Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 204, Novembre 1980

1. 108. The Committee examined this case at its February 1979 Session when it submitted an interim report to the Governing Body and requested the Government to supply certain information.
2. 109. As the Government had not sent its observations despite repeated requests to do se, the Committee decided at its May 1980 Session to apply to this case the special procedure of contacting the government representatives during the session of the International Labour Conference. In accordance with this procedure, the Chairman of the Committee on Freedom of Association met with the minister of Labour on 9 June 1980 to discuss the delay in the sending of replies. On the same day the Government sent a letter containing a partial reply.
3. 110. In the meantime, numerous complaints concerning serious allegations of violation of freedom of association were received on 11 March, 17 April, 23 and 30 June and 7 July 1980 which are now the subject of Cases Nos. 954, 957, 975 and 978. The complainants sent additional information in communications dated 24 June, 8 and 26 August and 2 September. The complaints mainly concern violent deaths, ill-treatment and arrests of trade union leaders and searches of trade union premises. These complaints have been transmitted to the Government, which has not as yet sent its observations. The Committee intends to examine these cases at its next session.
4. 111. Guatemala has ratified both 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

1. 112. The allegations of the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT) still outstanding since the Committee's examination of the case in February 1979 concern, on the one hand, the occupation and search by the police in June 1976 of the headquarters of the National Central of Workers (CNT), an organisation affiliated to CLAT, and, on the other hand, the persecution of Mr. Julio Celso de León Flores by the Guatemalan police while he was visiting Mexico on trade union business around the same time.
2. 113. At its February-March 1979 Session, the Governing Body, on the Committee's recommendation, requested the Government to indicate the reasons for the raid on the CNT's headquarters and whether it was carried out in pursuance of a search warrant it also requested the Government to forward its observations on the complainants' allegations concerning the persecution to which Mr. Julio Celso de León. Flores was said to have been subjected while in Mexico on trade union business.

B. The Government's reply

1. 114. In its reply dated 9 June 1980, the Government states that it is unaware of the facts both as for the raid or the CNT's headquarters and the persecution to which Mr. Celso de León Flores was said to have been subjected in Mexico, as both events are said to have taken place under a previous government. Nevertheless, it states that hr. León Flores had been a leader of the CNT and a founder of the Christian Democratic Party but that he had been thrown out of these two organisations. The Government goes on to state that he still carries on trade union activities with another organisation and makes use of his right of freedom of expression, which is guaranteed to him in Guatemala, to fight against the draft Labour Code, particularly during lectures at the University. The Government concludes that this person is exercising his trade union activities normally without suffering any persecution or restriction on his freedom.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 115. In this matter, the Committee notes that the Government has supplied a reply of a general nature dated 9 June 1980, but that it has not replied to the specific questions which were submitted to it.
2. 116. In these circumstances, the Committee would like to draw the Government's attention to the general principles as regards the protection of freedom of association which governs these questions.
3. 117. Thus, regarding searches of trade union premises, the Committee, while recognising that trade unions, like other associations or persons, cannot claim immunity from such an intervention, has always emphasised the importance which it attaches to the principle that such a search should only be made following the issue of a warrant by the ordinary judicial authority and only after that authority has been satisfied that reasonable grounds exist for supposing that evidence exists on the said premises material to eliciting the truth and to a prosecution for an offence under the ordinary law. In such cases, the search should be restricted to the purposes in respect of which the warrant was issued in fact, in the resolution on trade union rights and their relation to civil liberties, adopted by the international Labour Conference at its 54th Session (1970), the Conference expressed the view that the right to protection of trade union property was one of those civil liberties which are essential for the normal exercise of trade union rights.
4. 118. As concerns the persecution to which Mr. Celso de León Flores is said to have been subjected in June 1976 whilst in Mexico, the Committee, although it is not able to comment on the merits of the allegation in full knowledge of the facts as the Government has not supplied a detailed reply on this question, would nevertheless like to recall that where a person acts as a delegate in a trade union body or at a trade union conference, he should not be worried or prejudiced because of his trade union activities.
5. 119. In any case, the complainants' allegations are old, dating from June 1976, and the complaint has not been recently supported by additional information.