Informe provisional - Informe núm. 58, 1962

1. 128. At its 28th Session (May 1961) the Committee continued consideration of this case and submitted an interim report, contained in paragraphs 87 to 106 of its 56th Report, as approved by the Governing Body at its 149th Session (June 1961). The following paragraphs deal only with the allegations still pending.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

• Allegations concerning the Arrest of Trade Unionists in February 1960
  129. 129 After examining the allegations made by the complainants and the observations presented by the Government on this subject, the Committee, while agreeing that the measures in question might have been occasioned by political and not trade union activities, felt that, before it could make any further recommendations to the Governing Body, and having regard to the importance which it has always attached to the principle of prompt and fair trial by an independent and impartial judiciary in all cases, including cases in which trade unionists are charged with political or criminal offences which the government considers to have no relation to their trade union activities, the Government should be requested to furnish information as to the legal or judicial proceedings taken in the case of the persons referred to by the complainants, and as to the results of such proceedings. The Committee made a recommendation accordingly both at its 27th Session (February 1961) and at its 28th Session (May 1961) and this recommendation was approved by the Governing Body.
  130. 130 In its reply dated 7 June 1961 the Government gives the following information: the acts with which the accused persons are charged constituted a threat to the security of the State, so that the accused were handed over immediately to the competent judicial authority. According to the provisions in force, which were applied, a person must be released within five days of arrest or preventive detention must be ordered, and such an order may only be made after the reasons have been placed on record and a charge has been preferred.
  131. 131 The Government states: " The fact that the accused were judged in June 1960 is proof of the normal, rapid manner in which the proceedings were opened. The procedure followed was such as to provide every safeguard that justice would be done. It makes provision for: right to contest the competence of the court, appointment of defending counsel, right of the accused to put forward such evidence and to propose such procedural action as he considers appropriate for his own defence, ruling by the magistrate that there is no case to answer (such a ruling was made in respect of five of the accused), admittance of the public, judicial summing-up which states the facts and quotes the applicable rules of law, and possibility of appeal."
  132. 132 The Government states that the persons who had no case to answer were: Jesús Nazabal Palenzuela, Alvaro Garcia Garcia, Sabino Santurtun Aguirrezabala, Simón Plasencia Arteaga and Manuel Villán Fernández. They are now free. The following were sentenced: Jesús Moya Andrinal to 11 years' imprisonment: Manuel Pérez Garcia to 15 years; Luis Maria Ormazabal Pérez to ten years; Bernardino Seona Flamenco to five years; Herminio Carlos Minguel Docal to 12 years; José Pérez Gutiérrez to five years; Ezequiel Adsuar Casado to 12 years; Manuel Menéndez Fernández to seven years; Andrés Garcia Campos to four years; José Torralbo Rico to eight years. Antonio Martinez Delgado was sentenced to one year's imprisonment; having served this term he is now free. Alfredo Garcia Peón was released on 21 June 1960. Fermin Cano Jiménez was released on 4 July 1960, and Manuel Gendibe Peláez and Valentin Madrigal Bonaechea on 4 November 1960.
  133. 133 According to the information supplied by the Government, the sentences were passed according to a procedure which would appear to incorporate appropriate safeguards. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to decide that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
• Allegations relating to the Act Defining the New Powers of the Minister of the Interior as Regards Maintenance of Public Order and the Decree Defining the Term " Offence of Military Rebellion "
  134. 134 The Committee examined these allegations in detail in paragraphs 103 to 117 of its 49th Report and in paragraphs 97 to 105 of its 56th Report. At its 28th Session (May 1961) the Committee felt that there remained a final point on which additional information should be requested from the Government, and it recommended that the Governing Body request the Government to state whether it is correct that strikes relating to labour claims are to be considered as automatically excluded from the scope of the decree defining the term " offence of military rebellion " (rebelión militar).
  135. 135 In its reply dated 7 June 1961 the Government makes no comment in this connection. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to repeat the request already made in paragraph 106 (c) of the 56th Report.
• Allegations relating to Prosecution of Several Trade Unionists Accused of Having Attempted to Reconstitute the General Union of Spanish Workers
  136. 136 By a communication dated 30 September 1961 the General Union of Spanish Workers in Exile alleges that several trade unionists have been prosecuted for attempting to reconstitute the General Union of Spanish Workers. In evidence the complainant supplies the text of statements by witnesses during hearing of the matter.
  137. 137 These new allegations were communicated to the Government by a letter dated 12 October 1961. The Government has not yet made any observations.
  138. 138 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to adjourn examination of this aspect of the case pending receipt of the Government's observations concerning these allegations.