Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2007, Publication: 96th ILC session (2007)

A Government representative stated that his Government was surprised to be called before the Committee once again and observed that the explanations that he had provided to the Committee of Experts had seemingly not been taken into consideration. With regard to legislative issues, he asserted that the new Labour Code enacted in January 2006 marked the outcome of a decade's effort, over the course of which all the relevant partners had been consulted, at both the national and international levels, including the ILO and the Arab Labour Organization. In its final version, the Code reflected all relevant comments. Moreover, after the draft Code had been approved by the Council of Ministers, it was sent to the National Assembly, which summoned all the workers' and employers' organizations in order to listen to their opinions once again. It then studied the text article by article, having no qualms about amending various provisions, even if the Government did not agree. It was understandable that persons or groups were challenging the Code's contents, but the fundamental truth was that the law was the law and the Code had to be abided by once it was adopted. Nevertheless, the Government undertook before the Committee to amend all provisions of the Code that were found to violate the Convention.

With regard to the practical application of the Convention, and particularly the factual issues set forth in the Committee of Experts' report - arrests of trade unionists, physical aggression against demonstrators and strikers, acts of anti-union harassment, raids on the homes of trade unionists and the prohibition on holding elections in the national mint - the Government representative asserted that those allegations were based solely on imprecise information which was inadmissible and which the Government emphatically rejected. The Government would remain attentive to any comments made by the Committee of Experts in the future on legislative issues.

The Employer members recalled that this case had been discussed in 2000 and 2001. They noted the adoption of a new Labour Code in 2006 and the Government's indication that broad consultations had taken place during the drafting process. While noting that according to the Government the new Labour Code had resolved the issues relating to the requirement of prior authorization for the establishment of trade unions, the Employer members regretted that this matter had not been duly reported to the Committee of Experts. Similarly, the Government failed to report on the new Labour Code's provisions regarding the ability of foreign nationals to hold trade union office. Regarding the exercise of freedom of association of public servants, the Employer members recalled the Committee of Expert's observation that the legislation should limit the President's power of requisitioning to those public servants exercising authority in the name of the State and to essential services in the strict sense of the term. The Government had not provided any information on this matter. The Employer members noted the Government's promises to reinstate promptly the dismissed trade union leaders. In conclusion, they requested the Government to provide a detailed and comprehensive report on all the pending issues.

The Worker members expressed regret that, although several years had passed since the commitments undertaken by the Government in 2001, the Committee was again bound to address the issue of non-application of the Convention. Firstly, the Government had undertaken to introduce the appropriate amendments on the occasion of the revision of the Labour Code, in order to eliminate the requirement of previous authorization for the establishment of workers' organizations foreseen in section 5 of the Act. According to the new Labour Code published in January 2006, however, the establishment of a trade union still required the authorization of several ministers and the public prosecutor, who, moreover, had the power to dissolve a workers' organization by simple administrative decision.

Secondly, the Government had committed to amending section 6 of the former Labour Code that exclusively conferred on nationals of Djibouti the right to exercise trade union functions. While this matter had indeed been addressed in section 214 of the new Labour Code, the exercise of trade union functions was henceforth prohibited for any previously condemned person and any person exercising functions in the management and administration of political parties, which was contrary to Article 3 of the Convention.

Thirdly, as regards the restriction of the right to strike of public servants, the Government had undertaken to specify the limits of the "power of requisitioning" of public servants engaged in essential services, but nothing had been done in this respect.

Fourthly, the Government had committed in 2002 to reinstating trade union leaders who had been dismissed for reasons linked to trade union activities. These persons were requested to give pledges of loyalty to be able to be reinstated. To date, ten trade union leaders had still not been reinstated, despite the request of the Committee on Freedom of Association to reinstate workers wishing to be reinstated and to compensate those refusing reinstatement.

Fifthly, notwithstanding the recommendations of the ILO, the Government put forward a workers' organization manipulated by it, and again this year had designated persons affiliated to this union to represent the workers at the International Labour Conference.

The new Labour Code damaged and obstructed independent workers' organizations, and its anti-union provisions clearly violated the Convention. The anti-union repression had become worse, as illustrated by the dismissal of certain trade union leaders who were also subject to harassment, intimidation and blackmail; the violent repression of a strike of bus drivers, the arrest of trade unionists and the assassination of one of them; the prohibition to hold trade union elections in the national mint; the obstruction of the establishment and election of free trade unions; the mass arrest and detention of trade unionists of the Union of Port Workers (UTP); the arrest of trade union leaders for having "communicated information to a foreign power"; the expulsion of an international union solidarity mission; the harassment of trade unionists in the education sector; and the exile of trade unionists.

The Worker members believed that these facts demonstrated the Government's will to constantly reduce the role of the trade union movement in the country. They requested the Government to accept a direct contacts mission to the country, in order to assess the application of the Convention.

The Worker member of Djibouti stated that workers' organizations had been consulted on the occasion of the drafting of the Labour Code, but some of their suggestions had not been accepted. He pointed out that the critical comments formulated by an expert on the draft code had only partially been taken into consideration, and the rest had been rejected. As a fundamental Convention, Convention No. 87 prevailed over domestic law. Thus the Government had accepted to amend the Labour Code to bring it into conformity with this international instrument and had relied on a tripartite committee to this end. Finally, it would appear desirable that a direct contacts mission be carried out in the country.

The Worker member of Senegal stated that the non-observance of the relevant provisions of the Convention demonstrated the Government's will to stifle and repress freedom of association. The supervisory system as embodied by the Committee came up against the refusal of the Government to comply with the provisions of the Convention. The observation of the Committee of Experts mentioned specific cases of anti-union repression (physical aggressions, measures of removal, harassment, opposition to trade union elections, exile of trade unionists, etc.). The Government's restrictions on freedom of association had to be denounced, and the Committee needed to stand up against such practices. The indifference of the Government revealed how it perceived this matter. The repression had to cease, as freedom of association was the foundation of social dialogue, and the Committee needed to strive to ensure that the Government stopped infringing the rights and principles laid down in the Convention.

The Government representative challenged the Worker members' allegations of anti-union actions committed by his Government. He indicated that all cited trade unionists had refused reinstatement, pretending to exercise, contrary to the law of Djibouti, a political mandate and a union mandate. Moreover, compensation had been granted to those unionists in lieu of reinstatement. There had been no assassinations of trade unionists in Djibouti. Trade unionists that had left the country had done so of their own free will. In response to a question raised by the Employer members, the speaker specified that the Labour Code had been modified so as to ensure that foreign workers could exercise trade union functions. The Government did not hold foreigners up to public disgrace. Finally, the Government undertook to accept a direct contacts mission and to review its labour legislation if necessary.

The Employer members noted that previously the Government had submitted incomplete reports, while the information presented to the Committee had been of a very general nature. They urged the Government to ensure that the requirements of the Convention were fully reflected in law, including in the Labour Code, and in practice. Finally, they urged the Government to supply the Committee of Experts with a detailed report replying to all the points raised in its observation, as soon as possible.

The Worker members noted all elements brought up in the course of the discussion and came to the painful conclusion that the facts as they perceived them were radically different from the facts as presented by the Government. They deplored the bad faith of the Government in refusing to recognize the inconvenient truth. The Worker members nonetheless considered the acceptance of the principle of a direct contacts mission as a step forward. They expressed the hope that the new Labour Code could thus be revised so as to give full effect to Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. They also hoped that the Labour Union of Djibouti (UDT) and the General Union of Djibouti Workers (UGTD) would be officially recognized and could thus normally convene their Congress. Finally, the Worker members expressed the hope that, thanks to this direct contacts mission, light would be shed on the climate of violence and oppression weighing heavily on the trade union movement.

The Committee took note of the statement made by the Government representative, as well as the discussion that took place thereafter. The Committee observed that the pending questions concerned allegations relating to numerous arrests of trade unionists, physical aggression against demonstrators, raids on the homes of trade unionists and acts of anti-union harassment. The Committee of Experts had further noted information concerning the non-compliance of the recently adopted Labour Code with the Convention. The Committee also recalled the discrepancies between the national legislation and the Convention that had been raised by the Committee of Experts for many years.

The Committee noted the information provided by the Government according to which the new Labour Code was the fruit of ten years of consultation. The Government further denied ever having arrested trade unionists for exercising trade union activities.

Welcoming the Government's expressed commitment to review the new Labour Code, in light of the Convention, the Committee trusted that it would rapidly begin this process in full and meaningful consultation with the social partners with a view to ensuring its compliance with the provisions of the Convention. It requested the Government to provide detailed information on the new Labour Code, particularly as regards the requirement of previous authorization for the formation of a union and restrictions relating to the holding of union offices for certain persons, as well as on any consultations held thereon, in its report due in 2007 so that the Committee of Experts would be in a position to examine its conformity with the Convention. It further requested the Government to provide detailed information on the steps taken to ensure that workers' organizations may elect their officers freely without interference by the public authorities.

As regards the allegations concerning the arrest and detention of trade unionists, physical aggression and intimidation and anti-union harassment, the Committee, like the Committee of Experts, recalled that the rights of workers' and employers' organizations could only be exercised in a climate that is free from violence, pressure or threats of any kind against the leaders and members of these organizations. It urged the Government to ensure respect for this principle.

The Committee welcomed the Government's acceptance of a direct contacts mission in order to clarify the situation as regards all of the issues raised. It expressed the firm hope that it would be in a position to note significant progress made in the application of the Convention next year.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2001, Publication: 89th ILC session (2001)

A Government representative informed the Committee that, since its last session in June 2000, his country had obtained the technical assistance of the international labour standards specialist from the Addis Ababa MDT. As regards the observation of the Committee of Experts, he indicated that his Government planned to consider very soon the measures necessary to examine the compatibility of its legislation with Convention No. 87. His Government had taken note of the concerns expressed by the Committee of Experts as regards the compatibility of section 5 of the Act on Associations, as amended in 1977, with Convention No. 87, and particularly Article 2. He stated that his Government was ready to introduce the necessary amendments during the revision of the Labour Code, which should start soon. In addition, the technical assistance of the ILO had been requested for the revision of the labour legislation.

He stated that it was planned to repeal section 6 of the Labour Code, which provided that trade union functions may only be exercised by nationals, when revising the Labour Code in consultation with the relevant technical unit of the ILO, which had already been approached in this respect. As proof of its good faith, the Government of Djibouti had invited regional trade union organizations (such as the ALO) and international ones (such as ICFTU) to visit the country to examine the situation.

The Government was totally in favour of holding free and transparent elections, and wished to establish dialogue with truly representative trade union partners. He emphasized, however, that the organization of such elections was a matter for trade unions only. As appeared clearly from all reports submitted by Djibouti, the trade union situation had come to a complete standstill, due to a handful of leaders who had held their positions for over 20 years as though they owned their trade union mandate for life. As regards the trade union congress of 15 July 1999, termed as phoney by some speakers, he asserted that his Government was willing to talk to all workers' representatives, whoever they were. Until new elections were held, however, the Government was bound to recognize the leaders elected during that disputed congress. In view of all these difficulties, he requested the Office to help his Government break the deadlock. He considered that this help should not only cover the organization and holding of new trade union elections, but also the provision of training to trade union leaders elected on that occasion.

As regards the power of requisition, he emphasized that this applied only to public services considered to be essential for the life and health of the population. Nevertheless, if the Committee deemed it necessary, the Government was ready to circumscribe this power. While there existed provisions prohibiting foreign workers from joining or becoming leaders of trade unions, no such restrictions were applied in practice.

The speaker informed the Committee that 15 requests for reinstatement by dismissed workers had been received by the authorities, in line with the recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association. He acknowledged that the settlement of these cases had been delayed, but explained that this was due to the fact that the Government was concurrently facing a political priority, i.e. re-establishing peace. This had been achieved now, since the Government had just signed a final peace agreement with an armed faction (the FRUD). The Government was now politically able to address the problem of dismissed workers with renewed serenity. However, he wished to draw the Committee's attention to the fact that some of those who pursued political purposes under trade union pretexts had participated actively in the peace negotiations. The reinstatement process of trade unionists dismissed in the aftermath of the 1995 events was following its course, in accordance with the commitments made by the Government to this Committee. Three of the 15 dismissed trade unionists had already been reinstated in their jobs, and the other requests were being examined on an individual basis. He indicated in this respect that some of these workers had been living abroad since the 1995 events.

The Worker members thanked the Government representative for the information he had provided to the Conference Committee. They noted that, after a hiatus of some years, last year the Government had once again begun a dialogue with the Committee on the difficulties linked to the application of Convention No. 87 in the country. Recalling the firm conclusion reached in last year's Committee, which had "stressed with great concern the lack of cooperation by the Government", the Worker members noted that the Government had once again sent a report to the Committee of Experts expressing its willingness to amend legislation and modify practices which were not in conformity with Convention No. 87. However, the Worker members stressed that neither the law nor the practice in the country had been changed and that the serious violations described in the report were still in place.

The Worker members noted that the Committee of Experts had correctly taken into consideration the interim conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association. They addressed the five points made by the Committee of Experts in the order presented by the Committee of Experts in its report. The first point raised by the Committee of Experts was that national legislation required organizations to obtain prior authorization before establishing themselves as trade unions. In this regard, the Worker members cited the statement made by the Government representative last year that "the Government fully agreed that changes in the provision should be studied with a view to submitting the necessary amendments to the National Assembly as soon as possible". However, even after these renewed assurances, the promised changes had yet to be effected.

This observation applied equally to the second point raised in the report regarding section 6 of the Labour Code, which limited the holding of trade union office to Djibouti nationals. This provision was clearly in violation of Article 3 of Convention No. 87, which established the right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom.

The third point made by the Committee of Experts concerned the broad powers of the President to requisition public servants. While it was indeed possible to set limits in the area of essential public services, particularly with regard to the right to strike, the Worker members agreed fully with the Committee of Experts' comments that such limits could be imposed only in the strict sense of the term "essential services". They considered that the national legislation contained exceptions that went far beyond this threshold and which were not in conformity with the Convention. Noting that the Government had once again stated its willingness to redefine the limits of this broad power, the Worker members called for a change in the legislation and for its strict enforcement.

With regard to the fourth point raised in the report, concerning the reinstatement of trade union leaders, they considered the firing of these leaders to constitute a grave violation of the principle of freedom of association. The Worker members disagreed with the Government's statement to the Committee of Experts that the matter had been resolved. They pointed out that the September 1995 strike which had resulted in the dismissal of the UDT/UGDT leaders had been recognized by the Committee on Freedom of Association as being of a "legitimate nature ... and as a means of defending the economic and professional interests of the workers". The Worker members stated that the trade union leaders and union members dismissed, particularly the senior union leaders of the UDT/UGDT, should be reinstated in their former employment, and paid back-pay. Moreover, no conditions should be imposed upon their reinstatement.

The fifth point addressed in the report involved the right of workers to elect their trade union leaders freely and democratically. In this regard, the Committee of Experts had noted the Government's statement that it considered "this issue to be an internal matter for the trade union movement". The Worker members requested clarification on this point, since to date they had observed interference by the Government itself. Unfortunately, in contrast to the Government's statements, the legitimate trade union representatives in the country had presented the Worker members with a completely different picture of the situation. According to these sources, trade union freedom existed in Djibouti only on paper and interference in trade union affairs had gone as far as the creation of so-called "yellow trade unions". The Worker members also cited the specific example of over 5,000 shipbuilders who allegedly had no right to organize and bargain collectively and no social security benefits.

The Worker members stressed that this case involved one of the ILO fundamental rights. While they had listened once again to the Government representative express his Government's willingness to address the problems described, they noted that in practice a number of serious violations of the Convention were still common in Djibouti. The Worker members insisted that both law and practice needed to undergo radical change in the country in order to guarantee the independence of the trade union movement. They recalled that an ILO multidisciplinary advisory team had visited the country four times since November 1999. If the Government were serious and had political will, assistance in this regard could be provided yet again. There was no excuse but to take steps without delay to bring its national legislation and practice into conformity with Convention No. 87.

The Employer members noted that this case had been examined by the Committee of Experts on several occasions since 1997 and the Conference Committee had discussed the case in 1998 and 2000. In fact, they recalled that the views expressed by the Employer members in 2000 had been quite critical.

This case concerned five points, some of which the Employer members assessed differently from the Committee of Experts. The first point concerned the right to establish organizations without previous authorization. As Djibouti legislation required such authorization, there was therefore a clear violation of Convention No. 87. The Government had indicated previously its willingness to amend the legislation in question and the Committee of Experts had requested the Government to provide it with information on the proposed amendments. However, the Government representative had now indicated that the necessary amendments would be made in the new draft Labour Code. In the view of the Employer members, this was too late. It was therefore necessary to establish a concrete timetable within which these amendments must be made.

In respect of the legal restrictions limiting the holding of trade union office to Djibouti nationals, the Employer members considered this to constitute a typical internal trade union affair in which the Government had no right to interfere. However, it was acceptable to link the holding of trade union office to a minimum period of residence in the country.

Turning to the 1983 Decree, which conferred broad powers on the President to requisition public servants who were indispensable to the life of the nation and to the proper operation of essential public services, the Employer members noted the familiar argument that the national legislation should limit the power of requisitioning to public servants who exercised authority in the name of the State or essential services in a strict sense of the term. In this respect, the Employer members recalled that strikes were not internal trade union affairs, but always affected third parties. They once again stated that, in their view, the right to strike was not covered by Convention No. 87, for the reasons which had been set forth in detail in connection with the case of Ethiopia's application of Convention No. 87.

Addressing the Government's reinstatement of trade union leaders who had been dismissed for exercising legitimate trade union activities five years ago, the reasons for this dismissal were not clear to the Employer members since, in the view of the Committee of Experts, strikes were also a legitimate trade union activity. The Employer members pointed out that the Government had reinstated the trade union leaders in their jobs, not in their trade union functions, as this would have constituted government interference in the internal affairs of trade unions. Finally, the Employer members stated that workers' election of trade union representatives was of course an internal trade union affair which should be resolved without outside interference, noting that in any event the Government representative had indicated progress on this point. The Employer members also noted the reference in the report of the Committee of Experts indicating the Government's acceptance of ILO technical assistance, as well as the Government's intent to organize national tripartite consultations as soon as conditions were met. The Employer members noted that the Government's statement regarding tripartite consultation could be seen as a delaying tactic. However, the Employer members preferred to see this as a positive sign which they always looked for in such cases. In conclusion, the Employer members stated that the Government had shown its willingness to carry out the requested legislative amendments. However, these amendments should be finalized in the near future and this should be reflected in the Committee's conclusions.

The Worker member of France emphasized that unfortunately Djibouti was at the head of the list of countries which persisted in considering that they were not obliged to respect and apply the international Conventions which they had nevertheless ratified. To make matters worse, the Convention in question was one of the ILO's fundamental instruments. Convention No. 87 was essential for the development of independent trade union organizations and, as a consequence, of the sincere social dialogue that was a prerequisite for any hope of social progress. However, since the last session of the Conference, it appeared that there had been no progress in the Government's attitude. Indeed, with regard to Article 2 of the Convention, the Government had been taking evasive action for too long with a view to avoiding the submission of the necessary legislative amendment to Parliament. The same applied to the right of workers to elect their leaders freely and democratically. She emphasized that the Government had interfered in the activities of trade unions by endeavouring to create at any price fake trade unions and by organizing a congress for the establishment of a national confederation, whose leaders it would designate in place of the currently existing confederations. With reference to the report of the Committee of Experts, which emphasized the need to guarantee the right of workers to elect their representatives freely and democratically, she said that the Government, which through the ratification of the Convention was under the responsibility to guarantee this essential right to workers, considered that this matter was an internal affair of the trade union movement which must be resolved without any external interference, even by the Government.

She recalled that, according to the report of the Committee of Experts, the Government had called upon "international trade unions to come and observe the proper functioning of these trade union elections". In fact, a delegation composed of the ILO's MDT for East Africa and an official from AFRO-ICFTU had visited Djibouti from 9 to 13 March 2001. Its report merely confirmed the statements made by trade unionists from Djibouti who had fled into exile to safeguard their freedom and had become refugees in France. Following the visit, the official of the AFRO-ICFTU had referred to the terrible situation, in which matters were getting worse. None of the recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association had been taken into account. The trade union leaders had still not been reinstated in their jobs and lived in an increasingly unbearable situation, subject to daily harassment by the regime. Even the very idea of free and transparent trade union elections seemed to embarrass the authorities, whose interference in trade union affairs was worsening. The authorities disregarded international Conventions to which they were signatories. With reference to the report of the Committee of Experts, she therefore concluded that no progress had been made in terms of the Government's attitude. Not only did the Government engage in subterfuge, but it treated the legitimate concerns of the ILO with flippancy and disdain, if not cynicism. The Convention, which had been ratified in 1976, was still not applied in Djibouti. This was shown by the Committee of Experts in its report and confirmed by the information available to the speaker. The Government therefore needed to be reminded of its obligations.

The Worker member of Senegal recalled that Convention No. 87 was the best guarantee in the defence of the right of workers to organize and their right of freedom of association. He said that, because of the stubborn attitude adopted by the Government, the case of Djibouti had become a recurrent problem and was once again being examined by the Conference Committee. Indeed, he had the feeling that the Committee had not been heeded the previous year. This seemed to illustrate that the authorities were stubbornly maintaining a situation which placed them in violation of the provisions of the Convention by refusing to comply with the commitments that they had undertaken on ratifying the instrument. It was evident that the issue of the reinstatement of the trade union leaders was being addressed in an uneven manner, which should be forcibly condemned. He raised the question of the precise criteria on which the Government based its action in imposing such differentiated treatment. Certain leaders considered by the authorities to be the most hard-line had not been given the possibility of reinstatement because they had been considered to be elements which prevented the Government from turning in small circles. Were the authorities endeavouring in this way to set aside trade union leaders? Not content with his refusal to reinstate them, in a letter on 30 May 2001, the Minister of Employment and National Solidarity had qualified them as "apparatchiks", or individuals who regarded their positions as their own "private property". On the subject of the so-called free and democratic trade union elections which had been held in 1995, the Government representative should be reminded that the votes for the renewal of the executive board of the UDT and the UGDT had been cast by police officers. He took the occasion to recall that the authorities were obliged to recognize the trade union leaders elected at the 1995 congress. Interference by the Government in the internal affairs of trade unions was inadmissible. This interference was shown, for example, by the systematic and generalized harassment of trade union leaders, the prohibition of meeting regularly and freely and the closure of the headquarters of trade union organizations. He said that the trade union leaders elected at the famous congress in 1999 were in the service of the Government. He also questioned the relevance of the Government representative's statement concerning the political activism of certain trade union leaders. He urged the Government to reinstate the workers who had been dismissed, without exception. Finally, he recalled that there were other violations of freedom of association in Djibouti which he did not have the time to describe. Nevertheless, he said that the intention to subjugate the workers had never been so manifest.

Another Worker member of Senegal expressed the belief that the Government did not take the Committee's work seriously. Not only had none of the commitments undertaken last year been implemented, but the Committee still had good grounds for wondering whether the Government had ever made the effort to read the Convention that it had ratified over 20 years ago. The reasons put forward by the Government to justify violations of freedom of association in Djibouti were unacceptable. The facts showed that the authorities clearly interfered in the activities of workers' organizations and had the political intention of muzzling the trade unions. He therefore considered that it was no longer the time for diplomatic phrases and stated that such a situation required strong condemnation by the Committee. Indeed, the case of Djibouti was a sad illustration of the situations that the ILO was endeavouring to avoid, namely the total absence of dialogue. He concluded by stating that the Government, by snubbing the obligations that it had taken on when ratifying the Convention, was mocking the Conference Committee and therefore the ILO.

The Worker member of Côte d'Ivoire stated his concern about the statements of the Government representative of Djibouti regarding trade unionists located overseas and explained that sometimes when governments said that certain trade unionists were exiled abroad, these persons had later been found either imprisoned or murdered. For this reason, he requested the Government representative to provide more details on what had happened to the Djibouti trade unionists who had been dismissed in 1995.

The Government representative challenged some statements made during the discussion of this case and denied the accusations of trade union harassment. As regards the assertion of one Worker member that the Government had made a judgement about the trade union elections, he pointed out that it was not the Government, but indeed the trade union organizations, which had accused the Government of interference in their internal affairs. He emphasized once again that the Government needed to have a representative counterpart. For that purpose it was necessary to organize free and independent elections, under the control of regional and international trade union organizations if necessary, in order not to be accused of interference. He noted in this respect that, despite the invitation extended to these organizations last year, none of them had deemed it appropriate to check the situation on the spot. As regards the dismissals in 1995, he recalled that they had intervened following the strike launched to protest against an Act adopted by the National Assembly under IMF pressure. The Government considered that this strike was unlawful, while the workers felt it was legitimate, given the consequences of the Act on their working conditions. He reiterated that three out of 15 reinstatement requests had been accepted and that the other ones would be considered on a case-by-case basis. Regarding the legal provisions which violated Convention No. 87, he undertook that these would be amended when drafting the new Labour Code. Emphasizing that Djibouti was a young country which needed to train its workers, he reiterated his request for ILO assistance in trade union training. He concluded by reassuring the Worker member of Côte d'Ivoire about the physical well-being of dismissed workers living abroad since 1995; according to the information available to the Government, it appeared that these persons were alive and well in France, as implicitly confirmed by the French Worker member.

The Worker members considered that the situation in Djibouti was clearly critical for trade union activists. It was equally clear that government interference was at work. This interference should cease and the requested changes should be made to the national legislation. However, the Worker members recommended that the Conference Committee provide the Government with a timetable since, to date, no progress had been made in this case whatsoever. The Worker members noted that the Government had made promises and then returned to make more promises. As the Worker member of Senegal had stated, it was apparent that the Government did not take the Committee seriously. Therefore, the Worker members requested that the Committee ask the Government to report at the next sitting on any progress achieved. They stressed that, at a minimum, the Government must cease interfering with trade union activities, reinstate all trade union leaders and members dismissed and report to the Committee in detail on all changes made in law and practice.

The Employer members noted that in his concluding statements, the Government representative had announced his Government's willingness to amend various legislative provisions in violation of Convention No. 87. The Government had, however, already given these assurances to the Committee of Experts and this was reflected in the report. The Employer members reiterated that the Government needed to amend its legislation as it was in clear violation of the Convention, particularly with regard to the Government's interference in internal trade union affairs. They also urged the Government to provide the Committee of Experts with a report as soon as possible so that the Committee of Experts could evaluate the measures the Government had taken.

The Committee noted the information provided orally by the Government representative and the subsequent discussion. The Committee shared the deep concern of the Committee of Experts and the Committee on Freedom of Association at the grave violations of the Convention, particularly with regard to interference by the Government in the internal affairs of trade unions, and regretted to note that no significant progress had been found in the application of the Convention.

While noting the intention expressed by the Government to reinstate the trade unionists who had been dismissed, the Committee once again urged the Government to reinstate without delay in their jobs all trade union leaders and members of the UGTD/UDT who had been dismissed over six years ago for their trade union activities. It firmly requested the Government to allow the democratic election of trade union leaders at the level of federations and confederations.

The Committee noted the Government's announcement of an amendment to the relevant provisions when the new Labour Code was adopted. It also urged the Government to remove the serious discrepancies between the Convention and the legislation with regard to the establishment of trade unions without previous authorization, the freedom to elect trade union leaders and the rights of organization of public officials. The Committee requested the Government to refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of trade unions. It requested the Government to take the necessary measures on an urgent basis to ensure the full application of the Convention in both law and practice. Finally, the Committee requested the Government to supply full information in its next report so that developments in the situation could be examined exhaustively.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2000, Publication: 88th ILC session (2000)

A Government representative noted that according to some, notably trade union members, the Government was intolerant and opposed to freedom of association. It was more than willing to provide the Committee and anyone else who was interested with material information on this in a spirit of total transparency. It was true that some years ago Djibouti had experienced a trade union problem. But that was not the fault of the Government alone. As ILO experts who had met with the trade unions discovered, the situation of trade unions had been unstable for the following historical reasons. The trade union question, which came to a head in 1996, sprang from a political problem within the governing party, which included some influential trade union members. Certain leading political figures, as well as the union leaders who supported them, were repudiated and excluded from the party when the President signed a peace agreement with the armed movement known as FRUD in 1996. That was how the trade unions became pawns in a struggle which was not theirs to wage and which they had nothing to gain from. Therein lay the cause of the dismissals and the situation referred to by the Committee of Experts in its report. The Minister of Employment and Vocational Training recently stated the Government's position on this matter: the authorities would follow a hands-off policy on internal trade union matters. ILO experts who visited Djibouti in March of this year took note of that policy. Those experts were able to meet freely with the trade unions and reports on their meetings were drawn up. It was also decided, as the experts requested, to delay trade union elections, which would bring an opportunity for clarification, for the Government considered this was a trade union matter for the trade unions to settle free of any meddling from outsiders. International trade unionists were welcome to observe the elections and ensure that they were free and fair: the Government did not wish to take charge of the elections.

As to the reinstatement of trade union members, the Government considered that the issue had been resolved. There were those who sought to complicate it by coming up with new claims such as reinstatement in union leadership posts. It was, however, unfair to blame the Government for interfering in trade union affairs while asking it at the same time to assign trade union responsibilities to particular individuals. Some trade union members had been reinstated since 1997. The Government had documentary evidence of this and could share it with the Committee. Neither the Ministry of Employment nor the Government would yield to pressure from international trade unions which misled former national union members on the basis of information from certain union representatives in need of a cause. The Government representative told the Committee that the Government was reintegrating FRUD combatants in accordance with last February's peace agreement. The Government, which was organizing a peace conference with individuals who only a short time ago had been laying mines, had no reason whatsoever to oppose political pluralism or freedom of association.

To close the matter of reinstatement of certain trade union leaders, the speaker told the Committee that immediate action would be taken as soon as the ILO experts returned to Djibouti. It would plainly be easier to reinstate former public servants than workers in the private sector. However, the Ministry would see that this question was settled too. The country urged the ILO to organize in Djibouti a tripartite seminar on international labour standards and the Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up as well as a seminar on freedom of association so as to make up for the social partners' patent lack of training, which posed a major problem for the Government.

As for section 5 of the Act of Associations, as amended in 1977, the Government fully agreed that changes in the provision should be studied with a view to submitting the necessary amendments to the National Assembly as soon as possible.

Regarding section 6 of the Labour Code, which limits the holding of trade union office to Djibouti nationals, the representative observed that the provision belonged to the old Code of 1952. A new Code had been drafted and comments had been received from the employers. However, progress had been stalled by the trade unions' endless requests for more time. In any event the new draft did away with the provisions referred to by the Committee of Experts.

Lastly, concerning section 23 of Decree No. 83-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983, which established the conditions governing the right to organize and the right to strike of public servants, the speaker emphasized that the power to requisition was confined to indispensable services (health, security and air traffic control). Nevertheless, the Government was willing to place new limits on this power if the Committee considered that necessary.

The Worker members appreciated finally to be able to discuss this case with the Government of Djibouti. It was in fact not the first time that this case was on the list of cases regarding which Government delegates might be invited to supply information to the Committee. In 1999 they would have liked to engage in a dialogue with the Government but the latter was not accredited to the Conference at the time.

In its observations the Committee of Experts expressed particular concern for the case of Djibouti. Serious violations of the freedom of association had been established there for several years and there were no indications that the situation had improved. The Committee on Freedom of Association had examined problems concerning freedom of association in Djibouti and continued to do so. In January 1998 a direct contacts mission was conducted, at which time promises were made. The Government undertook to restore the dialogue with the syndicates and the proper worker representatives. However, to this day the Committee on Freedom of Association has not been able to note any tangible progress. Meanwhile, the situation in Djibouti did not seem to have changed and one of the fundamental rights of workers was thus being violated. The violations established in law and in practice should, furthermore, not be underestimated. According to information supplied by trade unions in Djibouti, it would seem that freedom of association was, in fact, constantly being violated: trade union meetings had been prohibited by the authorities, measures had been taken to intercept trade unionists' mail, etc. These were clearly cases of interference by the Government in trade union activities. Another example of such government interventions in trade unions' activities was illustrated by the unilateral convocation of the trade union congress UGTD/UDT by the Minister of Labour in July 1999. Several workers' organizations had declared that they had been considered to be illegal organizations by the authorities and that they did not have the right to call meetings or to meet workers.

From a purely legal point of view the Committee of Experts had pointed out the contradiction that existed between several legislative provisions and the terms of Convention No. 87. This concerned, first of all, the clear contradiction between the Act on Associations, which required prior authorization for the establishment of associations, and Article 2 of Convention No. 87. The second point raised by the Committee of Experts concerned article 6 of the Labour Code which limited the holding of trade union office to Djibouti nationals. This discrimination clearly violated Article 3 of Convention No. 87 which provided for the right to freely elect representatives of the organization. Finally, the third point cited by the Committee of Experts concerned the right to organize and the right to strike of public servants. It was in fact possible to limit the right to organize and the right to strike for "public servants who exercised authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, that is, those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, or in the event of an acute national crisis". The Djibouti legislation provided exceptions which went much further and which were not in conformity with the Convention and the meaning given to this provision by the Committee of Experts.

The Worker members considered that this case raised extremely important questions as it concerned one of the fundamental human rights at work. It was high time that the Djibouti Government conform to international labour Conventions which it had ratified and that it fulfil the promises made in the past. They insisted that law as well as practice should fundamentally be changed in order to allow for true independent trade union movements in all sectors. The lack of haste the Government was displaying in improving this situation was disquieting. It should act without any further delay.

The Employer members noted that they had hardly had an opportunity to examine the case of Djibouti to date. Although the case had been on the list for discussion last year, it had not been examined since the Government had not registered itself. They further noted that this year the Committee of Experts had indicated that the Government had not sent a report. This demonstrated the Government's lack of willingness to cooperate with the supervisory bodies. The Employer members also noted the comments made by the Committee on Freedom of Association as well as the results of the direct contacts mission undertaken in 1998 which gave rise to deep concern, since there was no tangible progress to date. In addition to the oral information provided by the Government representative to the Committee, a detailed report in writing was indispensable.

Turning to the issues raised by the Committee of Experts, the Employer members noted that these could be examined in three parts. Firstly, according to section 5 of the Act on Associations, as amended in 1997, prior authorization for the establishment of associations was required for trade unions. Secondly, section 6 of the Labour Code limited the holding of trade union office to Djibouti nationals. These provisions were a clear infringement of Convention No. 87 as they placed restrictions on the right to organize. Thirdly, with regard to the provision concerning the right to strike in the public sector, the Committee of Experts had reiterated its previous definition of the limited instances in which strikes could be prohibited and had therefore deemed this provision to be in contravention of the Convention. However, the Employer members considered that this definition of the right to strike had no foundation in Convention No. 87.

In any event, it was a matter of urgency for the Government to take some action. The Employer members had understood from the information provided by the Government representative that a second direct contacts mission should be envisaged. The mandate of such a mission, however, remained unclear. With regard to the Government representative's statement that there was no obstacle to the reinstatement of union leaders in their posts, the Employer members understood this to be a concrete promise. However, in view of the long period of time involved, the Employer members considered that the Government should engage itself in effective collaboration with the ILO. To this effect, it was indispensable for the Government to supply a detailed and comprehensive report reflecting all the issues which had been raised in the comments of the Committee of Experts. This case would then be re-examined in this Committee if necessary on the basis of the new information and the subsequent comments by the Committee of Experts.

The Worker member of Senegal stated that the case of Djibouti gave rise for concern. It was rare to observe cases of such flagrant violations perpetrated by a Government against trade unions. In July 1999 the Government organized a sham "joint" congress of the UDT and UGTD which prevented holding ordinary congresses of these trade union centrals. The Government wanted to impose leadership that it had chosen on these trade union organizations. It was important to underscore some of its acts, such as confiscation of post office boxes of the aforementioned trade union organizations, resulting in misrouting of their mail; the substitution of the legitimately elected union representatives by those working for the Government; systematic and generalized harassment of union leaders and affiliates of these organizations; the prohibition of free union meetings in enterprises; the forcible closure of the headquarters of the UDT and UGTD; and the arbitrary dismissal of leaders of these two trade union centrals. Despite promises made in 1998 by the Government to the direct contacts mission, no tangible progress could be observed. This problem had gone on for too long, and the Government must take all necessary measures to reinstate union leaders terminated since 1995; allow free organization of ordinary congresses of the UDT and UGTD; and ensure the respect of trade union freedom as well as the right to organize and bargain collectively. Firm conclusions must be adopted on this case by the Committee given the grave violations of trade union freedom which persist in Djibouti.

The Worker member of France indicated that if the Committee of Experts, citing the Committee on Freedom of Association, had not found any tangible progress in the restoration of freedom of association in full, then in reality one should speak of a deterioration in the situation, with government interference in the functioning of trade unions. The leaders of the trade unions UDT and UGTD who were dismissed in September 1995 had not yet been reinstated. Furthermore, in 1996 and 1997, teachers had been dismissed as a result of their participation in a strike. In this respect, it would be useful to be informed of measures taken by the Government in response to requests for reinstatement made this year by trade union leaders who had been dismissed. With regard to the organization of free and democratic elections, the speaker noted the participation of police officers in the vote to renew the Executive Committee of affiliates of the UDT and UGTD, in the place of employees of the Ministry of Transportation who were on strike the day of the election. The Government had furthermore blocked within the Ministry for Employment and Solidarity the list of delegates convened to participate in the election of the President and Secretary-General of the UDT and the UGTD. He raised the question of the sincerity of the Government's engagement to no longer interfere in the activities of trade unions. The Government had a restrictive attitude toward the exercise of the right to strike, and it was especially with regard to the public service that it used its power of requisition. Moreover, the Government continued to interfere frequently in the activities of trade unions. It should therefore be called upon to take concrete measures to restore freedom of association in Djibouti, both in law and in practice.

The Worker member of Rwanda stated that he was scarcely convinced by the statement of the Government member of Djibouti. The latter had invoked the economic and conflictual situation existing in his country in justification of violations of freedom of association, and further qualified the trade union situation in his country as a question of slight importance, despite the concerns expressed in this connection by the Committee on Freedom of Association. Regarding the question of the reinstatement of the dismissed trade unionists, the criteria employed should be examined in view of the fact that only some of them had been able to benefit from reinstatement. He considered that the statements of the Government member constituted a further diversionary tactic and that violations of trade union rights continued. The Government of Djibouti must stop these tactics and comply with the provisions of Convention No. 87.

The Government representative of Djibouti said that the statements of certain Worker members were exaggerated. References to cases of imprisonment, to manoeuvres intended to install persons in the pay of the Government as trade union leaders, and the seizure of post office boxes were laughable. However, the Government had no time for such amusement. It had proved its good faith, in particular by allowing the mission of ILO experts to act freely. Moreover, the reinstatements of dismissed trade union leaders were continuing, and were being examined case by case in full respect of the law. The Government reiterated its interest in, and its requests for, technical assistance for the organization of tripartite training seminars on international labour standards for trade unionists.

The Worker members noted that serious contradictions remained between national legislation and practice, on the one hand, and the Convention, on the other, without the Government having provided sufficient guarantees to allow an improvement in the situation. The Government must give effect to the promises made during the 1998 direct contacts mission as well as those renewed within this Committee. If the Government was motivated by the political will necessary to comply with the provisions of the Convention, effective application thereof would follow, if necessary with the technical assistance of the Office. The Worker members went on to stress the need to send in the reports due on the ratified Conventions, on the grounds that the latter provide the only means of noting an improvement in the situation.

The Employer members noted that, up to now, discussions with Djibouti had taken place only occasionally. Moreover, the information now provided by the Government representative was fairly general in nature. Pointing out that the Committee of Experts had noted several shortcomings in the legislation with regard to the Convention, the Employer members urged the Government to take measures to repeal or amend the provisions mentioned, which clearly violated the provisions of the Convention. The Employer members also urged the Government to promptly supply a report to the Committee of Experts responding in detail to all the issues raised in the observation at the earliest possible date.

The Government member of Djibouti wished that the conclusions of the Committee reflect his statements concerning the absence of interference by the Government in the exercise of trade union freedom and the renewed commitment of his Government in this respect.

The Committee took note of the oral information supplied by the Government representative and of the discussion which followed. The Committee shared the regret expressed by the Committee of Experts that the Government failed to send a report. The Committee stressed with great concern the lack of cooperation by the Government. It regretted in particular the absence of the Government of Djibouti at the International Labour Conference for the last two years. The Committee was deeply concerned by the situation of non-compliance over a number of years with the requirements of the Convention. It recalled that a direct contacts mission of representatives of the Director-General of the ILO went to Djibouti in January 1998 and that specialists on the multidisciplinary team (MDT) had two missions in the country in December 1999 and March 2000 with no significant results. It insisted on the importance for workers in Djibouti of being able to elect their representatives in full freedom. It urged the Government to reinstate the union leaders of UGTD/UDT who had been dismissed from their jobs for legitimate union activities five years ago and to allow the workers to elect democratically their union leaders at the unions' federation and confederation levels. It also urged the Government to remove all the discrepancies existing in the law in relation to: the forming of trade unions without previous authorization; the free elections of unions' representatives; and, the right of civil servants' unions to organize their activities without interference from the public authority that would impede their lawful exercise. The Committee expressed the firm hope that the Government would resume active cooperation with the supervisory bodies and would promptly supply a detailed report with answers to the points raised to the Committee of Experts on the concrete progress made both in practice and in law to ensure the application of this fundamental Convention.

The Government member of Djibouti wished that the conclusions of the Committee reflect his statements concerning the absence of interference by the Government in the exercise of trade union freedom and the renewed commitment of his Government in this respect.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1999, Publication: 87th ILC session (1999)

The Worker members recalled that the Committee had expressed grave concern regarding the measures taken and the practices used by the Government of Afghanistan, as well as other authorities, to prohibit the education of young girls and to prohibit women from working and to marginalize as much as possible the lives of hundreds of thousands of widows. The reports of the Special Rapporteur of the United Nations Human Rights Commission, the Secretary-General of the United Nations as well as the observations of the ICFTU and Amnesty International on the situation of women, revealed that the authorities imposed on women extremely difficult living and working conditions. The Committee of Experts having, in addition, learned about the regulatory text which restrained in a drastic manner the employment of women, could not help but observe the dramatic deterioration of the situation of women. The measures taken by the authorities had serious consequences on the health and teaching system, which had repercussions for women, young girls and young boys. Moreover, the almost generalized prohibition of women from working had dramatic consequences on the implementation of United Nations and NGO humanitarian programmes. The Committee of Experts highlighted, in the strongest terms, the violation by Afghanistan of the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), and also referred to discrimination based on political opinion. The Worker members stressed before the ILO and the delegates of the three groups present at the Conference that international and bilateral initiatives be taken to draw the attention of the Government in power in Afghanistan, as well as all the responsible politicians of this country, to the absolute necessity of taking urgent measures for the purpose of ending the very serious discrimination exercised against women in employment. Confronted with a case of such importance, the ILO and the entire international community must take responsibility.

The Worker members recalled that the Committee of Experts was particularly concerned by the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), by Djibouti. Serious contraventions of freedom of association had taken place and continued to exist in law and in practice. The Committee on Freedom of Association had examined complaints concerning very serious anti-trade union measures of reprisal taken against the leaders of the Djibouti Labour Union and the General Workers' Union of Djibouti, as well as against militants and members of these organizations. However, the Government promised, in January 1998, as a result of a direct contacts mission of the ILO led by Professor Verdier, a member of the Committee of Experts, to re-establish dialogue with trade unions and genuine workers' representatives. The Committee of Experts also observed that several provisions of the legislation were seriously in contravention of Convention No. 87, such as the requirement of prior consent to trade union constitutions, prohibition against foreigners from becoming trade union officers, and the extensive powers of the President of the Republic to bring a strike to an end upon demand. The Worker members considered that this case raised important questions and that the Government should take measures as soon as possible that would enable a renewal of the dialogue.

The Employer members regretted that certain governments had not responded to the invitation which had been made to them to come to the Committee in order to discuss questions relating to the application of ratified Conventions by their countries. They referred in particular in this respect to the Governments of Afghanistan and Djibouti. The Committee of Experts had made comments in its report which gave rise to serious concerns with regard to the application of certain Conventions by those countries. It was for that reason that they had been included in the list of cases proposed for discussion. In these circumstances, the conduct of these countries in not coming forward when requested displayed an uncooperative attitude towards the work of the Committee and of the Organization as a whole. The report of the Committee of Experts contained a great deal of information on the cases in question and the Employer members encouraged all those concerned to read the respective comments very carefully.

The Committee took note of the statements made by the Worker and Employer members regarding the application of Convention No. 87 by Djibouti and the application of Convention No. 111 by Afghanistan.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee recalls that its previous comments referred to certain provisions of Act No. 133/AN/05/5^e L of 28 January 2006 issuing the Labour Code.

Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the means of appeal provided for should the Minister of Labour refuse to issue the receipt of union registration or in the event that the Chief Public Prosecutor calls for the dissolution of a union under the terms of section 215 of the Labour Code. The Committee recalls that trade unions should have the right of appeal to independent courts against any administrative decision regarding their registration (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 77). If the right of appeal has not been provided for in the national regulations, the Committee requests the Government to make such provision and keep it informed of the measures adopted in this regard.

The Committee notes that, under the terms of section 212 of the Labour Code, minors over 16 years of age may join trade unions unless denied permission by their father, mother or guardian. The Committee recalls that the Convention guarantees to all workers, without distinction whatsoever, the right to establish and join organizations. The Convention does not authorize any distinction on grounds of age (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 64). The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 212 of the Labour Code in order to ensure that minors who have reached the legal minimum age for access to employment (16 years, according to section 5 of the Labour Code) can exercise their trade union rights without the need for prior authorization from a parent or guardian.

Article 3. The Committee notes that, under section 184 of the Labour Code, a trade union organization may express its opposition to an arbitration award, thereby depriving it of its binding force. It notes that, under section 190 of the Labour Code, a strike is unlawful, in the event of arbitration, until the arbitration award has acquired binding force. The Committee therefore requests the Government to clarify whether a strike called following opposition to an arbitration award is lawful within the meaning of section 190 of the Labour Code.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes with deep concern the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 24 August 2010 concerning the application of the Convention, in particular, the allegations concerning the total prohibition imposed on the Labour Union of Djibouti (UDT) to develop its activities; according to the ITUC, the Government accuses trade unionists of being enemies of the State and they are therefore arrested, detained, transferred or dismissed. Moreover, according to the allegations, the Government continues to favour fake organizations, thereby preventing the UDT’s representatives from participating in the International Labour Conference, and undertakes police controls at the entrance of the headquarters of the UDT. Given that the Government has not provided any observations on these comments and taking into account their seriousness and the fact that the authorities have prohibited the activities of the UDT – which is the most representative trade union organization – the Committee draws the attention of the Government to the fact that the exercise of trade union rights can only take place in a climate free from violence, pressure or threats of any kind and that the prohibition imposed on a trade union federation to develop its activities constitutes a direct violation of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide, without delay, its observations on the comments made by the ITUC, not to proceed with the measures adopted against the UDT and its leaders and to ensure that the physical integrity of all threatened trade unionists is protected.

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

Legislative problems. The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the provisions of Act No. 133/AN/05/5^e L of 28 January 2006 issuing the Labour Code. The Act was denounced by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and also by the Labour Union of Djibouti (UDT) and the General Union of Djibouti Workers (UGTD) as challenging fundamental rights relating to freedom of association. The Committee noted that, according to the report of the direct contacts mission undertaken in January 2008, the Government reaffirmed that all the social partners were consulted in the process of preparation of the Labour Code. However, the Committee noted that the Government held working meetings with the mission to consider the points of divergence between the national legislation and the Conventions in order to rectify them and that it undertook to bring the recommended solutions to the attention of a tripartite National Council for Labour, Employment and Vocational Training (CNTEFP), which was due to be constituted. The Committee noted that, in its report of May 2008, the Government reiterated its commitment to reviewing certain provisions of the legislation in order to bring them into conformity with the Convention and bring them to the attention of the CNTEFP. In this respect, the Committee noted the warning contained in the report of the direct contacts mission regarding any excessive delay in constituting the CNTEFP and the impact thereof on the adoption of the necessary legislative amendments. It also noted the mission’s recommendation that, in a context where the representativeness of workers’ organizations has not yet been established in a clear and objective manner, no representation from the trade unions in Djibouti should be discarded from the work of the CNTEFP. The Committee endorses the recommendations of the direct contacts mission on this point and requests the Government to indicate whether the CNTEFP has been constituted and state the composition thereof.

The Committee wishes to remind the Government of its comments concerning the following points of divergence between the Labour Code and the Convention:

–      Sections 41 and 42 of the Labour Code. These provisions concern the suspension of employment contracts. Section 41 provides that the employment contract shall be suspended, among other cases, for the duration of any regular, political or trade union office held by the worker which is not compatible with paid employment (paragraph 8). Section 42 provides in addition that the period during which the employment is suspended shall not be counted for the purpose of determining the worker’s seniority within the undertaking. The Committee considers that the holding of trade union office is not incompatible with professional life and, consequently, any worker holding trade union office should be able to remain employed. The Committee therefore considers that sections 41 and 42 of the Labour Code, in providing for a more or less automatic suspension of the employment contract when a worker holds trade union office, are likely to be detrimental to the rights of all workers to establish and join the organization of their own choosing or to hold trade union office (Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention). The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend sections 41 and 42 of the Labour Code by providing that the possibility of suspending the employment contract during a period in which a worker holds a trade union office that is incompatible with a professional activity is a matter for negotiation between the employer and the trade union, who must establish the relevant arrangements, and that in any case such suspension cannot be automatic.

–      Section 214 of the Labour Code. This section provides that any person convicted “by any court” may not hold office as a trade union leader. The Committee recalls that a law which generally prohibits access to trade union office because of any conviction is incompatible with the principles of freedom of association (Article 3 of the Convention), when the activity condemned is not prejudicial to the attitude and integrity required to exercise trade union office. In this case, the Committee considers that section 214 of the Code, in deeming any person who has been convicted to be unsuitable for trade union office, is formulated too broadly and would cover situations in which the nature of the conviction is not inherently such as to rule out the holding of trade union office. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend section 214 of the Labour Code so as to ensure that only court convictions for offences which by their nature call into question the integrity of the individual are deemed to be incompatible with the holding of trade union office.

–      Section 215 of the Labour Code. This section concerns the formalities for registration and verification of the legality of a trade union. Under the terms of this section, the founders of any occupational trade union are required to deposit their regulations and the list of persons responsible for their administration and management; within a period of 30 days following their deposit, copies of the regulations and the list of persons responsible for the administration and management of the union are transmitted by the labour inspector to the Minister of Labour and the Chief Public Prosecutor; the documents are accompanied by a report prepared by the Labour Inspectorate; the Minister of Labour then has 15 days to issue a receipt granting legal recognition to the union; the Chief Public Prosecutor then has 30 days to verify the regulations and review the situation of each of the officials responsible for the administration and management of the union and to notify the Minister of the Interior, the Minister of Labour and the union leaders concerned of his/her conclusions; any modification to the regulations and any changes to the composition of the officials responsible for the management or administration of the trade union have to be brought to the knowledge of the same authorities and are subject to verification under the same conditions. The Committee firstly wishes to remind the Government that Article 2 of the Convention guarantees the right of workers and employers to establish organizations without previous authorization by the public authorities. It therefore considers that national legislation which requires the deposit of the regulations of organizations is compatible with this provision if it is a mere formality intended to ensure that the regulations are available to the public. Nevertheless, problems of compatibility with the Convention may arise if the registration procedure is lengthy or complicated, or if the rules concerning registration are applied in such a way as to defeat its purpose and the registration authorities make excessive use of their discretionary power. The Committee notes that section 215 of the Labour Code, under which the decision of the Minister of Labour requires not only the deposit by the founders of the trade union of the relevant documents but also a detailed report by the labour inspector, would appear to grant the administration more or less discretionary power in deciding whether or not an organization meets the registration criteria. This situation could amount in practice to denying the right of workers and employers to establish organizations without previous authorization, in contravention of Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend, in consultation with the social partners, section 215 of the Labour Code so as to guarantee the right to establish workers’ and employers’ organizations without previous authorization, remove the provisions which give de facto discriminatory powers to the administration and ensure that the registration procedure is merely a formality.

Finally, the Committee recalls that its previous comments were also concerned with the need for the Government to repeal or amend the following provisions of the legislation:

–      Section 5 of the Act on associations. This provision, which requires organizations to obtain authorization prior to their establishment as trade unions, is contrary to Article 2 of the Convention.

–      Section 23 of Decree No. 83-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983. This provision, which confers upon the President of the Republic broad powers to requisition public servants who are indispensable to the life of the nation and the proper operation of essential public services, should be amended in order to restrict the power of requisition to public servants who exercise authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term.

Noting that the Government displayed a degree of openness during the direct contacts mission by indicating that it was planning a number of amendments and declaring its willingness to receive technical assistance and advice from the Office, the Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary steps as soon as possible to revise and amend the legislative provisions, taking into account the comments reiterated above. It expresses the firm hope that the Government’s next report will contain information on the progress made in this respect.

The Committee takes note of the comments dated 26 August 2009 from the ITUC which reiterate matters already examined by the Committee, as well as denouncing persistent acts of anti-union harassment and discrimination and the brutal repression of strike actions. The Committee urges the Government to provide its reply to the ITUC’s comments.

Finally, the Committee takes note of the conclusions of the Credentials Committee of the Conference concerning the examination of an objection, in June 2009, concerning the nomination of the Workers’ delegation of Djibouti. The Credentials Committee concluded that the Government had not fulfilled its obligations as set out in article 3 of the ILO Constitution because it had not nominated Workers’ delegates representing the workers of Djibouti in agreement with the most representative workers’ organization. Furthermore, it regretted the absence of any progress, despite the expectations raised in the recommendations of the direct contacts mission of January 2008, as well as the hopes expressed last year, and called upon the Government to guarantee the implementation of a procedure based on objective and transparent criteria for the nomination of the Worker representatives at future sessions of the Conference. To this end, it expected that these criteria will be identified so that consultation with all parties concerned, and particularly with the genuine workers’ organizations in Djibouti, which includes the UGDT whose current secretary-general is Mr Mohamed Abdou, could be carried out in an environment respecting the ability of the workers’ organizations to act in total independence from the Government, in accordance with 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 Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee recalls that its previous comments referred to certain provisions of Act No. 133/AN/05/5^e L of 28 January 2006 issuing the Labour Code.

Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the means of appeal provided for should the Minister of Labour refuse to issue the receipt of union registration or in the event that the Chief Public Prosecutor calls for the dissolution of a union under the terms of section 215 of the Labour Code. The Committee recalls that trade unions should have the right of appeal to independent courts against any administrative decision regarding their registration (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 77). If the right of appeal has not been provided for in the national regulations, the Committee requests the Government to make such provision and keep it informed of the measures adopted in this regard.

The Committee notes that, under the terms of section 212 of the Labour Code, minors over 16 years of age may join trade unions unless denied permission by their father, mother or guardian. The Committee recalls that the Convention guarantees to all workers, without distinction whatsoever, the right to establish and join organizations. The Convention does not authorize any distinction on grounds of age (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 64). The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 212 of the Labour Code in order to ensure that minors who have reached the legal minimum age for access to employment (16 years, according to section 5 of the Labour Code) can exercise their trade union rights without the need for prior authorization from a parent or guardian.

Article 3. The Committee notes that, under section 184 of the Labour Code, a trade union organization may express its opposition to an arbitration award, thereby depriving it of its binding force. It notes that, under section 190 of the Labour Code, a strike is unlawful, in the event of arbitration, until the arbitration award has acquired binding force. The Committee therefore requests the Government to clarify whether a strike called following opposition to an arbitration award is lawful within the meaning of section 190 of the Labour Code.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

Legislative problems. The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the provisions of Act No. 133/AN/05/5^e L of 28 January 2006 issuing the Labour Code. The Act was denounced by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and also by the Labour Union of Djibouti (UDT) and the General Union of Djibouti Workers (UGTD) as challenging fundamental rights relating to freedom of association. The Committee noted that, according to the report of the direct contacts mission undertaken in January 2008, the Government reaffirmed that all the social partners were consulted in the process of preparation of the Labour Code. However, the Committee noted that the Government held working meetings with the mission to consider the points of divergence between the national legislation and the Conventions in order to rectify them and that it undertook to bring the recommended solutions to the attention of a tripartite National Council for Labour, Employment and Vocational Training (CNTEFP), which was due to be constituted. The Committee noted that, in its report of May 2008, the Government reiterated its commitment to reviewing certain provisions of the legislation in order to bring them into conformity with the Convention and bring them to the attention of the CNTEFP. In this respect, the Committee noted the warning contained in the report of the direct contacts mission regarding any excessive delay in constituting the CNTEFP and the impact thereof on the adoption of the necessary legislative amendments. It also noted the mission’s recommendation that, in a context where the representativeness of workers’ organizations has not yet been established in a clear and objective manner, no representation from the trade unions in Djibouti should be discarded from the work of the CNTEFP. The Committee endorses the recommendations of the direct contacts mission on this point and requests the Government to indicate whether the CNTEFP has been constituted and state the composition thereof.

The Committee wishes to remind the Government of its comments concerning the following points of divergence between the Labour Code and the Convention:

–      Sections 41 and 42 of the Labour Code. These provisions concern the suspension of employment contracts. Section 41 provides that the employment contract shall be suspended, among other cases, for the duration of any regular, political or trade union office held by the worker which is not compatible with paid employment (paragraph 8). Section 42 provides in addition that the period during which the employment is suspended shall not be counted for the purpose of determining the worker’s seniority within the undertaking. The Committee considers that the holding of trade union office is not incompatible with professional life and, consequently, any worker holding trade union office should be able to remain employed. The Committee therefore considers that sections 41 and 42 of the Labour Code, in providing for a more or less automatic suspension of the employment contract when a worker holds trade union office, are likely to be detrimental to the rights of all workers to establish and join the organization of their own choosing or to hold trade union office (Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention). The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend sections 41 and 42 of the Labour Code by providing that the possibility of suspending the employment contract during a period in which a worker holds a trade union office that is incompatible with a professional activity is a matter for negotiation between the employer and the trade union, who must establish the relevant arrangements, and that in any case such suspension cannot be automatic.

–      Section 214 of the Labour Code. This section provides that any person convicted “by any court” may not hold office as a trade union leader. The Committee recalls that a law which generally prohibits access to trade union office because of any conviction is incompatible with the principles of freedom of association (Article 3 of the Convention), when the activity condemned is not prejudicial to the attitude and integrity required to exercise trade union office. In this case, the Committee considers that section 214 of the Code, in deeming any person who has been convicted to be unsuitable for trade union office, is formulated too broadly and would cover situations in which the nature of the conviction is not inherently such as to rule out the holding of trade union office. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend section 214 of the Labour Code so as to ensure that only court convictions for offences which by their nature call into question the integrity of the individual are deemed to be incompatible with the holding of trade union office.

–      Section 215 of the Labour Code. This section concerns the formalities for registration and verification of the legality of a trade union. Under the terms of this section, the founders of any occupational trade union are required to deposit their regulations and the list of persons responsible for their administration and management; within a period of 30 days following their deposit, copies of the regulations and the list of persons responsible for the administration and management of the union are transmitted by the labour inspector to the Minister of Labour and the Chief Public Prosecutor; the documents are accompanied by a report prepared by the Labour Inspectorate; the Minister of Labour then has 15 days to issue a receipt granting legal recognition to the union; the Chief Public Prosecutor then has 30 days to verify the regulations and review the situation of each of the officials responsible for the administration and management of the union and to notify the Minister of the Interior, the Minister of Labour and the union leaders concerned of his/her conclusions; any modification to the regulations and any changes to the composition of the officials responsible for the management or administration of the trade union have to be brought to the knowledge of the same authorities and are subject to verification under the same conditions. The Committee firstly wishes to remind the Government that Article 2 of the Convention guarantees the right of workers and employers to establish organizations without previous authorization by the public authorities. It therefore considers that national legislation which requires the deposit of the regulations of organizations is compatible with this provision if it is a mere formality intended to ensure that the regulations are available to the public. Nevertheless, problems of compatibility with the Convention may arise if the registration procedure is lengthy or complicated, or if the rules concerning registration are applied in such a way as to defeat its purpose and the registration authorities make excessive use of their discretionary power. The Committee notes that section 215 of the Labour Code, under which the decision of the Minister of Labour requires not only the deposit by the founders of the trade union of the relevant documents but also a detailed report by the labour inspector, would appear to grant the administration more or less discretionary power in deciding whether or not an organization meets the registration criteria. This situation could amount in practice to denying the right of workers and employers to establish organizations without previous authorization, in contravention of Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend, in consultation with the social partners, section 215 of the Labour Code so as to guarantee the right to establish workers’ and employers’ organizations without previous authorization, remove the provisions which give de facto discriminatory powers to the administration and ensure that the registration procedure is merely a formality.

Finally, the Committee recalls that its previous comments were also concerned with the need for the Government to repeal or amend the following provisions of the legislation:

–      Section 5 of the Act on associations. This provision, which requires organizations to obtain authorization prior to their establishment as trade unions, is contrary to Article 2 of the Convention.

–      Section 23 of Decree No. 83-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983. This provision, which confers upon the President of the Republic broad powers to requisition public servants who are indispensable to the life of the nation and the proper operation of essential public services, should be amended in order to restrict the power of requisition to public servants who exercise authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term.

Noting that the Government displayed a degree of openness during the direct contacts mission by indicating that it was planning a number of amendments and declaring its willingness to receive technical assistance and advice from the Office, the Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary steps as soon as possible to revise and amend the legislative provisions, taking into account the comments reiterated above. It expresses the firm hope that the Government’s next report will contain information on the progress made in this respect.

The Committee takes note of the comments dated 26 August 2009 from the ITUC which reiterate matters already examined by the Committee, as well as denouncing persistent acts of anti-union harassment and discrimination and the brutal repression of strike actions. The Committee urges the Government to provide its reply to the ITUC’s comments.

Finally, the Committee takes note of the conclusions of the Credentials Committee of the Conference concerning the examination of an objection, in June 2009, concerning the nomination of the Workers’ delegation of Djibouti. The Credentials Committee concluded that the Government had not fulfilled its obligations as set out in article 3 of the ILO Constitution because it had not nominated Workers’ delegates representing the workers of Djibouti in agreement with the most representative workers’ organization. Furthermore, it regretted the absence of any progress, despite the expectations raised in the recommendations of the direct contacts mission of January 2008, as well as the hopes expressed last year, and called upon the Government to guarantee the implementation of a procedure based on objective and transparent criteria for the nomination of the Worker representatives at future sessions of the Conference. To this end, it expected that these criteria will be identified so that consultation with all parties concerned, and particularly with the genuine workers’ organizations in Djibouti, which includes the UGDT whose current secretary-general is Mr Mohamed Abdou, could be carried out in an environment respecting the ability of the workers’ organizations to act in total independence from the Government, in accordance with 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 Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee recalls that its previous comments referred to certain provisions of Act No. 133/AN/05/5^e L of 28 January 2006 issuing the Labour Code. Noting that the Government’s last report does not provide any information on the clarifications and amendments requested previously, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the commitment reiterated by the Government in its report to review the provisions of the legislation in order to bring them into conformity with the Convention will lead it to consider the following points.

Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the means of appeal provided for should the Minister of Labour refuse to issue the receipt of union registration or in the event that the Chief Public Prosecutor calls for the dissolution of a union under the terms of section 215 of the Labour Code. The Committee recalls that trade unions should have the right of appeal to independent courts against any administrative decision regarding their registration (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 77). If the right of appeal has not been provided for in the national regulations, the Committee requests the Government to make such provision and keep it informed of the measures adopted in this regard.

The Committee notes that, under the terms of section 212 of the Labour Code, minors over 16 years of age may join trade unions unless denied permission by their father, mother or guardian. The Committee recalls that the Convention guarantees to all workers, without distinction whatsoever, the right to establish and join organizations. The Convention does not authorize any distinction on grounds of age (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 64). The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 212 of the Labour Code in order to ensure that minors who have reached the legal minimum age for access to employment (16 years, according to section 5 of the Labour Code) can exercise their trade union rights without the need for prior authorization from a parent or guardian.

Article 3. The Committee notes that, under section 184 of the Labour Code, a trade union organization may express its opposition to an arbitration award, thereby depriving it of its binding force. It notes that, under section 190 of the Labour Code, a strike is unlawful, in the event of arbitration, until the arbitration award has acquired binding force. The Committee therefore requests the Government to clarify whether a strike called following opposition to an arbitration award is lawful within the meaning of section 190 of the Labour Code.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee takes note of the direct contacts mission undertaken in January 2008 following the discussion that had taken place in the Committee on the Application of Standards of the 96th Session of the International Labour Conference (June 2007).

The Committee notes the comments from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 29 August 2008 reiterating its previous observations of 2007 concerning violations of the Convention in law and in practice. The ITUC denounces the brutal repression of strikes, the designation by the authorities of persons who do not represent the most representative organizations for participating in international meetings, and the harassment and arrest of trade unionists. The Committee urges the Government to send its replies to the observations by the ITUC.

The Committee recalls that in its previous comments it already noted the observations from the ITUC on the arrest and assault of trade unionists and acts of anti-union harassment, and requested the Government to conduct investigations into the allegations. The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report received in May 2008 merely rejects the ITUC’s observations and makes some general remarks on freedom of association in Djibouti. The Committee also notes that, according to information gathered by the direct contacts mission which took place in January 2008, a dominant feature of the situation of trade unions in Djibouti is a widening gap between some workers’ organizations and the Government, and allegations persist regarding Government interference in union activities and discrimination and harassment suffered by union leaders. Moreover, the Committee notes the recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 2450 (351st Report, paragraphs 775 to 798). The Committee firmly reminds the Government that civil freedoms and trade union rights are interdependent and that a truly free and independent trade union movement can only develop in a climate of respect for fundamental human rights. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will give priority to resolving all pending issues so that all trade union organizations and their representatives can fully enjoy the guarantees afforded by the Convention. The Committee once again requests the Government to take measures without delay so that the necessary investigations are conducted into the serious allegations referred to above in order to identify the persons responsible for anti-union acts, and to prosecute and penalize them, in accordance with the law.

Legislative problems. The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the provisions of Act No. 133/AN/05/5^e L of 28 January 2006 issuing the Labour Code. The Act was denounced by the ITUC and also by the Labour Union of Djibouti (UDT) and the General Union of Djibouti Workers (UGTD) as challenging fundamental rights relating to freedom of association. The Committee notes that, according to the report of the direct contacts mission, the Government reaffirms that all the social partners were consulted in the process of preparation of the Labour Code. However, the Committee notes that the Government held working meetings with the mission to consider the points of divergence between the national legislation and the Conventions in order to rectify them and that it undertook to bring the recommended solutions to the attention of a tripartite National Council for Labour, Employment and Vocational Training (CNTEFP), which was due to be constituted. The Committee notes that, in its report of May 2008, the Government reiterates its commitment to reviewing certain provisions of the legislation in order to bring them into conformity with the Convention and bring them to the attention of the CNTEFP. In this respect, the Committee notes the warning contained in the report of the direct contacts mission regarding any excessive delay in constituting the CNTEFP and the impact thereof on the adoption of the necessary legislative amendments. It also notes the mission’s recommendation that, in a context where the representativeness of workers’ organizations has not yet been established in a clear and objective manner, no representation from the trade unions in Djibouti should be discarded from the work of the CNTEFP. The Committee endorses the recommendations of the direct contacts mission on this point and requests the Government to indicate whether the CNTEFP has been constituted and state the composition thereof.

The Committee wishes to remind the Government of its comments concerning the following points of divergence between the Labour Code and the Convention:

–           Sections 41 and 42 of the Labour Code. These provisions concern the suspension of employment contracts. Section 41 provides that the employment contract shall be suspended, among other cases, for the duration of any regular, political or trade union office held by the worker which is not compatible with paid employment (paragraph 8). Section 42 provides in addition that the period during which the employment is suspended shall not be counted for the purpose of determining the worker’s seniority within the undertaking. The Committee considers that the holding of trade union office is not incompatible with professional life and, consequently, any worker holding trade union office should be able to remain employed. The Committee therefore considers that sections 41 and 42 of the Labour Code, in providing for a more or less automatic suspension of the employment contract when a worker holds trade union office, are likely to be detrimental to the rights of all workers to establish and join the organization of their own choosing or to hold trade union office (Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention). The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend sections 41 and 42 of the Labour Code by providing that the possibility of suspending the employment contract during a period in which a worker holds a trade union office that is incompatible with a professional activity is a matter for negotiation between the employer and the trade union, who must establish the relevant arrangements, and that in any case such suspension cannot be automatic.

–           Section 214 of the Labour Code. This section provides that any person convicted “by any court” may not hold office as a trade union leader. The Committee recalls that a law which generally prohibits access to trade union office because of any conviction is incompatible with the principles of freedom of association (Article 3 of the Convention), when the activity condemned is not prejudicial to the attitude and integrity required to exercise trade union office. In this case, the Committee considers that section 214 of the Code, in deeming any person who has been convicted to be unsuitable for trade union office, is formulated too broadly and would cover situations in which the nature of the conviction is not inherently such as to rule out the holding of trade union office. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend section 214 of the Labour Code so as to ensure that only court convictions for offences which by their nature call into question the integrity of the individual are deemed to be incompatible with the holding of trade union office.

–           Section 215 of the Labour Code. This section concerns the formalities for registration and verification of the legality of a trade union. Under the terms of this section, the founders of any occupational trade union are required to deposit their regulations and the list of persons responsible for their administration and management; within a period of 30 days following their deposit, copies of the regulations and the list of persons responsible for the administration and management of the union are transmitted by the labour inspector to the Minister of Labour and the Chief Public Prosecutor; the documents are accompanied by a report prepared by the Labour Inspectorate; the Minister of Labour then has 15 days to issue a receipt granting legal recognition to the union; the Chief Public Prosecutor then has 30 days to verify the regulations and review the situation of each of the officials responsible for the administration and management of the union and to notify the Minister of the Interior, the Minister of Labour and the union leaders concerned of his/her conclusions; any modification to the regulations and any changes to the composition of the officials responsible for the management or administration of the trade union have to be brought to the knowledge of the same authorities and are subject to verification under the same conditions. The Committee firstly wishes to remind the Government that Article 2 of the Convention guarantees the right of workers and employers to establish organizations without previous authorization by the public authorities. It therefore considers that national legislation which requires the deposit of the regulations of organizations is compatible with this provision if it is a mere formality intended to ensure that the regulations are available to the public. Nevertheless, problems of compatibility with the Convention may arise if the registration procedure is lengthy or complicated, or if the rules concerning registration are applied in such a way as to defeat its purpose and the registration authorities make excessive use of their discretionary power. The Committee notes that section 215 of the Labour Code, under which the decision of the Minister of Labour requires not only the deposit by the founders of the trade union of the relevant documents but also a detailed report by the labour inspector, would appear to grant the administration more or less discretionary power in deciding whether or not an organization meets the registration criteria. This situation could amount in practice to denying the right of workers and employers to establish organizations without previous authorization, in contravention of Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend, in consultation with the social partners, section 215 of the Labour Code so as to guarantee the right to establish workers’ and employers’ organizations without previous authorization, remove the provisions which give de facto discriminatory powers to the administration and ensure that the registration procedure is merely a formality.

Finally, the Committee recalls that its previous comments were also concerned with the need for the Government to repeal or amend the following provisions of the legislation:

–           Section 5 of the Act on associations. This provision, which requires organizations to obtain authorization prior to their establishment as trade unions, is contrary to Article 2 of the Convention.

–           Section 23 of Decree No. 83-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983. This provision, which confers upon the President of the Republic broad powers to requisition public servants who are indispensable to the life of the nation and the proper operation of essential public services, should be amended in order to restrict the power of requisition to public servants who exercise authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term.

Noting that the Government displayed a degree of openness during the direct contacts mission by indicating that it was planning a number of amendments and declaring its willingness to receive technical assistance and advice from the Office, the Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary steps as soon as possible to revise and amend the legislative provisions, taking into account the comments reiterated above. It expresses the firm hope that the Government’s next report will contain information on the progress made in this respect.

A request on a number of other points is being addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes the adoption of Act No. 133/AN/05/5thL of 28 January 2006 issuing the Labour Code.

1. The Committee notes that, by virtue of section 184 of the Labour Code, a trade union organization may express opposition to an arbitration award, thereby depriving it of its binding force. It notes that under section 190 of the Labour Code, a strike is unlawful, in the event of arbitration, until the arbitration award has acquired binding force. This being the case, the Committee requests the Government to specify whether a strike called following opposition to an arbitration award is lawful within the meaning of section 190 of the Labour Code.

2. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the means of recourse envisaged in the event of a refusal by the minister responsible for labour to issue a receipt or in the event of an application for dissolution made by the Attorney-General of the Republic under section 215 of the Labour Code. In this respect, the Committee recalls that trade unions should have the right to appeal to independent courts against any administrative decision regarding their registration (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 77). If such a right of appeal is not established in national law, the Committee requests the Government to make the necessary provision and to provide information on the measures adopted in this respect.

3. The Committee notes that, under the terms of section 212 of the Labour Code, minors over 16 years of age may become members of unions, unless their father, mother or guardian opposes membership. In this respect, the Committee recalls that the Convention guarantees that all workers, without distinction whatsoever, shall have the right to establish and to join organizations, and that the Government has undertaken to give effect to this provision. The Committee considers that no distinction based on age is authorized by the Convention (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 64). The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 212 of the Labour Code so as to raise any obstacle to the exercise of trade union rights by minors who have access to the labour market.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received.

1. Comments from workers’ organizations. The Committee notes the comments of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), dated 28 August 2007, reiterating those of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) of 2006 concerning violations of the Convention in law (and particularly the new Labour Code) and practice. The ITUC also denounces the brutal repression of strikes, arrests of trade union leaders and the expulsion from the country of the members of an international trade union solidarity mission and an ILO official. The Committee regrets to note that the Government, in a communication of 15 October 2007, confines itself to rejecting the observations made by the ITUC, without providing information on these grave allegations. The Committee recalls that the ICFTU denounced numerous arrests of trade unionists, physical aggression against demonstrators and strikers, measures to banish unionists from their homes, acts of anti-union harassment and, finally, the prohibition to hold trade union elections in the National Mint. The Committee recalls that civil liberties and trade union rights are interdependent and that a truly free and independent trade union movement can only develop in a climate of respect for fundamental human rights.

The Committee also notes the communication dated 11 August 2007 of the General Union of Djibouti Workers (UGTD), also relating to restrictions on trade union rights contained in the new Labour Code.

The Committee urges the Government to order inquiries into the acts of violence that are denounced and to provide without delay its reply to the observations relating to the very serious acts referred to by the ITUC.

The Committee notes Case No. 2450 of the Committee on Freedom of Association (348th Report, November 2007, paras 533 to 560) which relates, among other matters, to the issues raised by the ICFTU and the ITUC.

The Committee also notes the discussion which took place in the Committee on the Application of Standards at the 96th Session of the International Labour Conference (June 2007) concerning the application of the Convention by Djibouti. It notes in particular that the Government accepted a direct contacts mission in order to clarify the situation with regard to all the issues raised. The Committee trusts that it will be possible for this mission to take place in the near future and that the Government’s next report will show real progress in the application of the Convention in both law and practice.

2. New labour regulation since 2006. The Committee notes the adoption of Act No. 133/AN/05/5thL of 28 January 2006 issuing the Labour Code. It notes that, according to the ITUC, this Act, which challenges fundamental rights relating to freedom of association, was prepared and adopted without the participation of the social partners. The Committee notes that, in a communication of March 2007 provided by the Government in the context of Case No. 2450 pending before the Committee on Freedom of Association, the Government indicates that the social partners were fully consulted at all stages of the process. According to the Government, consultations were held on several occasions with the social partners and, although comments were received from the employers’ association, the trade union confederations (UDT and UGTD) did not provide their comments on the grounds that they did not have the necessary technical expertise.

While noting that certain of the provisions referred to below are also the subject of observations by the ITUC and the UGTD, the Committee wishes to make the following comments on certain provisions of the new Labour Code:

–      sections 41 and 42 of the Labour Code concerning the suspension of employment contracts. Section 41 provides that the employment contract shall be suspended, among other cases, for the duration of any regular, political or trade union office held by the worker which is not compatible with paid employment (subsection 8). Section 42 provides in addition that the period during which the employment contract is suspended shall not be counted for the purpose of determining the worker’s seniority within the undertaking. In this respect, the Committee considers that the holding of trade union office is not incompatible with paid employment, and consequently any worker holding trade union office should be able to remain employed. The Committee therefore considers that sections 41 and 42 of the Labour Code, in providing for a more or less automatic suspension of the employment contract when a worker holds trade union office, are likely to be detrimental to the rights of all workers to establish and to join the organization of their own choosing or to hold trade union office (Article 2 of the Convention). The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend sections 41 and 42 of the Labour Code by providing that the possibility of suspending the employment contract during a period of trade union office where such office is incompatible with the demands of work is a matter for negotiation between the parties concerned, who must establish the relevant modalities, and that in any event such suspension cannot be automatic.

–      section 214 of the Labour Code, under which a person sentenced “by any court” may not hold office as a trade union leader. In this respect, the Committee recalls that a law which generally prohibits access to trade union office because of any conviction is incompatible with the principles of freedom of association (Article 3 of the Convention), when the activity condemned is not prejudicial to the aptitude and integrity required to exercise trade union office. In this case, the Committee considers that section 214 of the Labour Code, in deeming any person who has been convicted to be unsuitable for trade union office, is formulated too broadly and would cover situations in which the nature of the conviction is not inherently such as to rule out the holding of trade union office. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend section 214 of the Labour Code, in consultation with the social partners, so as to ensure that only court sentences for offences which by their nature are prejudicial to the integrity of the individual are deemed to be incompatible with the holding of trade union office.

–      section 215 of the Labour Code concerning the formalities for the registration and verification of the legality of a trade union. Under the terms of this section, the founders of any occupational trade union are required to deposit their by-laws and the list of persons responsible for their administration and management; within a period of 30 days following their deposit, copies of the by-laws and the list of persons responsible for the administration and management of the union are transmitted by the labour inspector to the Labour Minister and the Attorney-General of the Republic; the documents are accompanied by a report prepared by the labour inspectorate; the Labour Minister then has 15 days to issue a receipt granting legal recognition to the union; the Attorney-General of the Republic then has 30 days to verify the by-laws and review the situation of each of the officials responsible for the administration and management of the union and to notify the Minister of the Interior, Minister of Labour and the union officials concerned of her/his conclusions; any modification to the by-laws and any changes to the composition of the officials responsible for the management or administration of the trade union have to be brought to the knowledge of the same authorities and are subject to verification under the same conditions. The Committee firstly wishes to recall that Article 2 of the Convention guarantees the right of workers and employers to establish organizations “without previous authorization” by the public authorities. The Committee therefore considers that national legislation which requires the deposit of the by-laws of organizations is compatible with this provision if it is a mere formality intended to ensure that the by-laws are available to the public. Nevertheless, problems of compatibility with the Convention may arise if the registration procedure is lengthy or complicated, or if the rules concerning registration are applied in such a way as to defeat its purpose and the registration authorities make excessive use of their discretionary power. The Committee notes that section 215 of the Labour Code, under which the decision of the Minister of Labour requires not only the deposit by the founders of the trade union of the relevant documents, but also a detailed report by the labour inspector, would appear to grant the administration more or less discretionary power in deciding whether or not an organization meets the registration criteria. This situation could amount in practice to denying the right of workers and employers to establish organizations “without previous authorization”, in contravention of Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government, in consultation with the representative organizations of employers and workers, to amend section 215 of the Labour Code so as to guarantee the right to establish workers’ and employers’ organizations without previous authorization, to remove the provisions which give de facto discriminatory powers to the administration and to ensure that the registration procedure is merely a formality.

Finally, the Committee refers to its previous comments and also reminds the Government of the need to repeal or amend the following provisions of the legislation:

–      section 5 of the Act on associations, which requires organizations to obtain authorization prior to their establishment as trade unions (Article 2 of the Convention); and

–      section 23 of Decree No. 83-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983, which confers upon the President of the Republic broad powers to requisition public servants who are indispensable to the life of the nation and the proper operation of essential public services, with a view to restricting the power of requisition to public servants who exercise authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term (Article 3 of the Convention).

The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures, in full consultation with the representative organizations of employers and workers, to revise and amend the legislative provisions, including provisions of the Labour Code, taking into account the above comments. It trusts that the Government will be in a position to indicate the progress achieved in this respect in its next report.

A request on certain other points is being addressed directly to the Government.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the comments of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) of 10 and 31 August 2006, which largely refer to very serious legislative matters and issues relating to the application of the Convention in practice that are already under examination. The ICFTU also indicates that the new Labour Code enacted in January 2006 was not the subject of consultation with the representative organizations of workers and criticizes specific provisions of the Code. The ICFTU further refers to numerous arrests of trade unionists, physical aggression against demonstrators and strikers, raids on the homes of trade unionists, acts of anti-union harassment and the prohibition to hold trade union elections in the national mint. The Committee recalls that the rights of workers’ and employers’ organizations can only be exercised in a climate that is free from violence, pressure or threats of any kind against the leaders and members of these organizations, and it is for governments to ensure that this principle is respected. In this connection, the Committee requests the Government to provide its comments on all of the serious observations made by the ICFTU, as well as on the issues raised in its 2005 observation.

The Committee also requests the Government, in the context of the regular reporting cycle, to provide its comments for the Committee’s next session in November-December 2007 on all the issues raised in its previous observation in 2005 (see 2005 observation, 76th Session). In particular, the Committee will examine, in the context of the regular reporting cycle, the comments made by the ICFTU that the new Labour Code undermines trade union rights.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It also notes the communication of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), which indicates that the draft of the new Labour Code, adopted by the Council of Ministers, constitutes a clear regression in social terms and still has to be approved by the Parliamentary Assembly. The ICFTU’s communication also refers to recurring examples of failure to comply with trade union rights (discrimination and harassment against trade union leaders, dismissals under abusive conditions and attempts to destabilize a trade union). The Committee asks the Government to reply to these comments in its next report.

Furthermore, the Committee recalls that for several years its comments have been focused on the need to repeal or amend the following provisions:

-  Section 5 of the Act on associations, which requires organizations to obtain authorization prior to their establishment as trade unions (Article 2 of the Convention).

-  Section 6 of the Labour Code, which limits the holding of trade union office to nationals of Djibouti (Article 3).

-  Section 23 of Decree No. 23-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983, which confers upon the President of the Republic broad powers to requisition public servants who are indispensable to the life of the nation and the proper operation of essential public services, with a view to restricting the power of requisition to public servants who exercise authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term (Article 3).

The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its last report that these matters would be covered in the next review of labour laws and regulations which it wished to undertake with the assistance of the Office. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the progress achieved in the work of revising the Labour Code, as well as a copy of the new text when it is adopted. The Committee once again hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures to bring the legislation into full conformity with the Convention and requests it to keep it informed in this respect.

With regard to the reinstatement in their jobs of nine trade union leaders of the UGTD/UDT, who were dismissed in reprisal for their participation in legitimate trade union activities against structural adjustment measures, the Committee noted that six of them were reinstated in their original departments in February 2002 and that the reinstatement of the other three leaders was under way. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that all the trade union leaders have indeed been reinstated in their jobs.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It notes once again the observations made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) in September 2002, concerning the requirement of prior authorization in order to establish trade unions and the broad powers of the authorities to requisition public servants who are on strike. The Committee also notes the discussion that took place in 2001 at the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards.

1. Article 2 of the Convention. Right to establish organizations without prior authorization. The Committee noted in its previous comments that section 5 of the Act on associations requires organizations to obtain authorization prior to establishing themselves as trade unions. The Government states in response that section 234 of the draft Labour Code requires only filing and checking formalities in order for a trade union to exist in law, and removes all reference to prior authorization. The Committee notes this information and asks the Government to send a copy of the code as soon as it has been adopted.

2. Article 3. Right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom. The Committee pointed out previously that section 6 of the Labour Code which limits the holding of trade union office to Djibouti nationals is such as to restrict the full exercise of the right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom. The Committee notes that, in its report, the Government states that section 233 of the draft Labour Code stipulates that "trade unions shall elect their representatives freely, provided that members who are responsible, in whatever capacity, for the management or organization of a trade union, shall be Djibouti nationals or foreign workers who are properly established in the country and enjoy civic and civil rights". The Committee notes this information and requests the Government to send a copy of the code as soon as it is adopted.

3. Requisitioning. With regard to section 23 of Decree No. 23-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983 which confers on the President of the Republic broad powers to requisition public servants who are indispensable to the life of the nation and to the proper operation of essential public services, the Committee notes that the Government once again states that it is ready to specify the limits of this power. The Committee therefore asks the Government to act accordingly and to amend its legislation in order to restrict the power to requisition to public servants who exercise authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term.

4. Reinstatement of trade union leaders. With regard to the reinstatement in their jobs of nine trade union leaders of the UGTD/UDT who were dismissed in reprisal for their participation in legitimate trade union activities against structural adjustment measures, referred to also by the ICFTU, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, six trade union leaders were reinstated in their former services in 2002 and that the reinstatement of the other three is under way. The Committee notes this information with interest and again asks the Government to endeavour to secure the reinstatement in their jobs of the three other trade union leaders who were dismissed, and to provide information in its next report on developments in this situation.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It further notes the observations made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and requests the Government to transmit its observations thereon. It must repeat its previous observation, which read as follows:

The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the divergencies between national law and practice and the guarantees set forth in the Convention, namely:

-  the requirement of prior authorization for the establishment of trade unions (section 5 of the Act on associations, as amended in 1977);

-  the requirement to be a national of Djibouti in order to hold trade union office (section 6 of the Labour Code);

-  the broad powers of the authorities to requisition public servants who are on strike (section 23 of Decree No. 83-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983);

-  the failure to reinstate trade union leaders dismissed for strike action;

-  the restrictions on the right of workers to elect their trade union representatives freely and democratically in elections in their enterprises and in the ordinary assemblies of trade union confederations.

1. Article 2 of the Convention. Right to establish organizations without previous authorization. The Committee notes once again that section 5 of the Act on associations, as amended in 1977, requires organizations to obtain prior authorization before establishing themselves as trade unions. The Committee has already recalled on several occasions that, under the terms of Article 2 of the Convention, workers have the right to establish organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization. It noted that the Government was prepared to examine amendments to be made to this provision and to submit the necessary amendments as soon as possible to the National Assembly with a view to bringing this text into conformity with the provisions of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken in this respect in its next report.

2. Article 3. Right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom. The Committee recalls once again that section 6 of the Labour Code, which limits the holding of trade union office to Djibouti nationals, is such as to restrict the full exercise of the right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom. It noted that, according to the information provided by the Government in its last report, this provision would be repealed by the draft Labour Code which was currently being prepared. The Committee expresses the firm hope that measures will be taken as soon as possible to allow foreign workers to have access to trade union office, at least after a reasonable period of residence in the country. It requests the Government to indicate the progress achieved in this respect in its next report and to provide copies of any relevant legislation as soon as it has been adopted.

3. Requisitioning. With regard to section 23 of Decree No. 23-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983, which confers broad powers on the President of the Republic to requisition public servants who are indispensable to the life of the nation and to the proper operation of essential public services, the Committee had noted the information provided by the Government in its last report to the effect that the power of requisitioning only applies to essential services (health, safety, air traffic). Furthermore, the Committee had noted that the Government was prepared, if the Committee considers it necessary, to specify the limits of this power. The Committee once again requests the Government to amend its legislation so as to limit the power of requisitioning to public servants who exercise authority in the name of the State or essential services in the strict sense of the term, that is those whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, or in the event of an acute national crisis.

4. Reinstatement of trade union leaders. With regard to the reinstatement in their jobs of the trade union leaders of the UGTD/UDT who were dismissed due to their legitimate trade union activities five years ago, the Committee had noted that the Government considers the matter to have been resolved. Certain trade unionists had been reinstated in their jobs since 1997, but the Government stated that it could not reinstate trade unionists in their trade union functions, since that would amount to interference in trade union activities. The Government provided an assurance that it would reinstate any trade unionist who would so request, provided that they would not set prior conditions for their reinstatement. The Committee noted this information and requested the Government to endeavour to obtain the reinstatement in their jobs of all dismissed trade union leaders who so request and to provide information in its next report on the measures taken in this respect.

5. Right of workers to elect their trade union leaders freely and democratically. While recalling that its previous comments concerned the need to guarantee workers the right to elect their trade union representatives freely and democratically in elections in their enterprises and in the ordinary assemblies of trade union confederations, the Committee had noted the information provided by the Government in its last report to the effect that it considered this issue to be an internal matter for the trade union movement which must be resolved without any external interference, even by the Government. Furthermore, the Committee noted that the Government had called on international trade unions to come and observe the proper functioning of these trade union elections. The Committee emphasizes the importance of workers being able to elect their representatives in full freedom in enterprises, trade unions, federations and confederations and requests the Government to provide information in its next report on developments in this respect.

The Committee had noted that the Government indicated that it would examine the necessary measures in order to put its legislation into conformity with the Convention during its future revision of all legislative texts with the assistance of the ILO, as soon as the conditions will be met to organize national tripartite consultations. Recalling that ILO technical assistance is available, the Committee expresses the firm hope that measures will be taken without delay in order to put the legislation and practice into conformity with the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on any progress achieved in these fields in both law and practice and to provide copies of any provisions which have been amended.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s reports. It also notes the interim conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Cases Nos. 1851, 1922 and 2042 (318th Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association, approved by the Governing Body in November 1999), as well as the discussion in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2000.

The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the divergencies between national law and practice and the guarantees set forth in the Convention, namely:

-  the requirement of prior authorization for the establishment of trade unions (section 5 of the Act on associations, as amended in 1977);

-  the requirement to be a national of Djibouti in order to hold trade union office (section 6 of the Labour Code);

-  the broad powers of the authorities to requisition public servants who are on strike (section 23 of Decree No. 83-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983);

-  the failure to reinstate trade union leaders dismissed for strike action;

-  the restrictions on the right of workers to elect their trade union representatives freely and democratically in elections in their enterprises and in the ordinary assemblies of trade union confederations.

1.  Article 2 of the Convention. Right to establish organizations without previous authorization.  The Committee notes once again that section 5 of the Act on associations, as amended in 1977, requires organizations to obtain prior authorization before establishing themselves as trade unions. The Committee has already recalled on several occasions that, under the terms of Article 2 of the Convention, workers have the right to establish organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization. It notes that the Government is prepared to examine amendments to be made to this provision and to submit the necessary amendments as soon as possible to the National Assembly with a view to bringing this text into conformity with the provisions of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken in this respect in its next report.

2.  Article 3. Right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom.  The Committee recalls once again that section 6 of the Labour Code, which limits the holding of trade union office to Djibouti nationals, is such as to restrict the full exercise of the right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom. It notes that, according to the information provided by the Government in its report, this provision will be repealed by the draft Labour Code which is currently being prepared. The Committee expresses the firm hope that measures will be taken as soon as possible to allow foreign workers to have access to trade union office, at least after a reasonable period of residence in the country. It requests the Government to indicate the progress achieved in this respect in its next report and to provide copies of any relevant legislation as soon as it has been adopted.

3.  Requisitioning.  With regard to section 23 of Decree No. 23-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983, which confers broad powers on the President of the Republic to requisition public servants who are indispensable to the life of the nation and to the proper operation of essential public services, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report to the effect that the power of requisitioning only applies to essential services (health, safety, air traffic). Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Government is prepared, if the Committee considers it necessary, to specify the limits of this power. The Committee once again requests the Government to amend its legislation so as to limit the power of requisitioning to public servants who exercise authority in the name of the State or essential services in the strict sense of the term, that is those whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, or in the event of an acute national crisis.

4.  Reinstatement of trade union leaders.  With regard to the reinstatement in their jobs of the trade union leaders of the UGTD/UDT who were dismissed due to their legitimate trade union activities five years ago, the Committee notes that the Government considers the matter to have been resolved. Certain trade unionists have been reinstated in their jobs since 1997, but the Government states that it cannot reinstate trade unionists in their trade union functions, since that would amount to interference in trade union activities. The Government provides an assurance that it will reinstate any trade unionist who so requests, provided that they do not set prior conditions for their reinstatement. The Committee notes this information and requests the Government to endeavour to obtain the reinstatement in their jobs of all dismissed trade union leaders who so request and to provide information in its next report on the measures taken in this respect.

5.  Right of workers to elect their trade union leaders freely and democratically.  While recalling that its previous comments concerned the need to guarantee workers the right to elect their trade union representatives freely and democratically in elections in their enterprises and in the ordinary assemblies of trade union confederations, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its last report to the effect that it considers this issue to be an internal matter for the trade union movement which must be resolved without any external interference, even by the Government. Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Government calls on international trade unions to come and observe the proper functioning of these trade union elections. The Committee emphasizes the importance of workers being able to elect their representatives in full freedom in enterprises, trade unions, federations and confederations and requests the Government to provide information in its next report on developments in this respect.

The Committee notes that the Government indicates that it will examine the necessary measures in order to put its legislation into conformity with the Convention during its future revision of all legislative texts with the assistance of the ILO, as soon as the conditions will be met to organize national tripartite consultations. Recalling that ILO technical assistance is available, the Committee expresses the firm hope that measures will be taken without delay in order to put the legislation and practice into conformity with the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on any progress achieved in these fields in both law and practice and to provide copies of any provisions which have been amended.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received.

However, it notes the interim conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Cases Nos. 1851, 1922 and 2042 (see 318th Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association, approved by the Governing Body in November 1999, paragraphs 188-207).

The Committee notes that the Committee on Freedom of Association observes with great concern that, despite the promises made by the Government to the direct contacts mission in January 1998, no tangible progress has been achieved since then in the restoration of freedom of association in full. Like the Committee on Freedom of Association, the Committee of Experts urges the Government to provide detailed information on the measures taken to ensure that dismissed trade union leaders who so request shall be reinstated in their posts and employment and to ensure that Djibouti workers may elect their union representatives freely and democratically in the trade union elections, in their companies and at the trade union confederations' ordinary congresses.

In addition, the Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the need to repeal or amend the following provisions:

-- section 5 of the Act on Associations, as amended in 1977, to ensure that prior authorization for the establishment of associations may not be imposed on trade unions;

-- section 6 of the Labour Code, which limits the holding of trade union office to Djibouti nationals, in order to allow foreign workers to hold trade union office, at least after a reasonable period of residence in the country;

-- section 23 of Decree No. 83-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983, establishing the conditions governing the right to organize and the right to strike of public servants, which confers on the President of the Republic the power to requisition public servants who are indispensable to the life of the nation and to the operation of essential public services. The Committee asks the Government to limit this power of requisitioning to public servants exercising authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, that is, those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, or in the event of an acute national crisis.

The Committee once again urges the Government to restore freedom of association as rapidly as possible in law and in practice and requests the Government to keep it informed of any positive developments in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received.

However, it notes with interest that, at the request of the Government, an ILO direct contacts mission visited the country from 11 to 18 January 1998 in the context of two complaints of violation of freedom of association from the Inter-Trade Union Association of Labour/General Union of Djibouti Workers (UDT/UGTD) (Cases Nos. 1851 and 1922), leading to the restitution of the premises of the UDT/UGTD and the restoration of social dialogue (see 309th Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association, approved by the Governing Body in March 1998).

However, the Committee notes once again that, in its conclusions in November 1998, the Committee on Freedom of Association notes with great concern that, despite the promises made by the Government to the direct contacts mission, no tangible progress has been achieved since then in the restoration of freedom of association in full (see 311th Report, approved by the Governing Body in November 1998). In the same way as the Committee on Freedom of Association, the Committee of Experts urges the Government to provide detailed information on any concrete measures that it has taken to restore freedom of association in full, and particularly to lift the anti-trade union reprisals against the leaders of the UDT/UGTD and their lawyer, and to ensure that the legislation is revised in consultation with the social partners.

On this latter point, the Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the need to repeal or amend the following provisions:

-- section 5 of the Act on Associations, as amended in 1977, to ensure that prior authorization for the establishment of associations may not be imposed for the establishment of trade unions, so as to guarantee the application of Article 2 of the Convention, under which workers shall have the right to establish organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization;

-- section 6 of the Labour Code, which limits the holding of trade union office to Djibouti nationals, in order to allow foreign workers to hold trade union office, at least after a reasonable period of residence in the country, so as to guarantee the application of Article 3, under which workers' organizations shall have the right to elect their representatives in full freedom;

-- section 23 of Decree No. 83-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983, establishing the conditions governing the right to organize and the right to strike of public servants, which confers on the President of the Republic the power to requisition public servants who are indispensable to the life of the nation and to the operation of essential services, so as to limit this power of requisitioning to cases in which, in the Committee's opinion, restrictions or prohibitions on the exercise of the right to strike are admissible, namely with regard to public servants exercising authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, that is those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, or in the event of an acute national crisis.

The Committee urges the Government to restore freedom of association as rapidly as possible in law and in practice and requests it to keep it informed of all progress made in this respect.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary measures in the near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes the Government's report received in February 1997. It recalls that its previous observation related to the following points:

The Committee observed with great concern that the Committee on Freedom of Association received two complaints concerning serious violations of freedom of association against the Djibouti Inter-trade Union Association of Labour/General Union of Djibouti Workers (UDT/UGTD) and members of different activity sectors, in particular education (Cases Nos. 1851 and 1922) (see 302nd Report of the Committee, approved by the Governing Body in June 1996). It notes with concern that the Committee, in its 307th Report of June 1997, continues to observe the seriousness of the situation (closure of the UGTD headquarters, freezing of union contributions, dismissals, arrests), the Committee on Freedom of Association urged the Government to take measures to lift immediately the severe penalties imposed on the union organizations and workers following the protest movements against the Government's economic and social policy. In addition, the Committee on Freedom of Association requested the Government to allow a direct contacts mission to visit the country at the earliest possible opportunity.

Furthermore, the Committee recalls that its previous comments also concerned the need to repeal or amend the following provisions:

-- section 5 of the Act on Associations, as amended in 1977 to ensure that prior authorization for the establishment of associations may not be imposed for the establishment of trade unions so as to guarantee the application of Article 2 of the Convention under which workers shall have the right to establish organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization;

-- section 6 of the Labour Code, which limits the holding of trade union office to Djibouti nationals, in order to allow foreign workers to hold trade union office, at least after a reasonable period of residence in the country, so as to guarantee the application of Article 3 under which workers' organizations shall have the right to elect their representatives in full freedom;

-- section 23 of Decree No. 83-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983 establishing the conditions governing the right to organize and the right to strike of public servants which confers on the President of the Republic the power to requisition public servants who are indispensable to the life of the nation and to the operation of essential services in order to restrict this power of requisitioning to cases in which, in the Committee's opinion, the restrictions or prohibitions of the exercise of the right to strike are admissible, namely with regard to public servants exercising authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, i.e. those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population or in the event of an acute national crisis.

The Committee, like the Committee on Freedom of Association, expresses the firm hope that the direct contacts mission will be able to visit the country in the very near future and that the Government's next report will contain detailed information on the measures actually taken to bring national legislation and practice into conformity with the requirements of the Convention. In particular, the Committee urges the Government to restore freedom of association, de facto and de jure, as soon as possible.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes with regret that no report has been received from the Government.

The Committee also notes with concern the report of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 1851 concerning serious violations of freedom of association against several members of the Djibouti Inter-Trade Union Association of Labour/General Union of Djibouti Workers (UDT/UGTD) (see the 304th Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association approved by the Governing Body in May-June 1996.) The Committee urged the Government to take measures as soon as possible to lift the severe penalties imposed following protest strikes against the Government's economic and social policy.

The Committee recalls that its previous comments also concerned the need to repeal or amend the following provisions:

- section 5 of the Act on Associations, as amended in 1977, to abolish prior authorization for the establishment of trade unions by specifying that the Act does not apply to trade unions;

- section 6 of the Labour Code, which limits the holding of trade union office to Djibouti nationals, in order to allow foreigners to hold trade union office, at least after a reasonable period of residence in the country;

- section 23 of Decree No. 83099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983 establishing the conditions governing the right to organize and the right to strike of public servants, which confers on the President of the Republic the power to requisition public servants who are indispensable to the life of the nation and to the operation of essential services, in order to restrict this power of requisitioning to cases in which, in the Committee's opinion, the restrictions or prohibitions of the exercise of the right to strike are admissible, namely those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population or in the event of an acute national crisis.

The Committee, like the Committee on Freedom of Association, requests the Government to take measures in the near future to bring its legislation and practice into conformity with the requirements of the Convention and to inform it of progress made in this matter.

[The Government is requested to provide a detailed report in 1997.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee takes note of the Government's report.

Right of workers to form organizations of their own choosing without prior authorization

1. Article 2 of the Convention. With reference to its previous direct request, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government to the effect that the establishment of trade union organizations is subject to the approval of the authorities. The Committee understands that section 5 of the French Act of 1901 on associations, as amended in 1977, still applies to industrial associations and that the latter must file a statement of establishment in order to obtain legal personality. The Committee asks the Government to confirm that this interpretation is right and again asks it to indicate the means of redress available to founders of trade unions where acknowledgement of the filing of the statement of establishment is not issued within the prescribed time-limits.

The Committee recalls that in its 1994 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining (paragraph 77), it had indicated that trade unions should have the right to appeal to independent courts which are competent to review the grounds for refusal, which grounds should not be contrary to the freedom of association principles, and which are empowered to give a ruling rapidly and order appropriate remedies. It asks the Government to state whether such right of appeal is established by law and, if not, to ensure that its legislation is amended in conformity with the Convention.

Right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom

2. Article 3. The Committee notes with regret that the Government merely indicates in its report that foreign workers are still not authorized to hold trade union office. The Committee again points out that section 6 of the Labour Code, which limits the holding of trade union office to Djibouti nationals, is liable to restrict the right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom. It again asks the Government to make its legislation more flexible so as to enable foreign workers to hold trade union office, at least after a reasonable period of residence in the country, and to indicate in its next report the measures taken to this end.

3. Noting that the Government provides no information in its report on the exercise of the right to strike, the Committee asks the Government to indicate whether any decrees or orders have been adopted during the period covered by the report under sections 20 and 23 of Decree No. 83 099/PR/F.P. of 10 September 1983 establishing the conditions governing the right to organize and the right to strike and, if so, to provide copies of them in order for the Committee to verify to what extent the dispositions concerning the right to strike are in conformity with the principles of freedom of association.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee notes that the Government's report does not contain a reply to its previous comments. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the points raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

1. The right of workers to establish organizations of their choosing without prior authorization (Article 2 of the Convention). The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report to the effect that the right to organize is governed by the Overseas Labour Code, as amended by Order No. 726 of 23 May 1956 to adopt Act No. 56.416 of 27 April 1956, and by Decree No. 83.099/PR/F.P establishing the conditions under which the right to organize and the right to strike may be exercised by public servants. The Committee notes that these texts provide for freedom of association without prior authorization and permit the possibility of trade union pluralism; it therefore hopes that the Associations Act, as amended in 1977, which, according to the information supplied previously by the Government in its reports, applied to occupational unions in their capacity as associations, is no longer applicable to trade unions. It requests the Government to confirm in its next report that this is the case in practice and that as a consequence, in accordance with the requirements of the Convention, the establishment of trade union organizations is not subject to the approval of the authorities. It also requests the Government to supply a copy of the Associations Act which is currently in force in Djibouti.

2. Right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom (Article 3). The Committee indicated previously that, under section 6 of the Labour Code, foreign workers are not authorized to hold trade union office and it emphasized that legislative provisions which restrict the holding of trade union office to nationals of the country are such as to restrict the right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom. The Committee once again requests the Government to envisage the adoption of measures to make the legislation more flexible so as to enable foreign workers to hold trade union office, at least after a reasonable period of residence in the country. It requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures which have been taken or are envisaged in this respect.

3. The Committee also requests the Government to supply with its future reports any orders or decrees which are adopted under sections 20 and 23 of Decree No. 83.099/PR/F.P, of 10 September 1983, in order to enable it to examine the extent to which the provisions governing the right to strike of public servants are in accordance with the principles of freedom of association.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

The Committee notes the Government's report.

1. The right of workers to establish organizations of their own choosing without prior authorization (Article 2 of the Convention). The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report to the effect that the right to organize is governed by the overseas Labour Code, as amended by Order No. 726 of 23 May 1956 to adopt Act No. 56.416 of 27 April 1956, and by Decree No. 83.099/PR/F.P establishing the conditions under which the right to organize and the right to strike may be exercised by public servants. The Committee notes that these texts provide for freedom of association without prior authorization and permit the possibility of trade union pluralism; it therefore hopes that the Act on Associations, as amended in 1977, which, according to the information supplied previously by the Government in its reports, applied to occupational unions in their capacity as associations, is no longer applicable to trade unions. It requests the Government to confirm in its next report that this is the case in practice and that as a consequence, in accordance with the requirements of the Convention, the establishment of trade union organizations is not subject to the approval of the authorities. It also requests the Government to supply a copy of the Act on Associations which is currently in force in Djibouti.

2. Right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom (Article 3). The Committee indicated previously that, under section 6 of the Labour Code, foreign workers are not authorized to hold trade union office and it emphasized that legislative provisions which restrict the holding of trade union office to nationals of the country are such as to restrict the right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom. The Committee once again requests the Government to envisage the adoption of measures to make the legislation more flexible so as to enable foreign workers to hold trade union office, at least after a reasonable period of residence in the country. It requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures which have been taken or are envisaged in this respect.

3. The Committee also requests the Government to supply with its future reports any orders or decrees which are adopted under sections 20 and 23 of Decree No. 83.099/PR/F.P, of 10 September 1983, in order to enable it to examine the extent to which the provisions governing the right to strike of public servants are in accordance with the principles of freedom of association.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report contains no reply to its previous comments. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous direct request which concerned the right of workers and workers' organisations to establish organisations of their own choosing without prior authorisation, and restrictions on the right to strike and on the right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom.

Article 2 of the Convention. The right of workers to establish organisations of their choice without prior authorisation. Under section 5 of the French Act on Associations of 1901, as amended on 27 June 1977, which, according to a previous report of the Government, applies to occupational unions in Djibouti, trade unions are obliged to register a statement of their establishment in order to obtain legal personality. The Committee again requests the Government to indicate what channels of appeal are available to the constituent members of a trade union in the event that, after registering this statement, a receipt of the statement is not issued within the prescribed time-limits.

Article 3. Limitation on the right to strike. The Committee recalls that the limitation or prohibition of the right to strike should be confined to public servants acting in their capacity as agents of the public authority or to services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee refers to section 20 of Decree No. 83-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983 establishing the conditions for the exercise of the right to organise and the right to strike, and again requests the Government to indicate in its next report which categories of public servants do not enjoy the right to strike under specific conditions of service or because they are engaged in employment which is included in a list established by Order. Furthermore, the Committee asks the Government to transmit any decree adopted under section 23 of the above Decree to requisition public servants who are indispensable to the life of the nation and to the operation of essential services.

Right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom. The Committee emphasises that, in its opinion, legislative provisions which restrict the holding of trade union office to nationals of the country are such as to restrict the right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom, and requests the Government to envisage the adoption of measures to make the legislation more flexible so as to enable foreign workers to hold trade union office, at least after a reasonable period of residence in the country.

Article 5. The right of federations and confederations and international affiliation. In the opinion of the Committee, in order to defend the interests of their members more effectively, first-level trade unions must have the right to establish federations and confederations of their own choosing. The Committee refers to section 27 of the Statutes of the General Union of Djibouti Workers (UGTD), and again requests the Government in its next report to state what effect is given to this provision in practice and, in particular, whether the UGTD has already expelled a national trade union and, if so, what were the consequences of this action.

In the absence of specific provisions on this matter, the Committee again asks the Government to indicate whether, in practice, trade union organisations enjoy the right to affiliate with international organisations.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

1. The Committee notes that the report has not been received. It therefore reminds the Government that, in its previous request, it noted that, under section 27 of the Statutes of the General Union of Djibouti Workers (UGTD), the Congress may grant or refuse membership to national trade unions on presentation of their affiliation application and written acceptance of the statutes and rules of the UGTD. The Committee once again requests the Government to supply information on the effect given to this provision in practice and to indicate whether the UGTD has already expelled a national trade union and, if so, what were the consequences of this action.

2. With reference to section 20 of Decree No. 83-009/PR/FP, of 10 September 1983, establishing the conditions for the exercise of the right to organise and the right to strike, the Committee once again requests the Government to state which categories of public servants do not enjoy the right to strike under specific conditions of service or because they are engaged in employment which is included in a list established by Order. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to transmit any decree adopted under section 23 of the above Decree to requisition public servants who are indispensable to the life of the nation and to the operation of essential services.

3. The Committee also notes that, by virtue of section 6 of the Labour Code, foreign workers are not authorised to hold trade union office. In the Committee's opinion, legislative provisions which restrict the holding of trade union office to nationals of the country are such as to restrict the right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would envisage the adoption of measures to make the legislation more flexible in order to enable foreign workers to hold trade union office, at least after a reasonable period of residence in the country.

4. In the absence of specific provisions to this effect, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether, in practice, trade union organisations enjoy the right to affiliate with international organisations.

5. The Committee notes from a previous report by the Government that occupational unions are subject to the provisions of the French Act of 1901 on associations, as amended on 27 June 1977, and that they are therefore obliged to register a statement of their establishment in order to obtain legal personality. The Committee requests the Government to indicate what channels of appeal are available to the constituent members of a trade union in the event that, after registering this statement, a receipt of the statement is not issued within the prescribed time-limits.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

The Committee thanks the Government for the information provided in its reports on the application of the Convention.

1. The Committee notes that, under article 27 of the Statutes of the General Union of Djibouti Workers (UGTD), the Congress may grant or refuse membership by national trade unions on presentation of their application and written acceptance of the statutes and rules of the UGTD.

The Committee asks the Government to indicate what use is made of this provision in practice and, in particular, whether the UGTD has already expelled a national trade union and, if so, what were the consequences of this action.

2. With reference to section 20 of Decree No. 83-099/PR/FP of 10 September 1983 establishing the conditions for the exercise of the right to organise and the right to strike, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would state which categories of public servants do not enjoy the right to strike under specific conditions of service or because they are engaged in employment which is included in a list established by Order.