Informe provisional - Informe núm. 90, 1966

1. 263. The last time the Committee examined this case was at its meeting in November 1965, and on that occasion it submitted a provisional report which appears in paragraphs 525 to 540 of its 85th Report, approved by the Governing Body at its 163rd Session (November 1965). The present report refers only to the allegations whose examination remained in suspense, i.e. those referring to the arrest of trade union leaders in connection with which more complete information was sought from the Government, pursuant to paragraph 540 (b) of the 85th Report.
2. 264. Ecuador has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), but has ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 265. In two communications, dated 24 November and 23 December 1964, the Latin American Federation of Christian Trade Unionists complained of the arrest of eight officials of the Ecuadorian Federation of Catholic Workers. Francisco Checa and Carlos Aroca are alleged to have been apprehended and imprisoned in September 1964 while they were attending a meeting of peasants convened to found a peasants' league; Pedro Moreno Rocha, Carlos Idovro Vergara and Mesias Zamora Pérez were imprisoned for distributing leaflets to peasants with the aim of convening a meeting to found another peasants' league. It was also alleged that the trade union leader Hugo Espinosa, who was held incommunicado, and the trade union leaders Luis Cajas and Teodoro Reinoso were imprisoned but that the latter two were subsequently released.
2. 266. After examining the case in its entirety at its meetings held in February and May 1965, the Committee recommended the Governing Body to ask the Government for its observations respecting the alleged imprisonment, since no observations had been received up to that time. By a communication dated 27 August 1965 the Government declared, without giving any more precise details, that the arrest referred to had been carried out for infringement of specific provisions of the penal legislation which had no connection with trade union activities. On re-examining the case at its meeting held in November 1965, the Committee noted that in similar cases it had always followed the rule that the governments concerned should be requested to submit further and as precise information as possible concerning the arrests or detentions and the exact reasons therefor. It also noted that, if in certain cases the Committee had concluded that allegations relating to the arrests or detentions of trade union militants did not call for further examination, this had been after it had received information from the governments showing sufficiently precisely and with sufficient detail that the arrests or detentions were in no way occasioned by trade union activities but solely by activities outside the trade union sphere which were either prejudicial to public order or of a political character. Finally, in paragraph 540 (b) of its 85th Report, the Committee again recommended the Governing Body to reiterate to the Government its request to send more complete information on this aspect of the case, including an account of the offences with which each of the trade unionists had been charged and the result of the prosecutions commenced in this respect.
3. 267. This recommendation was approved by the Governing Body and transmitted to the Government, which replied by a communication dated 11 February 1966. The Government stated in its reply that the arrest of Messrs. Checa and Aroca was due to blatant infringements of specific provisions of the penal legislation of Ecuador. The authorities responsible for applying the appropriate penalty, however, had been conciliatory enough to order the release of these men with the very purpose of avoiding the distortion of the reasons for their arrest. The Government declared in this connection that the fact of being a trade union official did not entitle anyone to devote himself to overthrowing public order on the pretext of organising workers' unions. As regards the arrest of Messrs. Moreno Rocha, Hidrovo Vergara (called Idovro Vergara by the complainants) and Zamora Pérez, the Government stated that, according to the information supplied by the authorities dealing with each case, the arrest was due to these persons having been found distributing subversive leaflets with no printer's mark and disturbing political order in the district, particularly among the country people; the three men were released after signing a declaration before the authorities, binding them to take no part in political activities which in the opinion of the Government have no connection with trade unionism. The distribution of leaflets with no printer's mark is an offence punishable under section 272 of the Penal Code with imprisonment of from three months to one year and a fine of from 80 to 200 sucres.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 268. With respect to the last-mentioned three trade unionists, the Committee noted the Government's declaration that the arrest had been made in respect of an offence punishable under the Penal Code. However, in view of what had been said by the Government concerning political activities in connection with the trade unionists' acts, the Committee thought it necessary to bear in mind the opinion expressed by the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations which states that " provisions prohibiting trade unions in general terms from engaging in any political activities ... may raise difficulties by reason of the fact that the interpretation given to them in practice may change at any moment and restrict considerably the possibility of action of the organisations. In this connection the Committee thinks it useful to make reference to the resolution adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 35th Session (Geneva, 1951) in which it is stated, among other things, that when trade unions undertake or associate themselves with political action, this action shall not be of such a nature as to compromise the continuance of the trade union movement or its social or economic functions, irrespective of political changes in the country It would therefore seem that States should be able, without prohibiting in general terms and a priori all political activities by occupational organisations, to entrust to the judicial authorities the task of repressing abuses which might, in certain cases, be committed by organisations which had lost sight of the fact that their fundamental objective should be the economic and social advancement of their members ".
2. 269. On the other hand the Committee deplores the fact that, in spite of repeated requests' for precise information concerning the detention of the other trade unionists mentioned in the complaint, the Government has once again restricted itself to stating in its communication of 11 February 1966, referring to only two of the cases of arrest, that both the trade unionists concerned had infringed the provisions of the Penal Code, without throwing more light on the exact nature of the alleged offences with which these persons are charged, and that no judicial proceedings seem to have been taken against them.
3. 270. Although these two trade unionists, Messrs. Checa and Aroca, have been released at some time after the date on which the complaint was lodged, in view of the importance it has always attached, in all cases where trade unionists are detained for political offences or common law crimes, to the principle that the persons concerned should be tried with all the safeguards of regular judicial procedure, at the earliest possible moment and by an impartial and independent judicial authority, the Committee, in accordance with the practice it has followed hitherto in similar cases, recommends the Governing Body to draw the Government's attention to the dangers that measures for the detention of trade unionists might entail for freedom of association if such measures are not accompanied by proper judicial safeguards, and to the fact that every government should make it a rule to ensure respect for human rights and, in particular, the right of every detained person to receive a fair trial at the earliest possible moment by an impartial and independent judicial authority."
4. 271. With respect to the other three trade unionists, Messrs. Espinosa, Cajas and Reinoso, whose arrest has also been alleged by the complainants, the Government has not submitted any information up to the present.