Informe en el que el Comité pide que se le mantenga informado de la evolución de la situación - Informe núm. 376, Octubre 2015

1. 155. The Committee last examined this case at its March 2013 meeting, when it presented an interim report to the Governing Body [see 367th Report, approved by the Governing Body at its 317th Session (March 2013), paras 153–162].
2. 156. The Confederation of Argentine Workers (CTA) sent additional information in a communication of May 2013.
3. 157. The Government sent its observations in communications of 30 May 2013, September 2013, February 2014 and 27 May 2015.
4. 158. Argentina has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), the Workers’ Representatives Convention, 1971 (No. 135), and the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 159. In its previous examination of the case at its March 2013 meeting, the Committee made the following recommendations [see 367th Report, para. 162]:
   • (a) Regarding the alleged intervention and violent repression by the federal police of Argentina aimed at preventing the installation of a protest stand outside the INDEC entrance, on 22 August 2007, the Committee again requests the Government to send its observations on the matter without delay.
   • (b) The Committee requests the Government to inform it of the outcome of the ongoing court proceedings against the ATE delegate Mr Luciano Osvaldo Belforte.
   • [In its initial conclusions, the Committee made reference to legal proceedings concerning defrauding the public administration (see 360th Report, paras 219 and 223(c)).]
   • (c) Regarding the alleged dismissal of 13 workers (whose names the Committee requested from the complainant) from the Consumer Price Index and Continuous Household Survey Department, on 1 November 2007, for having participated in meetings and direct action organized by the trade union, the Committee once again requests the CTA to send the names of the workers who were allegedly dismissed without delay so as to enable the Government to send concrete information on the allegations.

B. Further information from the complainant

1. 160. In a communication of May 2013, the CTA names the 13 workers who were allegedly dismissed and states that the Government knew of them, as they were listed in an appendix to the document signed on 8 November 2007, in the context of the dispute settlement committee of the National Institute of Statistics and Censuses (INDEC), between the Office of the Cabinet of Ministers, the Ministry of Economy and Production, and the Association of State Workers (ATE).

C. The Government’s reply

1. 161. In its communication dated 30 May 2013, the Government submits the report of the Office of the Superintendent of Metropolitan Security of the federal police force on the events of 22 August 2007 concerning the actions of the federal police infantry to prevent the installation of a protest stand outside the INDEC entrance. The report outlines the investigatory proceedings in a case characterized as “assault on and resistance to authority”. The Government states that the investigation found that it was the intervening law enforcement officers who were attacked. The Office of the Superintendent’s report gathers officers’ statements that when the police informed the protesters that they could not set up their stands because they did not have the necessary authorization, a riot ensued, during which the protesters began to attack the police officers. As a result, the report states that a number of officers sustained various types of injury and the infantry had to intervene to restore order. The Government informs the Committee that the case is being handled by the Investigating Prosecutor’s Office, which will determine the responsibility of the relevant parties.
2. 162. In its communication of February 2014, the Government encloses the INDEC report on the ongoing cases against Mr Luciano Osvaldo Belforte, an ATE delegate. INDEC alleges that it has been established that Mr Belforte committed fraud against the public administration by being absent without authorization and signing documents as if he had been performing services, for which he received compensation for census hours and overtime. In relation to the proceedings against Mr Belforte for fraud, INDEC informs the Committee that the criminal court concluded the case without a conviction and that the decision not to prosecute Mr Belforte is final. In its communication dated 27 May 2015 in relation to the second case against Mr Belforte seeking to revoke his trade union immunity, the Government indicates that the proceedings are pending before the National Labour Appeals Chamber.
3. 163. In its communication of September 2013, the Government submits a report by INDEC noting that the State complied with the agreement of 8 November 2007 establishing the continued employment of the 13 workers named by the complainant who had allegedly been dismissed. INDEC indicates that the workers in question were not dismissed and are currently under contract, working for the Ministry of Economy and Public Finance.

D. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 164. With regard to recommendation (a) from its previous examination of the case (on allegations concerning the events of 22 August 2007, the intervention and violent suppression by the federal police infantry to prevent the installation of a protest stand outside the INDEC entrance), the Committee observes that, according to the investigation conducted by the Government, after informing the trade unionists that they could not set up stands without authorization, the law enforcement officers were attacked by the protesters, which resulted in several officers sustaining injuries. The Committee wishes to recall that the principles of freedom of association do not protect abuses consisting of criminal acts while exercising protest action. The Committee notes that the case is before the judge of the Investigating Prosecutor’s Office, who will determine the responsibilities. The Committee expects that the allegations of violent repression by the federal police of trade unionists who were setting up a protest stand will be brought to the attention of the judge so that they may be considered, and requests the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the proceedings.
2. 165. With regard to recommendation (b) from the previous examination of the case (outcome of the legal proceedings against the trade unionist Mr Belforte), the Committee notes that the criminal proceedings concerning the defrauding of the public administration were concluded without a conviction against Mr Belforte. With regard to the proceedings seeking to revoke Mr Belforte’s trade union immunity, the Committee notes that the case is pending before the National Labour Appeals Chamber, and requests the Government to keep it informed of the outcome.
3. 166. With regard to recommendation (c) of the previous examination of the case (allegations concerning the dismissal of 13 workers), the Committee duly notes the information provided by the Government that the 13 workers in question are under contract, in accordance with the agreement of 8 November 2007 concerning their continued employment.