freedom of association in Colombia, exacerbated by increasing impunity and the absence of the political will to eradicate it.

Nineteen ninety-seven marked the tenth anniversary of a painful and continuous bleeding of the trade union movement which began in 1987 with an escalation of murders, disappearances, torture and ruthless persecution of trade union members and officials. As a result, Colombia won the sad distinction of being the most dangerous country for the exercise of fundamental rights of freedom of association and collective bargaining.

Acts of violence against trade unionism may be attributed to state agents, members of paramilitary forces and action by guerrilla groups. In 1998, far from improving, the situation has deteriorated significantly.

Society as a whole has been permeated by the intolerance demonstrated by the protagonists in the prolonged armed conflict. The exercise of the right to promote the organization of workers or to be a trade union member is considered to be subversive by certain public servants or by members of the paramilitary forces who view trade unionism as an ally of insurgency, while some guerrilla groups pursue as "traitors" former sympathizers who have subsequently espoused alternative political options.

While the confluence of these circumstances make for a complex situation, it is by no means confused. We have no doubt that, if the political will existed to do so, it would be possible to identify the intellectual authors of the crimes which we have for many years denounced before the ILO supervisory bodies and before this forum of the International Labour Conference, which is the supreme authority of the Organization.

Some of us on this stage today have been threatened merely for engaging in our trade union activities. We claim our right to testify, as eye witnesses of the situation that exists in Colombia today in this regard.

In addition, our report focuses on the manner in which Colombia has ignored the requirements of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations to adapt domestic legislation and national practice to the provisions of Conventions Nos. 87 and 98.

The country: Location and characteristics

The State of Colombia is situated at the north-western end of South America, and borders with Venezuela, Brazil, Peru, Ecuador and Panama. The Atlantic Ocean lies to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the west. According to the Constitution adopted in 1991, Colombia is a lawful societal State organized in the form of a unitary republic.(4)  Public power is divided among the executive, judicial and legislative branches.

Colombia has a surface area of 1,141,748 km2 with a population of approximately 35 million inhabitants. Under 8 per cent of the economically active population (EAP) is unionized.

As we stated last year, the fact that the confederations' report centres on freedom of association does not mean that the Colombian Government is complying fully with the other Conventions to which it is party. We have decided to concentrate on the violations of freedom of association because we believe that if this right is not guaranteed, then other workers' rights cannot be fully defended by their representatives.

In Colombia, over the last decade, violence has been brought to bear on trade union members and officials because of their activities, as the supervisory bodies of the ILO and other international entities are aware. Colombian labour legislation, which was enacted prior to the promulgation of the Constitution of 1991 restricts the exercise of the population's rights, while the legal structure is not ideally suited to settling the problem of the impunity protecting those who have engaged in violence against persons exercising their trade union rights and against the population as a whole.

A different report: The situation of trade union
leaders and members continues to deteriorate
and the Government remains indifferent

Unlike the previous reports submitted by Colombian trade union confederations to the International Labour Conference, our report today does not contain a detailed list of events since the last Conference. We consider that it serves no purpose endlessly to recount in detail the dramatic events which prevent the full exercise of freedom of association in Colombia when the Colombian State, over and above the Government in power, has demonstrated no will to resolve the divergence between practice and international obligations in this sphere, just as it has failed to show the will to bring domestic legislation into conformity with the provisions of Conventions Nos. 87 and 98, despite the insistence of the ILO and of the international community as a whole.

We do not exaggerate when we state that the representatives of the Colombian Government have, for the last ten years, systematically deceived the international community year after year, making promises that they fail to keep.

This year we wish to draw the attention of the International Labour Conference to the most serious aspects of the complex situation of freedom of association violations in Colombia, namely:

(a) impunity of the perpetrators of murder, disappearances, torture and other crimes against trade union members and leaders in Colombia;

(b) absence of the political will to bring legislation into conformity with the provisions of Conventions Nos. 87 and 98.

For this purpose, we will list the ILO's requirements and actions over the last ten years and compare them to the actions of the Colombian Government.

Colombia: A long history of impunity and contempt of the ILO

Since 1987, over 2,000 trade union members and officials have been murdered in Colombia. In 1997, 156 were murdered; nine were the targets of attempted murder; nine were kidnapped; 342 were subject to obligatory transfer; ten disappeared and torture has been reported.(5) 

In drafting this report, we have reviewed the cases reported to the Committee on Freedom of Association, in conjunction with the observations of the Committee of Experts since 1987, using official ILO source documents.

1987: The Committee on Freedom of Association requests
that criminals be punished

As far back as 1987, in examining Case No. 1343, in the light of the Government's claim that criminal proceedings had been brought "... and that in certain cases the provisional filing of the dossier had been ordered because the guilty paries could not be identified", the Committee's conclusions expressed "... the hope that it will be possible to conclude these proceedings in the near future and that they will make it possible to identify and punish those responsible for the crimes. The Committee wishes to refer to the general conclusions which it formulated regarding the present case on a previous occasion [246th Report, Case No. 1323, para. 408], and in which it stated that "all appropriate measures should be taken to guarantee that trade union rights can be exercised in normal conditions, with respect for basic human rights and in a climate free of violence, pressure, fear and threats of any kind".(6)  In its 248th Report, the Committee likewise expressed the hope that "the investigations undertaken will make it possible to determine who is responsible, punish those who are guilty and establish the whereabouts of those who have disappeared" and, in connection with Case No. 1376, it deeply deplored the death of a trade union member and the disappearance of a further two and asked the Government for information on the inquiries instituted.

For over a decade, appropriate conditions have not existed in Colombia for the exercise of trade union freedoms. Civil and political rights of the Colombian population and of trade union members and leaders in particular, such as the right to life, integrity and personal liberty are violated with impunity. The mere exercise of the legitimate right to establish trade unions and actively to participate in them and of the right to collective bargaining, are sufficient reason for shady hired assassins to make attempts upon the life of those who exercise them or to deprive them of their personal liberty.

1989: The Cahier mission and the Committee on Freedom
of Association call for the disbanding of paramilitary groups

In its 259th Report, the Committee's conclusions on Case No. 1434 stated:

At that time, in line with the Cahier mission report, the Committee requested "vigorous measures to dismantle the paramilitary groups, and a radical strengthening of the financial and human resources of the judiciary".(7)  The Cahier report, which is appended to the examination of the case in question, states that "the main reproach levelled at the Government is its failure to act. The authorities have recently stated in public their commitment to peace and their desire to enforce the law. But this does not seem to lead to action with any convincing results. As regards justice, the trade unions have repeatedly stressed the fact that investigations yield no results and that no legal action is taken against persons guilty of committing crimes. Everyone I met emphasized the impunity with which the murderers operate. This impunity generates more violence".(8) 

Indeed, violence has since escalated in Colombia and the number of victims who are trade union members or officials has continued to rise.

1. See 251st Report on the Committee on Freedom of Association in Official Bulletin, Vol. LXX, 1987, Series B, No. 2, pp. 86-92, paras. 323-333, and the 246th Report, in Official Bulletin, Vol. LXIX, 1986, Series B, No. 3.

2. See report of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, General Report and observations concerning particular countries. Report III (Part 4A) of the International Labour Conference, 77th Session 1990.

3. See report of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, General Report and observations concerning particular countries, Report III (Part 1A) to the International Labour Conference, 86th Session, 1998, pp. 171-172.

4. Constitution: "Article 1. Colombia is a lawful societal State democratic, participative and pluralistic, organized in the form of a unitary republic, decentralized with the autonomy of its territorial units, based on respect of the human dignity, on the work and solidarity of the individuals who belong to it, and the prevalence of the general interest."

5. Source: Escuela Nacional Sindical. "Los derechos humanos de los trabajadores en 1997", Cuaderno de Derechos Humanos No. 5, ENS, Medellín, 1998. See table No. 2, p. 27. According to the same source, between 1991 when the new Colombian Constitution was promulgated and 1997, 1,083 workers were murdered, 865 of whom were trade union officials.

6. See 251st Report in Official Bulletin, Vol. LXX, 1987, Series B, No. 2, pp. 86-92, paras. 323-333. The 246th Report was published in Official Bulletin, Vol. LXIX, 1986, Series B, No. 3.

7. See Official Bulletin, Vol. LXXI, 1988, Series B, No. 3, pp. 236 ff., paras. 653 to 655.

8. See report by Professor Philippe Cahier regarding the mission to Colombia on 31 August-7 September 1988, published in Official Bulletin, Vol. LXXI, 1988, Series B, No. 3, pp. 255 ff. as appendix of the 259th Report.

 Updated by SA. Approved by NdW. Last update: 19 April 2000.

For further information, please contact the Official Relations Branch at Tel: +41.22.799.7732, Fax: +41.22.799.8944 or by e-mail: RELOFF@ilo.org

Governing Body: [ Top | Previous sessions | Records of Decisions ]

© 1996-2022 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Copyright and Permissions | Privacy policy | Disclaimer