Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2019, Publication: 108th ILC session (2019)



Written information provided by the Government

1. Terms of the listing

The Government of Zimbabwe has been listed for appearance in the Committee on the Application of Standards under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), which it ratified in 2003. The Committee is interested in following up on aspects discussed at the 105th Session in 2016, which are a follow-up to the recommendations of the 2009 Commission of Inquiry on Zimbabwe appointed under article 26 of the Constitution of the ILO.

2. Issues contained in the report of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Recommendations and Conventions and action taken by the Government of Zimbabwe

2.1. Trade union rights and civil liberties

2.1.1. Alleged attack on the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Union’s Office and personnel by soldiers on 1 August 2018

It should be noted that the demonstrations in question were organized by political actors who alleged delays in the release of electoral results of the 2018 general elections and subsequently ushered violent activities targeting the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) offices which are situated close to the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) offices. The Government had to intervene in line with its constitutional duty to protect citizens and property as the demonstrations became violent leading to injury of people and indiscriminate destruction of property. It is unfortunate that buildings and individuals close to the centre of violent protests were inadvertently affected in the process of trying to maintain peace and order.

The Government of Zimbabwe, soon after the demonstrations, appointed a commission of inquiry headed by the former South African Head of State, His Excellency Mr Kgalema Motlanthe which included, among others, eminent persons Chief Emeka Anyaoku, a former Commonwealth Secretary-General from Nigeria, Rodney Dixon QC from the United Kingdom and General Davis Mwamunyange, a former Chief of Tanzania People’s Defence Forces. The commission conducted open and televised public hearings in which affected victims openly testified including named ZCTU officials. The commission since provided recommendations on its findings which the Government of Zimbabwe is currently implementing.

It is therefore our considered view that the Government has already complied with the request made by the Committee of Experts.

2.1.2. Alleged ban of strike action

As part of precautionary measures to protect people and businesses during the violent demonstration of 1 August 2018, the Government appealed to the citizens not to stage demonstrations or embark on related actions that were likely to be taken advantage of by people with other motives.

2.1.3. Denial and delay in trade union registration

There was only one issue pertaining to the contested registration of two trade unions, one of which has since been registered. The other one is still to approach the office of the registrar of trade unions as directed by the Labour court (reference is made to case number 3128 under the Committee of Freedom of Association).

2.2. The Public Order and Security Act (POSA)

The Government of Zimbabwe, consistent with its reform agenda, has initiated the process to repeal the POSA. New legislation will be enacted, whose provisions will be aligned to the principles of freedom of association enshrined in the Constitution of Zimbabwe. This new legislation, the Maintenance of Peace and Order Bill, has been drafted, published and is now under public consultations by Parliament. It is our hope that the social partners will, as usual, contribute during the public consultations to provide their input to the process of developing the law in question.

2.3. Labour law reform and the harmonization of the Labour Act

The labour law reform is ongoing and the drafts have been shared with the social partners at all material times. The recent draft that was produced by the Attorney General on 11 June 2019 has also been shared with the social partners and the Office. The Government looks forward to inputs and comments from the social partners for the finalization and subsequent enactment of the new Labour Act.

With the enactment of the Tripartite Negotiating Forum (TNF) Act in May 2019, sharing of pertinent information between the Government and the social partners will now be a matter to be prescribed in the rules that are to be made in terms of the said Act. The TNF Act makes it mandatory for all labour legislation to be processed through the TNF. The legislated TNF was commissioned by the State President on 5 June 2019. The TNF is about meaningful and sustained social dialogue between the Government and the social partners on socio-economic issues.

2.4. Public Service Act

Principles for the Public Service Act were approved by Cabinet on 2 May 2019 and the first draft Bill has been produced by the Attorney General. Consultations with the social partners on the draft Bill are set to commence in earnest once public service associations, the ZCTU and other federations, including the Employers’ Confederation of Zimbabwe, have been furnished with the draft Bill.

It is expected that the reform of the Public Service Act will take into account the status of the secretariat of the Public Service Commission.

The Government took note of the comments made by the Committee of Experts regarding the registration of public service associations. The Public Service Bill will accordingly harmonize the registration process in line with the corresponding provisions in the Labour Act.

The newly adopted Tripartite Negotiating Forum Act makes it mandatory for consultation and negotiation of Zimbabwe labour laws in line with the Constitution and international best practices within the TNF. Accordingly, the social partners will be consulted on the new Public Service Bill in line with the TNF Act.

2.5. Health Service Act

The Health Service Act is lined up for review just like the Public Service Act and the Labour Act so as to align them with the Zimbabwe Constitution adopted in 2013 that provides for freedom of association and the right to strike under its section 65 and the ILO Conventions Nos 87 on freedom of association and protection of the right to organize, and 98 on the right to organize and collective bargaining.

2.6. Tripartite Negotiating Forum

The Government and the social partners have been working to develop a legal framework for the social dialogue institution in Zimbabwe, the Tripartite Negotiating Forum (TNF). The TNF Act was enacted and launched on 5 June at an event attended by all social partners. There is agreement among the social partners that this historic development will usher a new era for social dialogue in Zimbabwe. It is expected that the TNF Act will usher in genuine, effective and sustained dialogue in Zimbabwe. It is against this backdrop that there is conviction that most of the issues of concern among the social partners will be effectively dealt with within the purview of the strengthened TNF.

Discussion by the Committee

Government representative – The Committee of Experts raised a number of issues which relate to the implementation of the recommendations of the 2009 Commission of Inquiry on Zimbabwe’s observance both in law and practice in respect of Convention No. 87, ratified in 2003, and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), ratified earlier in 1998.

In its 2019 report, the Committee of Experts raised legislative issues which are mainly to do with reforms of the labour laws and another law that has a bearing on the labour market, that is, the Public Order and Security Act (POSA). I wish to start by addressing the legislative issues. The Committee of Experts expressed concern on the application of the POSA. I am happy to inform the Committee that this piece of legislation will be repealed. A new piece of legislation, the Maintenance of Peace and Order Act, whose Bill is currently under consideration by Parliament, will address issues of peace and order. Parliament is currently carrying out public consultations around the Bill. It is expected that employers’ organizations and trade unions will take part in the public consultations.

The Committee of Experts also wishes to know how far Zimbabwe has gone in revising the Labour Act (chapter 28:01). I am happy to inform the Committee that we are at an advanced stage in revising the Labour Act. We now have a Labour Amendment Bill that the Government has shared with social partners in March 2019. The Government received comments from social partners in April 2019. The comments have since been incorporated into the Bill. We are now waiting for the Attorney General’s Office to furnish us with the revised Bill which will be subject to consideration by the Government and social partners.

Furthermore, the Committee of Experts requested an update on the revision of the Public Service Act (chapter 16:04). With regard to this Act, I wish to inform the Committee that the principles for the amendment of the Public Service Act were approved by Cabinet on the 2 May 2019, subject to the approval the Attorney General proceeded to produce the first draft Bill on 5 June 2019. The Bill is to be subjected again to consultations with social partners in due course. As I am speaking, arrangements are being made to share the Bill with concerned stakeholders ahead of the planned consultations. The revision of the Public Service Act will take into account specific issues raised by the Committee of Experts in relation to the status of the secretariat of the Public Service Commission and the registration of public service associations.

The Committee of Experts also wants to know what the Government of Zimbabwe has done in terms of revising the Health Services Act. I wish to inform the Committee that the parties to the Health Services Act have recently concluded the negotiations for the principles to amend the Act. The principles will be considered by Cabinet very soon to pave way for the development of the Bill. Essentially the revised Health Services Act will be in sync with the new Public Service Act as both cover the civil servants.

Before I conclude on legislative matters, I wish to inform this august house that Zimbabwe is revising its laws not only to align them to ratified ILO Conventions but more importantly to have these pieces of legislation in sync with our new Constitution.

For instance, labour rights and the right to collective job action are provided for in terms of section 65 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe. To this end, the Government has an obligation to revise various pieces of legislation that are not consistent with the new Constitution and these also include the labour laws. Chairperson, let me now turn to the issue raised in the report of the Committee of Experts pertaining to the complaints filed by International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) regarding the injuries suffered by ZCTU personnel during the disturbances on 1 August 2018. It will be good to discuss this issue in its proper context. Unfortunately, the report of the Committee of Experts does not provide the necessary contextual detail. However, let me first of all give you details of the context. Following the 30 July general elections in Zimbabwe, the main opposition party organized demonstrations on 1 August 2019, alleging delays in the release of election results, yet the electoral law provides that the results of any plebiscite should be released within five days. The demonstrators became violent, attacking offices of the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission and other nearby properties. Government had to intervene in line with its constitutional duty to protect citizens and property as the demonstrations became violent, leading to injury or people and wanton destruction of property. It is unfortunate that buildings and individuals close to the centre of the violent protests were inadvertently affected. It will be misleading to report that soldiers targeted ZCTU offices and its personnel in the ensuing melee that pitted violent demonstrators against law enforcement agents and demonstrators. Offices of the ZCTU happen to be situated close to the offices of the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC), which was the target of the violent demonstrators. This matter is well covered in the report of the commission of inquiry. This commission of inquiry was established by His Excellency the President of the Republic of Zimbabwe, Comrade Emmerson D. Mnangagwa. The commission of inquiry was headed by the former South African Head of State, His Excellency Mr Kgalema Motlanthe and included, among others, eminent persons which include Chief Emeka Anyaoku, a former Commonwealth Secretary-General from Nigeria. Also included were Rodney Dixon QC from the United Kingdom and General Davis Mwamunyange, a former Chief of Tanzania People’s Defence Forces. The commission conducted open and televised public hearings in which affected persons including ZCTU testified openly. The commission has since provided recommendations on its findings which the Government of Zimbabwe is currently implementing. It is therefore a fact that Government has already complied with the requests made by the Committee of Experts on the issues of damages to ZCTU buildings and injury to its personnel. Regarding the alleged banning of demonstrators, as part of precautionary measures to protect people and businesses, during the violent demonstration of l August 20l8, the Government appealed to the citizens not to stage demonstrations, or embark on related actions that were likely to be taken advantage of, by people with other motives. That appeal, I am glad to confirm, was by and large welcome and heeded by the generality of Zimbabweans.

Concerning the alleged denial or delayed registrations of trade unions, I wish to submit that there was only one issue pertaining to contested registrations of two trade unions, one of which has since been registered. The other one, is still to approach the Office of the Registrar of Trade Unions as directed by the Labour Court. My Government has already submitted this information to the Committee on Freedom of Association under Case No. 3128.

I wish to conclude by dwelling on an important development in our country which will change the social dialogue landscape in Zimbabwe and help to build trust between the Government and social partners going forward. On 24 May 2019, the Parliament of Zimbabwe passed the Tripartite Negotiating Forum Act, known as TNF in short. The legislated TNF was commissioned on 5 June 2019. This was launched by the Head of State, His Excellency Emmerson D. Mnangagwa, at a function that was attended by leaders from Trade Unions, Employers’ Organizations, some of whom are in this room today. During the launch, all of us from Government, Business and Labour, reaffirmed our commitment to address socio economic issues, including those that are labour related, through sustained social dialogue.

At the launch, the ILO Country Director was represented. The ILO Director-General, Guy Ryder, was able to send a representative to the launch of the TNF, in Zimbabwe, on 5 June 2019. The TNF Act provides for consultation and negotiation around labour laws in Zimbabwe. The Government of Zimbabwe is therefore going to revise labour laws and align them to the Constitution. Accordingly, the social partners will be consulted on the new Public Service Bill in line with the TNF Act. It is our considered view that the Government of Zimbabwe has demonstrated full respect for the comments and observations of the ILO supervisory bodies and the concerns of the social partners and their very diverse opinions on various issues of interest.

I would therefore like to assure the Committee that the Government of Zimbabwe’s commitment is to expedite the Labour Law Reform and Engendering Social Dialogue, as it helps recover and grow our national economy. Thus, besides meeting the Committee’s expectations, we are implementing all these reforms for our national benefit.

I look forward to a productive engagement with the distinguished members of this Committee in exploring further possibilities, for the strengthening of the observance of International Labour Standards in Zimbabwe, including Convention No. 87.

Employer members – I would like to begin by thanking the distinguished Government delegate from Zimbabwe for her detailed submissions today and in particular the very constructive and open tone in which these submissions were delivered, we very much appreciate that. As the participants in our Committee know, Convention No. 87 is a fundamental Convention dealing with freedom of association and was ratified by Zimbabwe in 2003 and has been discussed since 2006 on five occasions before this Committee. I am very pleased to be here at a moment presenting this case when it appears that there is some very positive progress to report.

Recalling that our discussion in 2006 focused on the POSA and the elements of that Act that were not in compliance with Zimbabwe’s obligations under the Convention, and taking into account that the 2017 high-level technical assistance mission that took place in Zimbabwe and noted the divergence that existed in that time in the scope of the POSA and its application to legitimate trade union activities continued to exist, we are very pleased to note positively today the Government’s indication that the POSA will be repealed and the distinguished Government delegate’s submission that Parliament is currently carrying out consultations with the social partners on potential legislation that will replace the POSA.

Clearly as this has been a long-standing issue, in terms of Zimbabwe’s compliance with the Convention we are encouraged to hear about these measures and would encourage the Government to provide additional information regarding these measures in its report to the Committee of Experts at its next session.

In respect of a labour law reform and the Labour Act, the Employers note that the Committee of Experts and this Committee have previously requested the Government to provide information on the progress achieved in bringing the labour and public service legislation into conformity with the Convention.

Taking into account the conclusions of the Commission of Inquiry, the Employers also welcome the comments made in respect of measures taken in this regard. We therefore, request that Government provide this information which would constitute a status update on its efforts to amend the Labour Act to the Committee of Experts, including the specific measures addressed today.

More specifically, with respect to the Public Services Act, the Committee will recall that the Committee of Experts noted that the Attorney General was working on a draft of an amendment to the Public Service Act, to take into the ability of public servants to establish and join workers’ organizations without the obligation of prior authorization.

The Employers’ group notes the Government’s submission today that the principles in this regard were approved on 2 May 2019 and that the Attorney General has produced a first draft on 1 June 2019 and that consultation with the social partners including the sharing of the draft bill would take place.

We were also advised that the Health Services Act will be revised so that it is in sync with the Public Service Act and we very much encourage the Government in this regard, in particular in its efforts to consult with the social partners in respect of this legislative change. The Employers’ group also requested the Government to provide a report on the status of this process and a copy of the draft bill to the Committee of Experts for their 2019 session.

The Employers’ group will not address the Committee of Experts observations regarding cases in which strike action was banned or otherwise regulated and we will restate our well-known position that in our view this does not fall within the scope of the Convention and therefore our discussion in conclusions will not address those issues.

Turing to the issues related to civil liberties. While noting the ZCTU’s allegations of injury and attack on trade union members on 1 August 2018, the Employers must take this opportunity to note its deep concern regarding any possible use of violence to manage demonstrations which in our view is an unacceptable response. The Employers note the additional information provided by the Government today and the additional context that was given.

And while we understand that such circumstances can be difficult, we do take this opportunity to reinforce our view about the importance of ensuring that government officials refrain from violence as a reaction to such matters.

In respect of the ZCTU’s allegations of the denial or delay of trade union registrations, the Employers requested the Government to provide information specifically in response to these issues to the Committee of Experts for its next session so that this issue can be reviewed in more detail.

Finally the Employers’ group welcomes Zimbabwe’s focus on rebuilding social dialogue in the country, including the launch of the TNF. The Employers’ group is encouraged by this development and encourages the Government to make a strong commitment to the engagement in the process of social dialogue with the social partners within the TNF and also provide additional information about the dialogue process that is engaged in in respect of the TNF in its report to the Committee of Experts.

Overall, we feel that there is some very important forward motion in this case and we look forward to continuing on that path.

Worker members – We are once again examining the application of a fundamental Convention in Zimbabwe. Despite the in-depth recommendations delivered by the 2009 Commission of Inquiry and the 2017 high-level mission of the ILO, the Government violates in a systematic way the core principles of freedom of association.

The level of brutality in squashing the exercise of civil rights and severe criminal sanctions against activists is of enormous concern. The absence of real reforms over the past decade continues to enable serious violations denying workers the free exercise of their rights under the Convention.

Just this January we witnessed a massive clampdown in response to a peaceful protest. When the Government announced an extraordinary 100 per cent increase in fuel prices, there was a strong reaction from the population. The ZCTU called on workers to stay home to demonstrate that such a drastic increase in fuel prices would impact their mobility and access to employment.

This peaceful form of protest was met with a violent response by the Government. The country was reported to be on a virtual lockdown. The Government blocked the internet and social media for a number of days to prevent access to information and free speech. The security forces, police, army and others were deployed unto the streets committing violent attacks on peaceful protesters. They beat protesters and opened fire on them. They arbitrarily assaulted people on the streets and in some cases entered homes to drag out and beat up innocent people amidst allegations of sexual violence, including rape. People died, many were injured and over 200 arrested. Instead of investigating and prosecuting those responsible for the brutal violence, the Government targeted ZCTU leaders with severe criminal charges that could put them behind bars for decades and instil fear in trade union members.

The Government attempts to justify its violent and excessive response by arguing that the stay away spilled into street protests and disturbances. However, we remind the Government that forceful police interventions must remain proportional and should in no circumstances lead to the excessive violence that was unleashed on innocent protesters. Zimbabwean workers are already facing an enormous hardship due to the economic crisis and the non-payment of their wages. Moreover, such a reasoning seems to condone the arbitrary violence perpetrated by the police and security forces contributing to an atmosphere of fear in society.

It is also notable that this was not an isolated incident. In October 2018, police prevented the ZCTU from holding a peaceful demonstration organized against the Government’s announced economic measures. The ZCTU informed the authorities of its intention to hold a peaceful demonstration that included the delivery of a workers’ petition to the Minister of Finance, even though this notice was not required by the POSA. Police stormed the premises of the ZCTU and blatantly blocked the protests with trucks and water cannons and beatings. The ZCTU’s President, Peter Mutasa, and its Secretary-General, Japhet Moyo as well as 39 others were subsequently arrested. The arrest of Peter Mutasa sparked an immediate reaction of solidarity actions by trade unions all around the world.

Clearly, the Government uses these repressive and violent tactics to intimidate trade unions and their members from carrying out their activities in full freedom. It is worth reiterating the Committee on Freedom of Association’s comment in this regard. The rights of employers’ and workers’ organizations can only be exercised within the framework of a system that guarantees the effective respect of fundamental human rights including the right of assembly and freedom of opinion and expression.

The Commission of Inquiry as well as previous conclusions of the Committee called for reforms to enable trade unions to fully exercise their rights. One of such is the reform of the institutional culture of the security forces and law enforcement. The Government states that they have taken steps to train the police and have adopted a curriculum to deliver this training on an ongoing basis but it is plain that the actions of the police bear no witness to any such training on civil liberties and international labour standards. The repression perpetrated by the police speaks louder than the expected outcome of such a training. The Zimbabwe Republic Police must do more than adopting a curriculum. It must adopt the principles of civil liberties and freedom of association as part of its operational directives and code of conduct. It must discourage unacceptable behavior by investigating and punishing errant conduct of those who act in violation of the directives and code. We call on the Government of Zimbabwe to fully investigate the excessive violence perpetrated against workers by the police and submit a report to the Committee of Experts with evidence of the sanctions imposed against those who have been found responsible.

Secondly, we are deeply concerned that the Public Service Amendment Bill requires an authorization before public service associations and trade unions can be registered. The Bill also denies staff of the Civil Service Commission the right to organize in breach of Article 2 of the Convention. All workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, have the right to establish and join organizations of their choice subject only to the rules of the organization concerned. The State cannot condition the exercise of this right or administer it under circumstances amounting to previous authorization. The only group of workers whose right to form or join organizations of their choice that may be limited is the police and the army.

Convention No. 87 does not contain a provision excluding public servants or civil service staff from its scope. Clearly, it is a violation of the Convention that the Public Service Act and the proposed new Bill deny staff of the Civil Service Commission the right to organize and conditions the registration of public service associations and trade unions on the previous advice of the Civil Service Commission. The Commissions prior advice in this respect operates as previous authorization and violates the Convention to that extent. The Health Service Act also denies health-service workers this right. We call on the Government to amend the Bill to comply with the Convention and constitutional principles of the ILO and amend the Health Service Act accordingly.

We are equally concerned about the lack of progress in amending the Labour Act, which has come under repeated criticism by the supervisory bodies and the Commission of Inquiry. We reinforce the call made by the Committee of Experts and urge the Government to immediately engage in full, frank and in-depth consultations with its social partners to review the Labour Bill and the new public order Bill.

Finally, we are deeply concerned about the extremely broad definition of essential services that continues to be in operation to control and limit the legitimate activities of trade unions. According to Principle 11.3, essential services include all services the interruption of which may endanger rights under the Constitution.

We note, in agreement with the Committee of Experts, that the definition is so broad as to restrict the legitimate exercise of Article 3 rights in general and the right to strike in particular. Essential services must be defined strictly and should be limited to services whose interruption could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. This provision therefore constitutes an obstacle for workers seeking to exercise their rights under the Convention and must be revised.

This case deserves our specific attention. The issues we are discussing today have now been pending for over a decade. While the absence of progress is worrisome enough, there are new and very serious instances where the rights under the Convention have been breached by the public authorities. We want to take the commitments made by the Governments on the application of the Convention seriously. To be credible, the Government must put them into effect in the country and not only in our discussions in the Committee.

We had real hopes that with the new Government the situation in Zimbabwe would improve for working people. However, the situation has in fact worsened. We call on this Committee to denounce the unacceptable situation that workers in Zimbabwe have to go through every day.

Employer member, Zimbabwe – I take the floor on behalf of the Employers’ Confederation of Zimbabwe to contribute to the issues under discussion. We thank the Government for their response particularly on issues and activities which we are all seized with as tripartite partners as we work towards improving the application of International Labour Standards in Zimbabwe. As Employers we have witnessed, following the ratification of the Convention, the multiplicity of trade unions and employers’ associations given the guarantee to freedom of association which is enshrined in section 65 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe. We continue to be involved as social partners and we are regularly consulted in the legislative reforms. We hope that we can expedite the conclusion of this process so that the much awaited reforms can be concluded, here I am talking about the Labour Act, the Public Service Act, the Health Act and the POSA. At present as we speak amendments to the Labour Act have been shared and we are being consulted as social partners. Allow me to also mention that freedom of association in our country is institutionalized as we employers and employees can engage in collective bargaining at national, sector and workplace levels. The TNF is now legislated following the promulgation of the Tripartite Negotiating Forum Act early this month. As Employers, we are of the view that this move will strengthen social dialogue as social partners will now be held accountable of their decisions and actions. We also hold the view that any outstanding issues elaborated here will be discussed and resolved by the social partners in the TNF. We look forward to meaningful social dialogue and for this to happen there must be mutual trust and mutual respect of each other as the parties sit around that TNF table. There must be cordial relationships and negotiation must be in good faith. As social partners we also look to meaningful engagements which will result in mutual gains. The need to build capacity for social partners with the requisite negotiating skills cannot be overemphasized. The parties to the TNF need capacity building so that the negotiating process is taken seriously. The events surrounding the demonstrations on 1 August 2018 in Zimbabwe highlighted here could have been avoided. It is our view that this could have been avoided if parties involved had discussed the issues around the table in the form of the TNF. We do not foresee a repeat of the same in the near future as we are prepared to forge ahead in meaningful engagements with our social partners and that we now have a legislated TNF.

Worker member, Zimbabwe – Allow me to start by thanking your Committee for the efforts in seeking to restore dignity, security and prosperity to the working people and working families of Zimbabwe. On behalf of the suffering workers of Zimbabwe, I would like to bring to your attention the serious violations of human and labour rights, especially as they relate to the violations of the principles and provisions of the Convention. The violations are so grave to the extent that if the Committee does not take stern measures against the Government of Zimbabwe, trade unions and civil society organizations will soon disappear in Zimbabwe or rendered ineffective to hold the Government accountable. This is because there is a deliberate and sinister plan that is being implemented to shrink spaces for democratic participation.

The violations relate to killing of citizens, mass arrests, torture, harassment, intimidation, imprisonment, anti-trade union discrimination, obstruction of citizens’ rights through the use of force and live ammunition. Ours resembles a war zone in a country not at war. This usually happens once there is a communication of a protest action and actual execution of same against Government’s policies injurious to the socio-economic interests of the people.

In November 2017, Zimbabwe had a new Government following the fall of Mr Robert Mugabe, whose Government’s record of human and labour rights violations is well-known by this Committee and well documented by the Commission of Inquiry of 2009. The change of Government brought some hope to the people of Zimbabwe as the new regime made promises to respect human rights. However, what we have witnessed so far made it a crime to have been optimistic. The supposed liberator has become more dangerous than its predecessor and we now live in fear and hope is now on a fast lane of retreat.

The serious events that occurred on 1 August 2018 during election period put our fears in perspectives. On the said date, a group of people demonstrated on the streets of Harare demanding the release of election results. In response to the protest actions, the Government of Zimbabwe deployed the army to disperse the protesters. The army and the police indiscriminately fired bullets in the central business district of Harare. Several people were injured and six persons killed.

During this incident, the ZCTU offices were deliberately targeted and our Harare head office was littered with bullets that damaged our building and glasses were shattered, injuring the ZCTU Legal Advisor Mr Zakeyo Mtimtema and the security officer Mr Joseph Chuma. The details about this incident are contained in a commission report titled “Report of the commission of inquiry into the 1 August 2018 Post-Election Violence” chaired by former South African President Mr Kgalema Motlanthe. The commission among others noted with concern the use of live ammunition against defenceless citizens and recommended compensation to victims. Unfortunately no such compensation has been made so far.

As if that incident was not enough, the use of live ammunition against citizens occurred again on 14–16 January 2019 during protest action against rising cost of living including fuel increases. This incident left 17 persons dead, 81 injured and treated for gunshot wounds and 1,055 people were arrested and imprisoned including 12 juveniles. They were subjected to mass trials and 995 were denied bail.

The ZCTU Secretary-General Mr Japhet Moyo and President Mr Peter Mutasa were also arrested on 21 and 26 January respectively and jailed for two weeks only to gain their freedom through a court order coupled with strict bail conditions that include to report daily and twice a week for Mr Mutasa. The crackdown was extended to civil society leaders and human rights defenders. They have been charged under section 22 (2) (a) (iii) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act Chapter 9.23 for subverting Constitutional Government or alternatively inciting public violence under section 36 (1) (a) of the same Act. They face a 20-year jail term if convicted. It is the State’s case that it is criminal to call for a protest action against Government policy even if such policy has direct capability to injure the economic and social rights and well-being of the people. Besides, the argument by the Government is a direct departure and disregard for the clear provisions in our Constitution that guarantees the freedom to demonstrate and petition in section 59.

We are aware that our Government disputes the figures of people it killed as it put the number to 12 but has not done anything to ascertain the number nor pay compensation to the affected people or their families. Our Government justifies its action of killing by alleging that the protest was violent and goods were looted. To the contrary, it was the security forces that responded violently to the protests by attacking protesters. Besides, the ZCTU had informed them of the planned protest and the rules of managing protest suggest that security forces take adequate measures to protect protesters and properties. To the contrary, the security forces simply rained brutal forces on legitimate protesters under the pretext that the protest was used to perpetrate looting. During the protest period, the Government denied us the right to information as it disconnected internet services and social media access in an attempt to hide the atrocities perpetrated against the protesters by security forces that followed people into their homes and brutalized them and some women were reportedly raped. These findings were validated by the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission (ZHRC), a Constitutional Body that observed that uniformed members of the Zimbabwe National Army and the Zimbabwe Republic Police instigated systematic torture to civilians visiting their homes at night.

The Government uses State media to incite hate speech and incite menaces against the ZCTU with the intention of blackmailing our organization by the public and to lay pretexts for senseless State attacks against us. Concerning the labour law reforms, the strategy of the Government is to engage the ZCTU in a deliberate haphazard manner, including resorting to last-minute dispatch of outcome documents of the process.

We have just received an official copy of the new Labour Bill here in Geneva and the Maintenance of Peace and Order Bill meant to repeal and replace the POSA, which is under preliminary process. We have not been consulted at all.

Furthermore, a total of 169 trade unionists including the ZCTU President and Secretary-General were arrested on 11 October 2018 for calling for a protest action against increased tax on transaction from 5 cents to 2 per cent per transaction. The increased tax is a rip-off of the workers’ income who are struggling to make ends meet in the face of dire economic conditions. The ZCTU leaders and members have all been acquitted by the Court in this matter after several trials that drained the ZCTU’s financial resources and lost time.

Despite all these challenges, we continue to call for engagement with our Government. We are not a violent organization as portrayed, our record speaks for itself. On the eve of this ILC on 5 June 2019, our Government partially responded to our call for dialogue and together we launched the TNF. This is a step in the right direction. However, we remain under arrest and wonder how we will participate in the negotiations when we face jail. We will be on trial soon after the closure of this Conference and we are not free to travel due to bail conditions imposed.

Let me conclude by reiterating the established principles of freedom of association. It is my submission that by arresting, detaining the President and Secretary-General of the ZCTU and teachers’ organization leaders, the Government of Zimbabwe violated Article 3(1)(2) of the Convention that provides that “workers’ and employers’ organizations shall have the right to draw up their constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom, to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes, the public authorities shall refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof.”

The ILO supervisory mechanism has over the years stated that “allegations of criminal conduct should not be used to harass trade unionists by reason of their union membership or activities”. Furthermore, “all appropriate measures should be taken to guarantee that irrespective of trade union affiliation, trade union rights can be exercised in normal conditions with respect for basic rights and in a climate free of violence, pressure, fear, and threats of any kind”.

The ZCTU urges the honourable Committee to disapprove the excessive and disproportionate use of live ammunition against defenceless people by the Government of Zimbabwe. Instead of persecuting workers, the Government must devote its time to address the economic ills that have impoverished the workers of Zimbabwe.

Government member, Romania – I am speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States. The Candidate Countries, the Republic of North Macedonia, Montenegro and Albania, as well as EFTA country Norway, member of the European Economic Area, align themselves with this statement.We are committed to the promotion of universal ratification and implementation of the eight fundamental Conventions as part of our Strategic Framework on Human Rights. We call on all countries to protect, promote and respect all human rights and labour rights and we attach the highest importance to freedom of association and right to organize. Compliance with Conventions Nos 87 and 98 is essential in this respect.

Zimbabwe–EU relations are governed by the Cotonou Agreement, which is the framework for cooperation with the European Union. This Agreement is based on the commitment to respect human rights, democratic principles and the rule of law. On 5 June, the Government of Zimbabwe and the EU launched the formal political dialogue process in accordance with the Cotonou Agreement, which paves the way for enhanced cooperation.

Zimbabwe is also amongst the signatory countries of the Eastern and Southern Africa (ESA) region of the interim Economic Partnership Agreement (iEPA) that is being implemented since 2012. Further, Zimbabwe together with the other members of the ESA region of the iEPA, have requested to deepen this Agreement and the EU responded positively. The negotiations in this respect, will cover all trade related issues, including trade and sustainable development and consultative bodies for civil society.

It is not the first time that the case of Zimbabwe is discussed by the ILO supervisory mechanisms in relation to freedom of association and right to organize. In 2009, a Commission of Inquiry was appointed to examine observance of Conventions Nos 87 and 98, and in 2016 this Committee discussed compliance with Convention No. 98 and the recommendation of the Commission of Inquiry on the implementation of Conventions Nos 87 and 98.

We want to reaffirm that an environment conducive to social dialogue and trust between employers, workers and governments is essential for social and economic stability. We note with interest, the adoption by the Government of a Tripartite Negotiating Forum Bill. We hope this will constitute a first step towards institutionalizing tripartite dialogue in the country.

We also note, that as recommended by the conclusions of the training of trainers’ workshop for members of the Zimbabwe Republic Police organized with ILO’s assistance, a training curriculum has been developed and is now part of the material taught to all members of the police during induction and refresher courses. This contributes to a better understanding of national labour laws, labour rights and the role of the police and can contribute to a climate free of violence against trade unions.

However, we express deep concern over recent acts of repression against workers in demonstrations, including the allegations of injuries suffered by the ZCTU personnel during the demonstration on 1 August 2018, as well as in the beginning of this year, cases of strikes and demonstration being banned or criminalized and denial or delay of trade union registration. We expect and underline the importance that all acts of violence and repression are duly investigated and pursued.

We recall that the need to ensure public order and security should not be used as an argument to limit the rights of trade unions and ban protest actions. In this context the ILO High-level Mission had suggested the Government reviews the application of the POSA, to ensure with greater clarity that trade union activities are outside its scope. We are pleased to hear from the Minister that the POSA will be repealed and we call on the Government to review the application of the POSA in consultation with the social partners.

We also regret that despite numerous requests by the Committee, there is no progress on bringing the labour and public service legislation into conformity with the Convention. We therefore urge the Government to amend the Labour Act without delay and in full consultation with social partners.

We recall the right for all civil servants to unionize and join trade unions of their own choosing, and encourage the government to include the right for the staff of the Civil Service Commission to establish and join occupational organizations in the Public Service Amendment Bill.

We also request the Government to ensure that the legislative provisions dealing with the registration of organizations of public servants will be sufficiently clear, so as not to give rise to possible interpretation of the law, as giving discretionary power to the Civil Service Commission to refuse the registration of any organization.

Based on these considerations, we encourage the Government to fully and systematically consult with social partners on the review of the public service legislation and other labour matters. The EU and its Member States will continue to support Zimbabwe in these endeavours.

Government member, Egypt – We listened to the statement made by the Government of Zimbabwe and that gave us valuable information about measures taken by the Government in order to guarantee application of the Convention. In particular, we noted what was said by the Government about new legislation on trade unions and we noted what was stated about the Constitution of Zimbabwe. We see that the Government has now completed its preparations for the adoption of this new legislation and it has consulted the social partners.

Efforts have also been undertaken to amend a number of other pieces of legislation that relate to this Convention. In particular, we noted what was said about the POSA, the law on certain medical services also should be noted. All of this shows that the Government is really trying to ensure application of this Convention.

We commend the Government of Zimbabwe for all that it has done in seeking to allow freedom of association and the right to organize to be truly exercised in their country. We also commend the promotion of dialogue with social partners. We support the Government in what it is seeking to do in endeavouring to ensure application of the Convention in law and practice.

Worker member, Kenya – I speak on behalf of the East African Trade Union Confederation (EATUC) on this issue of Zimbabwe. The attack on trade union rights and civil liberties by the Government of Zimbabwe has a history that this Committee is well aware and weary of. To be discussing Zimbabwe for the 14th time this year by the Committee is a clear sign of the serious disrespect of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry of 2009 and the series of conclusions of this Committee.

As may be recalled, in 2016 this Committee dealt with the case of Zimbabwe concerning anti-union discrimination and recommended a stop to such practices. It is unfortunate to report to this Committee that eight trade union leaders belonging to the Energy Sector Workers Union of Zimbabwe (ESWUZ) and another one belonging to the National Energy Workers Union of Zimbabwe (NEWUZ) are facing criminal charges for participating in a protest action against a government company – the Zimbabwe Electricity Supply Authority. Their crime was to demand the implementation of the 2012 collective bargaining agreement and being anti-corruption whistle blowers. They are charged for alleged participation in an unlawful collective job action, breach of confidentiality and insubordination. These charges are new euphemisms for official harassment.

There is also the case of the issue of the President of the Amalgamated Rural Teachers Union of Zimbabwe, Mr Masaraure Obert, who was abducted from his home by suspected state security agents as another example of the deliberate attempt to undermine the tenets of the freedom of association. Mr Masaraure was brutalized and dumped in the bush because he was advocating for an industrial protest action to demand better working conditions of teachers necessary for better education service delivery. This assault was so brazen that the European Union demanded a swift, thorough and transparent investigation by the competent authorities while also demanding that citizens’ civic and constitutional rights be respected.

On another note, the second Vice-President of the ZCTU, Mr John Chirenda, was dismissed by the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority on the 10 April 2019 for no clear reasons save to say he insisted that management should speak to the workers through the union. The antics of the management to speak directly to workers is a direct move to undermine the trade union.

We urge this Committee to be weary of doing the needful by siding with the civil liberties, especially as it concerns these unacceptable violations. Zimbabwe must be asked to comply with the provisions of Convention No. 87.

Government member, Algeria – Algeria thanks Zimbabwe for presenting its report and notes with satisfaction the legislative reforms undertaken, in particular the reform to harmonize labour law and the Public Service Act, within the framework of constructive social dialogue and supported by the Government and the social partners.

The Algerian delegation also takes positive note of the fact that Zimbabwe remains committed to principles which aim to strengthen freedom of association. We are convinced that this commitment can be maintained by taking note of the information provided by the Government. According to that information, a draft law on peacekeeping and law enforcement is currently subject to consultations with a view to ensuring that legislation complies with the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) and is aligned with the principles of freedom of association and with the civil liberties established in the Constitution of Zimbabwe.

Algeria also welcomes the introduction of measures that aim to fully implement the recommendations of the Committee of Experts. In particular, it welcomes the measures to ensure protection and guarantee the security of managers and trade union members by conducting a detailed independent investigation into allegations of intimidation, threats and impediments to freedom of association. This is evidence that the new approach undertaken by the Government of Zimbabwe is well founded and should be further developed in light of the obligations of the Convention.

That said, you will surely agree that progress is fragile given the circumstances. It is imperative to maintain and consolidate that progress with the help of the ILO, especially because new challenges lie ahead which will require other approaches. It is for this reason that Zimbabwe is committed to fully implementing the Convention and to continuing the efforts needed to improve tripartite dialogue and to facilitate legislative reforms in line with constitutional principles that guarantee respect for the rule of law and fundamental liberties.

Observer, Public Services International (PSI) – This is one of those cases in which the patient has stopped taking the antibiotics before time and relapsed or never fully cured. It has been ten years since the Commission of Inquiry and despite the efforts we have not been able to pursue the Government of Zimbabwe to fully comply its recommendations and take the necessary steps to amend its labour and other legislation interfering with the exercise of freedom of association, or – what is even worse – the Government is adopting new legislation in violation of such principles.

Perhaps, what makes it more frustrating is that we visit this house again – in its Centenary – and find out that we are fighting for these same old issues with a new Government – the same Government which not long ago promised a change but today is presenting us with the same old excuses not to comply with the observations of the Committee of Experts and the conclusions of this Committee.

Contrary to the current trend of thinking in this house, we should find methods to strengthen the supervisory mechanism and the ILO capacity to make sure member States comply with their commitments and the international treaties they have ratified. Meanwhile, we will reiterate our demands and the issues raised by the Committee of Experts in the hope that we see some improvement in the near future.

For instance:

- Principle 4.4 of the Public Service Act of Zimbabwe must be repealed or amended in order to grant staff of the Civil Service Commission the right to organize, irrespective of whether they are engaged in the state administration or are officials of bodies which provide important public services.

- Principle 9.2 of the Public Service Act must be repealed or amended to ensure that legislative provisions adopted on the basis of this principle do not impose in practice a requirement of “previous authorization”, in violation of Article 2 of this Convention.

- Principle 11.3 of the Public Service Act which provides for a very broad definition of essential services, must be amended so as to ensure that workers fully enjoy the rights guaranteed by the Convention.

- And most importantly, the process of amendments and adoption of the legislation that complies with the Conventions must be done in full consultation with the social partners.

Government member, Malawi – Malawi has taken note of the comments raised by the Committee of Experts, in reference to Zimbabwe, regarding application of Convention No. 87. We have also listened to the submission by Zimbabwe. Malawi appreciates the steps that Zimbabwe has taken, ensuring that trade union rights and civil remedies are protected and respected, in line with the Convention. Malawi also appreciates the Government of Zimbabwe, in implementing the recommendations made by the high-level commission of inquiry, headed by His Excellency, Kgalema Motlanthe, former President of South Africa.

Malawi further applauds the positive steps taken by the Government of Zimbabwe in its legislative reforms, to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Convention. The Government of Malawi would like to encourage the social partners to continue cooperation and providing their inputs to the ongoing process of reviewing and developing of roles. The Government of Malawi hopes that the final and adopted copies of the reviewed legislative texts will be shared with the Committee of Experts in this regard.

Worker member, Netherlands– As a representative of the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV) and a large group of its activist members, who already campaigned for over 20 years for justice and respect of trade union rights in Zimbabwe, I want to express our serious concern for the recent heavy and repeated violations by the Government of Zimbabwe of the Convention.

In its 2018 report, the Committee of Experts has noted with concern the allegations submitted by the ITUC and ZCTU regarding the injuries suffered by the ZCTU personnel, when the union’s office came under attack by soldiers during the demonstration on 1 August 2018.

Of a more recent date is the violent government reaction when the ZCTU called for a peaceful three day stay-away from 14 to 16 January 2019, demanding an end to the economic crisis faced by the country, and a reversal of the over 150 per cent increase of fuel prices announced by the Government.

Police and security forces attacked peaceful protesters by opening fire, injuring many. We have reports of 17 dead and over 1,055 persons arrested. We heard about fierce crackdown with reports of heavy military and police presence on the streets and security forces arbitrarily assaulting citizens, including following them to their homes.

On 21 January, we learned that ZCTU General Secretary, Japhet Moyo, had been arrested at the airport upon his return from abroad. He was processed at the central police station with a charge of subverting the constitutionally elected Government. Followed by the arrest of the ZCTU President, Peter Mutasa, on 26 January 2019, on charges of inciting violence and subverting the constitutional Government. Repeatedly, his house was raided by police and his brother severely beaten, while he escaped abduction.

We want to emphasize that freedom of organization means workers have the right to express their views on a government’s economic programme, including through peaceful demonstrations, in an atmosphere free of fear, intimidation and repression. We urge the Government of Zimbabwe to do all what is possible to restore a social climate, free of violence, to guarantee the safety of trade unionists when they engage in their legal and peaceful action. With the ZCTU, we also demand an independent judicial inquiry into the excessive violence against protesters over the January crackdown, which should be instituted without delay, in order to punish the guilty parties and prevent repetition.

We call up on the Government of Zimbabwe to respect trade union rights for peaceful protest and address the economic problems affecting the country, rather than attacking unionists.

Government member, Senegal – Senegal, hereby, thanks the delegation of Zimbabwe for the information that it has brought to the attention of the Committee.

The Government of Zimbabwe has informed us of the progress made towards the different legislative reforms aiming to implement the recommendations of the commission of inquiry. This shows its willingness to cooperate with the ILO supervisory bodies and ensure respect for the Convention. The enactment of legislation intended to guide social dialogue and tripartite participation in Zimbabwe offers opportunities that the Government and the social partners should seize with a view to finding common solutions to the problems that they are facing.

That said, the Government of Senegal urges the secretariat to provide support to the parties concerned so that they can prioritize inclusive social dialogue and productive tripartism at the national level, thereby preserving the best interests of the country.

Worker member, United States – For years, Zimbabwe has consistently failed in law and practice to respect and protect assembly rights. Unions and their allies who protest peacefully to express opinions to Government pay a high price. The Government systematically suppresses this right through a pattern of threats, harassment, physical abuse, and use of force, as well as arbitrary arrests and detentions specifically targeted at trade union leaders, members and their local allies.

The right to freedom of assembly is a fundamental human right. Section 58 of Zimbabwe’s Constitution specifically guarantees the right to peaceful assembly and association. Yet the POSA requires organizers to notify police of plans to hold a public gathering of as little as 15 people seven days in advance, except supposedly in relation to public gatherings held by a registered trade union. Failure to do so may result in criminal prosecution and civil liability. As stated in the ILO Commission of Inquiry report from 2009, as a matter of courtesy the ZCTU gives notice to the police of assemblies.

Authorities often either do not respond or deny requests by trade unions, civil society, religious groups and political parties other than the ZANU-PF to hold public events if the agenda conflicts with government policy. This law is often used to ban protests by unions. Policymakers must make real changes to the law to comply with the Constitution and the Convention. Until then, Government must stop using the law to target unions and allies. In a democracy, unions cannot fulfill their basic roles without exercising this right.

Currently, the people bear hardships brought on by failed policy over many years, including massive unemployment, Government debt, an acute shortage of hard currency and crumbling infrastructure. While the elite are largely protected, those living in or near poverty deal with major price increases, tight monetary policies and regressive tax measures.

In October 2018, police arrested Peter Mutasa, President of the ZCTU, and 35 unionists and others in Harare and other cities as they awaited a court decision on a planned demonstration. Police had previously denied ZCTU’s request for a permit, and a magistrate dismissed ZCTU’s challenge to the ban.

In response to this sustained crisis, on 11 January 2019, the ZCTU notified the Government of plans to hold protest actions if the Government failed to address concerns of its members in seven days. The next day, the Government announced a massive increase in the cost of fuel more than doubling fuel prices for workers who already struggled to get to work. The ZCTU then called for a three-day stay away in protest of the increases. Over the next few days, while members were on strike, groups of people not organized by the ZCTU engaged in public demonstrations. The military brutally cracked down on the protestors. Union leaders, ZCTU Secretary-General and President still face charges, charges which could lead to a 20 year jail sentence. All charges must be dropped now.

The Government also targets civil society leaders criminalizing human rights defenders in Zimbabwe. Those arrested include members of the Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition, members of the Parliament of the Movement for Democratic Change and the president of the Amalgamated Rural Teachers Union of Zimbabwe.

The Government must undertake serious reform in order to meet its obligations to freedom of assembly as stated in its constitution and to ensure freedom of association, as required by the Convention.

Government member, Cuba – My delegation would like to reaffirm the importance of promoting tripartism and social dialogue in all countries with the aim of resolving the differences that arise in the world of work, and enhancing protection of workers’ rights and of freedom of association, which should be a long-standing objective for all.

In this case, the Government of Zimbabwe has reported on the measures it has taken to meet its commitments at the ILO, which shows its willingness to continue progressing. It explicitly mentioned the legislative measures it has been taking. Therefore, we recognize the efforts made by the Government of Zimbabwe and encourage it to continue in the same vein.

We also emphasize the need to continue promoting, within the framework of the ILO, measures and programmes that encourage the provision of technical assistance to countries and give space for governments to take action aimed at resolving challenges in an atmosphere of cooperation and exchange.

Observer, Organisation of Trade Unions of West Africa (OTUWA) – I speak on behalf of OTUWA covering 16 countries. Some of those workers coming from countries who have had military experience, know and cherish the values of a democratic society. And the role citizens’ participation can play in consolidating and shaping it. This is why we are deeply concerned about the growing mockery of democracy and the disregard for citizens, humans and liberal right in Zimbabwe.

Zimbabweans are experiencing change of power from one person to another for the first time after 37 years of the liberation struggle. Unfortunately, they are yet to witness the real dividends to democracy and the benefit of power change. Rather, the people and workers have continued to get boots, wipes and bullets instead of bread, roses and freedom. This is exactly the case with the relentless and serial attack that the ZCTU and its allies are subjected to, in clear disregard of the provision of this very important Convention.

The attacks against the ZCTU have been catalogued by some of the interventions we have listened to so far. The International Visitors and Allies of the ZCTU, most of whom visited for solidarity gestures have not been spared either. This is the case of the ITUC from the Africa region, Mr Kwasi Adu-Amankwah, a Ghanaian, who was arrested on 26 February 2019 an hour after checking into his hotel room in Harare. He was detained at the Harare International Airport for 11 hours and being processed for deportation. He was only released after a flurry of actions. The ZCTU petitioned the High Court; a coordinated international outcry took place as well as the intervention by his own Government. Furthermore, on 12–14 March 2019, the Southern Africa Trade Union Coordination Council (SATUCC) leadership comprising of Mr Cosmas Mukuka, Mr Austin Muneku, Mr Hahongora Kavihuha and Mrs Angie were also detained at the Harare airport for visiting the ZCTU.

The Zimbabwean Government will allude to her genuine disposition to facilitating social dialogue and accountability by pointing to the adoption of the TNF and the empanelling of the composition of the eminent persons led by former South African President, Mr Kgalema Motlanthe, to inquire into the handling of the 1 August 2019 protest. Therefore, we ask: “how do social partners engage in meaningful social dialogue under an atmosphere of perpetual harassment meant to undermine their right to freely associate?” The report of the panel of Inquiry to the protest of 1 August 2019 has been released and the report recommended compensation to victims of brutality by the security agents. When will the recommendations be implemented?

This Committee must once again demand that the Zimbabwean Government take genuine and time-measured steps to enhance social dialogue by desisting from the harassment and persecution of the officials of ZCTU, its members, leaders, affiliates and allies. The charges against the leadership of ZCTU must be dropped.

Government member, Zambia – Zambia takes the floor in support of the statement given by the Government of Zimbabwe. Zambia notes the efforts that Zimbabwe has made in addressing the issue of alleged attack on the ZCTU Office and personnel by soldiers on 1 August 2018 by appointing a Commission of Inquiry. It further notes the reviews of the various pieces of legislation including the labour law reform and harmonization of the Labour Act.

Zambia appreciates the efforts and commitment of Zimbabwe to address the number of issues raised by the Committee of Experts and therefore advise that the country be given a chance to finalize its reviews. Zambia further wishes to encourage the tripartite partners in Zimbabwe to fully engage on various issues affecting the employment and labour sector as well as in other areas in the country.

Worker member, Republic of Korea – Korea and Zimbabwe have been competing with each other in terms of the number of the ratified ILO Conventions, while Zimbabwe is one step ahead than my country, in that it ratified the Convention on freedom of association. So the effective implementation of the ratified Convention by the Government is always our concern.

The Committee of Expert’s report shows that the unilateral and clandestine processes for the amendments of the Labour Acts has not been improved at all. It is my regret, that the new draft for the Labour Act revision was given to the ZTUC at this Conference, no earlier than 12 June, at 1.55 p.m. The Bill still falls short of compliance with the comments of the supervisory bodies and agreed tripartite principle, which are well known by the Government. For example, the amendment of section five on discrimination still excludes discriminatory grounds of social reason, national instruction, direct and indirect discrimination, which was recommended by the Committee of Experts.

Secondly, section 34(a) introduced new provisions that require workers’ and employers’ organizations to supply audit report, membership and its office bearers to the Registrar, and empowers it to cancel the certification if it fails to submit without any mechanism of appeal. This is a clear violation of the principle of the freedom of association.

Thirdly, section 55(a) introduces new powers of the Registrar to interfere in the internal dispute of the workers’ and employers’ organizations on the day-to-day management, which it should be resolved by the organizations themselves, or by and independent judicial court, not an administrative authority.

The amendment to section 63, does not address interference in voluntary bipartite employment council. The amendment of section 74 excludes part of the agreed principle number of two on collective bargaining to include adopting the factors to be considered in fixing minimum wages provided in the Minimum Wage Fixing Convention, 1970 (No. 131).

The amendment to section 98 excludes other agreed elements of principle No. 3 that addresses issues of enforcement of conciliation agreements, setting timeframes for conclusion of arbitration process and reviewing the power of the labour court. The draft Bill does not address the repeated observation of the Committee of Experts on the declaration of the essential services, the excessive penalties for the unlawful strikes, provided in section 107 of the Act, interference by the Minister in trade union, anti-union discrimination and protection of worker representatives. I would like to conclude by urging the Government to amend the Labour Act, so as to bring it into conformity with the Convention and the review should be concluded in full consultation with the social partners without further delay.

Government member, Namibia – In its capacity as the current Chair of Southern African Development Community (SADC) Employment and Labour Sector (ELS), Namibia would like to inform the Committee that issues of compliance to International Labour Standards are central to our tripartite dialogue mechanism as a Regional Economic Community. SADC member States and social partners have committed themselves to collectively address questions relating to the full implementation of the Conventions at the regional and national levels, including in particular Conventions Nos 87 and 98. At our last regional meeting held in March 2019, the regional bloc discussed reports of social partners, which detailed some of the matters that have been brought before this august house in the case of Zimbabwe. As is our tradition, the discussions were held in a true spirit of social dialogue and tripartite engagement and we are confident that such a unique mechanism as we have established in the region, will go a long way in promoting compliance with labour standards, not only in Zimbabwe, but also in the region at large. As SADC ELS Chair, we note the ongoing efforts by the Government of Zimbabwe to address socio-economic challenges and transform the economy, particularly through the Zimbabwe Transitional Stabilization Programme (2018–20), and to consolidate unity and peace in the country. We also note that there are various initiatives that have been put in place to promote dialogue to address a wide range of issues, including through the TNF that has recently been greatly strengthened following the enactment of the TNF Act. We particularly note the demonstration of political will at the highest level towards the Forum purpose of objective giving that the President, His Excellency Emmerson Mnangagwa, personally presided over the launch of the TNF on 5 June 2019. The Committee is requested to consider this pertinent and important development in the discussions. Therefore, we call upon all the tripartite parties to the TNF dialogue to earnestly work towards the full functioning of the Forum, prioritizing dialogue for a common understanding on the implementation of ratified Conventions in law and practice. Indeed, we wish to specially request the Committee to consider that new TNF presents an important platform for the Government of Zimbabwe and its social partners to collectively address the issues raised by the workers. Accordingly, we request the Office to prioritize support towards the full functioning of the Forum as may be requested by the parties to fast track progress.

Worker member, Norway – I will speak on behalf of the trade unions in the Nordic countries. Once again, we are here to discuss Zimbabwe and the Government’s violation of the Convention. The Government has over the years made promises to improve the situation but words continue to be different from deeds.

An ILO high-level mission visited Zimbabwe in 2017 following the conclusions of this Committee. Previously, in 2009, a Commission of Inquiry visited Zimbabwe and made a report with recommendations on:

- stopping prosecution of trade unionists, allowing trade unions to operate freely; and

- amending the laws and creating a conducive environment for social dialogue.

Although the Government accepted the recommendations, like in the past, not much has been done. All Acts which the report called for reform remained intact – for example, the Public Service Act and the famous POSA which I understand has now changed name to MOPA (Maintenance of Order and Peace Act). I am yet to see whether the contents of this Act have also changed.

We are however pleased to note that a Tripartite Negotiation Forum Act was signed last week. We do hope that this is a serious step forward to establish a functioning social dialogue allowing the three social partners space to articulate their agenda.

In the Nordic countries we have a very active and effective social dialogue system among the three social partners. Many laws and regulations have been formulated through social dialogue. Even though we do not always agree, consultations take place. Both employers and workers follow the rules and regulations regarding the rights to organize, strike and bargain as laid down in the basic agreement between the parties. This cooperation has definitely had a very positive impact on our economies.

We hope that Zimbabwe will take advantage of the ILO experience to ensure that social dialogue contributes to economic growth of the country. The Government must ensure that an agreed road map is in place for continued consultations and that social dialogue must be based on mutual trust.

In conclusion, we would like to urge the Government to avoid cosmetic reforms but engage in genuine dialogue with social partners for a way forward. Some of us are tired of seeing Zimbabwe on the agenda of this committee year after year and hope to see Zimbabwe on the list of progressive countries next year.

Government member, Botswana – Botswana wishes to support the Government of Zimbabwe in its efforts to address shortcomings in compliance with the Convention. We know that the Government of Zimbabwe has embarked on the following:

(1) The repealing of the POSA which would be replaced by the maintenance of Peace and Order Bill.

(2) The enactment of the TNF Act in May 2019. Consultations with the social partners on the draft Public Service Bill. Upcoming review of the Health Act and Labour Act as to align them with Zimbabwe constitution adopted in 2013 that provides for freedom of association and the right to strike.

We also noted, however, that reforms the Government of Zimbabwe plans to carry out are legislative by nature so borrowing from our own experience patience should be exercised by all parties involved as legislative reforms tend to take longer as they are usually many bodies involved in the process which include cabinet, tripartite structures and the national assembly. It is our hope that Zimbabwe will avail itself to ILO technical assistance in order to expedite the ongoing labour law reform.

The events of 1 August 2018 which culminated in violence were unfortunate, however, we note with satisfaction that Zimbabwe is on the road to recovery. We wish to commend the Government of Zimbabwe for promptly engaging his Excellency Kgalema Motlantle and his commission to investigate the incidents that happened on that day and we are happy that the Government is currently implementing the recommendations of the commission.

Worker member, South Africa – I speak on behalf of the Southern African Trade Union Co-ordination Council (SATUCC). By arresting and detaining civil society leaders, the Government of Zimbabwe continues to demonstrate its serial capacity to violate the principles of freedom of association of workers with the intention to instil fear in them and deny them the right to associate with the ZCTU.

The ILO supervisory mechanism had pronounced clearly that a system of democracy is fundamental for the free exercise of trade union rights and that trade union rights can only be exercised within the framework of a system that guarantees the effective respect of other fundamental rights including the right to associate and assemble. The supervisory mechanism further pronounced that a free trade union movement can develop only under a regime which guarantees fundamental rights, including the right of trade unionists to hold meetings in trade union premises, freedom of opinion expressed through speech and the press and the right of detained trade unionists to enjoy the guarantees of normal judicial procedures at the earliest possible moment. However, the Government of Zimbabwe continues to violate all these principles through its action of attacking trade unionists and subjecting them to long court processes that amounts to leashing worker leaders, violating the right to free movement both internally and abroad. This honourable Committee has over the years emphasized the respect of human rights embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Furthermore, the Government of Zimbabwe violated its own Constitution which provides for the right to life which is section 48; rights to personal liberty section 49; freedom from torture or cruel inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment section 53; right to privacy section 57; freedom of assembly and association section 58; freedom to demonstrate in petition section 59; freedom of expression and freedom of the media section 61; access to information section 62; labour rights section 65; and freedom of movement section 66. SATUCC requests the honourable committee to impress it upon the Government of Zimbabwe to stop its military actions against civilians and adopt humane policing measures in line with its international obligations. The Government of Zimbabwe must withdraw all criminal charges against trade union leaders, civil society leaders and members of the public arbitrarily arrested. Also the Government of Zimbabwe must be told unambiguously in unambiguous terms to allow trade unions to engage in peaceful protest actions in line with its constitution and its international obligations regarding the right to freedom of association, assembly and expression.

Government member, Mozambique – The Government of Mozambique would like to thank the Government representative and her delegation for the update she gave to this Committee. Indeed, the Government of Zimbabwe has made significant progress in addressing the legislative gaps. We commend Zimbabwe’s efforts in revising Labour Act and the Public Service Act. More importantly, my Government is pleased to note that the Government of Zimbabwe working with its social partners has promulgated the Tripartite Negotiating Forum Act. This Act is the key to sustained social dialogue in Zimbabwe.

My Government urges the Government of Zimbabwe and its social partners to deal with all socio-economic issues in line with what is provided in the TNF Act. Finally, I wish to end by requesting the ILO to support the Government of Zimbabwe and its social partners in strengthening the structure for social dialogue.

Worker member, Germany – In its report, the Committee of Experts urges the Government to review the application of the POSA in consultation with the social partners. This law is systematically abused in order to violate the rights guaranteed by the Convention. The European Parliament also condemns in a resolution of February 2019 the misuse and restrictive nature of this Act.

At the end of 2018, the Constitutional Court of Zimbabwe declared article 27 of the POSA unconstitutional. Article 27 gave the police a far-reaching power to ban demonstrations in certain areas for up to one month.

As we have heard, the Government of Zimbabwe submitted a bill for the Maintenance of Peace and Order Act to replace the POSA.

However, this bill only contains cosmetic corrections and, to a large extent, adopts the regulations of the POSA in its provisions. Furthermore, a demonstration must be registered seven days, a public assembly five days in advance. The law leaves no room for spontaneous meetings, which are at the core of the freedom of assembly also protected by the Zimbabwean Constitution. In the event of a breach of this obligation, the convener of the meeting – as under the POSA – is personally liable for any damage. The deterrent effect that follows from the potentially high financial consequences of this regime is more than obvious.

In addition, the Maintenance of Peace and Order Act continues to include an obligation to periodically provide police with lists of the names of non-public assembly participants. This interference with personal freedom of assembly and privacy is intolerable.

Finally, the draft law continues to provide extensive police powers to restrict freedom of assembly, which, on account of the wide discretion and vague wording of the law, constitute a gateway for disproportionate interference. This is simply the POSA in a new outfit. To cite the Committee on Freedom of Association: “Freedom of assembly and expression are indispensable for the exercise of freedom of association.”

We therefore urge the Government of Zimbabwe, in cooperation with the social partners, to amend the Maintenance of Peace and Order Bill in such a way that it complies with freedom of assembly and expression and thus with the right of trade unions under Article 3 of the Convention, to organize their activities freely. Furthermore, we urge the Government to ensure that also the application of the law is compliance with these provisions.

Government member, Kenya – The Kenya delegation thanks the representative of the Government of Zimbabwe for the detailed reply to the issues raised by the Committee of Experts on the Government’s compliance with certain provisions of the Convention.

After careful consideration of the report by the Committee of Experts and the replies by the Government, it is apparent that, matters under discussion in this case have been the subject of constructive engagement between the Government of Zimbabwe and the ILO through the high-level mission carried out in 2017 following the conclusions of this Committee at the 105th Session of the International Labour Conference through the implementation of the 2009 Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations.

And as noted in the Government’s report, the outcomes of these engagements are now at various stages of implementation. Legal reforms relating to the POSA, the Labour Law Act and the Health Service Act have been commenced with a view of aligning them with the provisions of this fundamental Convention. These measures represent important steps towards full compliance and should be encouraged.

The Kenya delegation welcomes the Government’s commitment to fully consult with the social partners in the process of implementing the legal and policy reforms and calls on the social partners to take advantage of such initiatives to advance their concerns. Regarding the issue of alleged violation of trade union rights and civil liberties which resulted into the injury of people and destruction of property, we note the Government’s explanation that it was an unfortunate incident which has since been investigated by an independent commission of inquiry and whose findings are currently being implemented. We remain hopeful that justice will be rendered to all those who were affected by these unfortunate acts.

Finally, it is our view that since Zimbabwe remains a member State of the ILO this Committee may wish to give the Government more time to complete the ongoing reforms while continuing to monitor progress under the existing reporting mechanisms.

Worker member, Ethiopia – I am speaking on behalf of the Ethiopian Teachers’ Association, Education International and the Zimbabwe Education Unions. A quality public education system must have respect for teachers as a core value. The Zimbabwe Teachers’ Association (ZIMTA) and the Progressive Teachers’ Union of Zimbabwe (PTUZ) have recently joined to demand that the government provide adequate funding of basic education and decent working conditions for teachers. They hold the government to account so that it delivers on its commitment to reform the labour and public service legislation.

However, what progress can we report to this Committee? What steps has the post-Mugabe government made? Are we seeing real political will? Unfortunately, we can report no such thing. For over ten years, there have only been endless delays.

Despite the adoption of a new Constitution taking into account the provisions of ILO Conventions, the Public Service Act Chapter 16.04, the Public Service Regulations and the Public Service Joint Negotiating Council Regulation 141/97 have not been amended accordingly.

We urge the Attorney General to amend the Labour Act and the Public Service Act to bring them in full conformity with the Convention. The amendments should be submitted for the consideration of the social partners, and then to Parliament. These amendments should provide for public service employees to enjoy the right to collective bargaining and collective job action. They should also clearly define what is meant by essential services in line with the Convention. For the record, we insist that the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association excludes the teaching profession from any definition of essential service.

ZIMTA and PTUZ are proactively seeking to find constructive ways forward. On 3 June, the unions convened an “indaba”, a meeting where in traditional African culture, people get together to sort out the problems that affect them all. Union leaders held a daylong meeting with members of the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare. This was an opportunity to discuss how to move forward. The teachers’ unions in Zimbabwe are also mobilizing their teaching profession through a signature campaign calling upon the Government to meet its international commitments.

The teacher unions will continue to mobilize for the right to organize and to bargain collectively. Hence, today, we are requesting that this Committee assist the unions in their work.

Government member, Eswatini – From hearing the submissions made by the representative of the Government of Zimbabwe on progress made so far, regarding the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and the subsequent Committee of Experts report, we note the progress that has been made thus far.

Being alive to the common cause challenge that in most governments, the procedures for legislative reforms are normally protracted, and thus not easy to accomplish within the shortest possible time. We are appealing to the Committee to accept the commitment already presented by the Government of Zimbabwe to complete its journey, without being burdened with some further conditions and recommendations, over and above the programme that the Government has set for this purpose.

We congratulate the Zimbabwean Government and their social partners for having successfully commissioned the TNF on 5 June 2019, following promulgation into law, of the TNF Act. In the spirit of moving towards strong tripartitism and inclusiveness as already demonstrated in the statement presented by the Government delegation of Zimbabwe, the Government should be encouraged and supported to continue in its efforts to work together with the social partners in fostering the development of national labour legislation, on individual and collective labour rights, and other activities that drive decent work and sustained inclusive and sustainable economy growth.

Eswatini persuades the Committee to reckon that with the practical demonstration of a political will and commitment by the Government of Zimbabwe regarding ensuring the exercise and enjoyment of the right to freedom of association, and the protection of the right to organize. Further progress regarding the case of Zimbabwe could still conveniently be made through a tripartite approach at the national level.

Worker member, Zambia – I am speaking for the Workers’ movement in Zambia. This Committee has established repeatedly that workers have the right to use their organization and benefits of association to pursue the protection of their socio-economic rights. It is, therefore, from this standpoint that I would like to bring the attention of this Committee to the economic problem facing the workers of Zimbabwe. These problems are the source of protest actions and if not addressed, Zimbabwe will appear again in this Committee in the near future.

In 2009, Zimbabwe dumped its own currency due to hyperinflation and adopted a basket of other countries’ currencies dominated by the United States dollar. As from 2009 to 2015, wages were paid in United States dollars. In 2016, Zimbabwe introduced a surrogate currency called “bond note” and declared by law that it is equivalent to the United States dollar. As a result, workers’ wages were then paid in bond notes. In February 2019, Zimbabwe introduced another electronic currency called RTGS dollar. Zimbabwe has now accepted that its bond note and RTGS are not equivalent to the US dollar. As a result, goods and services are now pegged in United States dollar, while wages are paid in the local currency. Goods charged in local currency are eight times more than those in US dollars.

While goods and prices change every day, wages have remained static at an average of RTGS$300, against a total Consumption Poverty Line of RTGS$873 for a family of five in April 2019.

The Committee on Freedom of Association has pronounced the following principles regarding protests in paragraphs 716–718 of the Freedom of Association Compilation, 2018: “that Freedom of association implies not only the right of workers and employers to form freely organizations of their own choosing, but also the right for the organizations themselves to pursue lawful activities for the defence of their occupational interests.”

“The Committee firstly recalls that freedom of association implies not only to the right of workers and employers to form freely organizations of their own choosing, but also the right for the organizations themselves to pursue lawful activities – including peaceful demonstrations – for the defence of their occupational interests. Any provision that restricts the rights is incompatible with this Convention.”

I implore the government of Zimbabwe to stop its crackdown on workers and address the economic problems.

Government member, Ethiopia – My delegation takes note of the observations of the Committee of Experts in relation to the application of the Convention in law and in practice on which the Government of Zimbabwe is requested to supply information. We have keenly listened to the information provided by the Government of Zimbabwe pertaining to measures taken in response to the observations of the Committee. More specifically, the Government of Zimbabwe indicated in its report that it is currently implementing the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and is undertaking legislative reforms so as to harmonize with the Convention. Furthermore, we listened from the interventions of the Government of Zimbabwe that a tripartite negotiation forum act was passed by the competent authority and was launched in June, which, in our view, is a welcome development.

Article 2 of the Convention clearly stipulates that workers shall have the right to establish and to join organizations of their own choosing. To this effect, the ultimate responsibility for ensuring less respect for the principle of freedom of association lies with governments.

Based on the information and explanations as provided by the Government of Zimbabwe, we are encouraged by the development taking place in the country, complying with the observations of the Committee.

Finally, we encourage the Government of Zimbabwe to expedite its efforts in consultation with social partners, to address cases that may be outstanding and we hope that the Committee will take into consideration the progress made in Zimbabwe while drawing its conclusions.

Worker member, United Kingdom – In 2009, an ILO Commission of Inquiry was convened to discuss serious allegations in relation to violations of basic civil liberties, including the arrest, harassment and intimidation of trade unionists for exercising legitimate trade union activities. Its 164-page report outlined steps to bring the country into compliance with the Convention and emphasized that: “It is only if this agreement is implemented in good faith by everyone that it could help steer Zimbabwe on a new course towards stability and progress in the interests of its people and pave the way to genuine democracy”.

Its opinion was that the reforms could, and should, be carried out without further delay. Those reforms included: The Labour Act, and the POSA, should be brought into line with the Convention; that all anti-trade union practices should cease, and; that training should be provided for the police and security forces in understanding Freedom of Association.

Now we enter a decade of missed opportunities. In 2010, The Committee of Experts expressed the firm hope that the Labour Law would be brought in line with the Convention. In 2011 the Committee heard that progress had been delayed, and that education of law enforcement had only just started. The Committee reiterated that the POSA should be amended to comply with the Convention and repeated that trade unionists prosecuted under the POSA should have cases withdrawn, expressing the hope that this would happen in the very near future. In 2012, the Committee asked again for a review of the POSA with the social partners. Withdrawal of prosecutions appeared not to have happened. In 2013 some good news: a handbook and a code of conduct for law enforcement agencies were agreed. In 2015, two years later, the Committee “urges the Government to take the necessary steps for the early adoption and effective implementation of the mentioned handbook and code of conduct.” The Government meanwhile announces amendments to the Labour Laws. They still don’t align with the Convention. In 2016, seven years after the first request, the matter of prosecutions under the POSA finally seems to be resolved. But here we are ten years later: law enforcement agencies still act as if trade unions were subject to the POSA. The POSA still has not been aligned with the Convention. Nor has the Labour Act. An ILO Commission of Inquiry is a serious investigation. States are understandably keen to avoid the opprobrium of such a high-level investigation into the failings of fundamental labour rights. But the biggest shame lies with states that many years after such a Commission, proceed at a snail’s pace, or sometimes not at all, in implementing recommendations.

How can it be that after ten years the labour law has been amended on several occasions and the Government either cannot, or will not, get the changes right to make it consistent with the Convention? Recalling that vital democratic freedoms, and often personal safety, are at stake, ten years is an unacceptable time to wait for resolution of these matters.

Government member, Uganda – The Ugandan delegation thanks the Government of Zimbabwe for the submission made to the Committee. My delegation is of the view that the steps taken by the Government to operationalize a framework for social dialogue and collective decision-making on the matters of industrial relations through the establishment of the tripartite negotiating forum will greatly address matters raised by the Committee.

Secondly, the processes initiated for review of the national laws are key and will greatly improve the enabling environment by providing the legal and institutional framework that are necessary for the implementation of the appropriate recommendations of the Committee. We therefore ask Zimbabwe to continue on that path and request the Committee to take note of the progress made in addressing these recommendations.

Government member, United Republic of Tanzania – The United Republic of Tanzania thanks the delegation of Zimbabwe for the explanation given and constructive engagement in the review process. Tanzania welcomes the various efforts by the Government of Zimbabwe, in fulfilling its obligations and the ILO Conventions, despite all the major economic challenges that the country continues to face.

Tanzania notes with gratitude, progress made by the Government of Zimbabwe in the implementation of Recommendations, including advancement in legislative and administrative measures. We further congratulate the Government of Zimbabwe and its social partners for the enactment of the TNFA, in May 2019.

Finally, Tanzania would like to encourage the Government of Zimbabwe to continue engaging with social partners in fulfilling its international obligations, and we ask the ILO to continue lending full necessary support to efforts being made by the Government of Zimbabwe.

Government member, Sudan – The Sudan Government expresses its wishes to the Government representative for the updating to the Committee on the progress Zimbabwe has made in giving effect to the recommendations of the Committee of Experts. The Government of Zimbabwe should be commended for the stride it has taken to review all key pieces of labour legislation. Sudan notes the renewed commitment to social dialogue by the Government and its social partners. This is an encouraging step and should be supported.

Government representative – Allow me to thank all delegates who have contributed to the discussion of my country. We have taken note of the various constructive ideas generated during the debate. We particularly want to acknowledge and appreciate the interventions that have recognized the great strides being made by my Government and social partners in addressing the observations and comments of the ILO supervisory bodies and in modernizing the labour laws in Zimbabwe in general.

Let me also take the opportunity to respond to some of the issues raised during the debate. Some delegates made reference to issues that are not part of the report of the Committee of Experts. These issues are intrinsically domiciled in the political domain. In my initial address to this august house I did make reference to the commission of inquiry set by his Excellency the President of Zimbabwe E.D. Mnangagwa to deal with violent disturbances, wanton destruction of property and injuries to citizens including those who were not taking part in the demonstration.

I also went further to indicate that my Government accepted the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and is already implementing them. In addition, I wish to inform the Committee that consistent with the Government’s reform agenda and the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry in question, the Zimbabwe republic police is currently undergoing comprehensive transformation.

Again, I also note that my compatriots raised issues around the violent disturbances of January 2019. These disturbances are not part of the report of the Committee of Experts. In response, however, allow me to point out that it is the primary responsibility of any government to ensure that all citizens are secure and are able to fully exercise their rights including the right to demonstrate as provided for and protected under section 59 of the constitution of Zimbabwe. While we recognize the right to demonstrate, what transpired in the form of violent disturbances from 14 to 16 January 2019 is not what is contemplated in the principles of the Convention. What happened on 14 to 16 January 2019 was not an ordinary stay away. As all fair-minded observers and even our compatriots from the ZCTU will acknowledge that the protests which took place in some parts of Zimbabwe from 14 to 16 January were neither civil nor peaceful but were characterized by wanton violence and destruction of private and public property.

I also want to ask the partner who gave this meeting a list of what he heard about events in January 2019. I want to ask whether he also heard that the non-violence demonstrations he mentioned involved the beating-up of citizens who tried to cross the barricades erected by the demonstrators or whether he also heard about the destruction of vendor stalls and merchandise. Did he also hear about the burning of privately owned vehicles, the beating-up and killing of a policeman? Did he also hear about the joy of workers when they were facilitated by the Government to go back to work when the Government provided them with buses? When the people had appealed for protection against the brutal attacks by the so-called peaceful demonstrators.

I also want to take note of what the compatriot Mr Mutasa said. He noted that he was arrested, that is true, however we would like to point out that there is a separation of powers between the executive and the judiciary. The Government negotiated with the courts for Mr Mutasa to be here and through his own acknowledgement and I quote “I was only freed by the court” and we take this as an honest acknowledgement by Mr Mutasa of that separation of powers between executive and judiciary.

For the TNF to work in Zimbabwe it calls for mutual trust and goodwill. When we launched the TNF on 5 June, it was done in a collaborative and friendly manner. I also want to quote the President of the ZCTU when he said “We live in fear, we are in a war zone in a country not at war” was the friendly collaborative nature in which we launched the TNF done in a war zone, I think not.

I also want to mention that one of the speakers noted the labour bill, we note that the draft legislation on the labour bill is still being critiqued internally. It has not or should not have been shared as yet with the external partners. We are surprised that it has been discussed here. Without dwelling on political overtones as some of the delegates did in their intervention, let me just say that my Government respects freedom of association and expression on the part of all Zimbabweans including workers as enshrined in the Bill of Rights of our constitution. Nevertheless it should also be appreciated that the Government has the duty to enforce the rule of law, to protect citizens and property when demonstrators turn violent like what happened in January 2019.

Having commissioned the Tripartite Negotiating Forum my Government now looks forward to constantly updating a beneficial relationship with our social partners. I am convinced that most of the issues raised will be dealt with in our engagements within the purview of the TNF which has already been enacted. There is renewed commitment among social partners.

Finally, I would like it noted that we are a new Government, it is a Government in transition, reform is in process. We require technical assistance to achieve what needs to be achieved. I also would like it noted that despite the earlier speaker talking about living in fear, it is important that for the first time ever in history his Excellency the President of Zimbabwe was able to meet trade unions and business in one room. The trade unionists shared their concerns with the President and he reassured them that they shall be addressed.

It is our hope that those responsible for serial attacks on Zimbabwe can please cease and desist for long enough to recognize the very positive developments being spearheaded by the Government of Zimbabwe. In closing I would like to ensure this Committee the commitment that Zimbabwe has and also to say that Zimbabwe is currently on the cusp of a sea change in our labour relations. We are moving forward towards the realization of Vision 2030 to make Zimbabwe an upper-middle income economy in order for us to achieve that, we value the commitment by our social partners in ensuring that we achieve a shared national vision.

Worker members – The Government of Zimbabwe must match its expressed intentions to live up to its international obligations with its action on the grounds. As we speak, the Government is engaged in a campaign of prosecutorial and judicial harassment of both the President and General Secretary of ZCTU. They dared to challenge the Government’s economic policy and direction, and are therefore facing subversion charges. It is the role of trade union leaders to reject policies that would bring hardship from their members and to seek dialogue on alternative solutions. The criminalization of trade unions stands at odds with the obligations the Government has under this Convention. Zimbabwe must immediately and unconditionally withdraw the charges against trade union leaders and members for peaceful activities undertaken to defend and protect the rights and interests of workers. We urge the Government to take all necessary measures in order to ensure the safety of those who have spoken out here today upon their return to Zimbabwe. We call on the Government of Zimbabwe to vigorously investigate and pursue these cases of serious allegations of brutalities perpetrated by the security forces, and indeed, the Committee of Experts’ report did not mention the violence occurred in January. How could they possibly have done it? The Government must begin an inclusive process, a national dialogue to resolve the economic and political challenges facing the country. This is the way for stability and progress. Without social peace and stability based on inclusion, tripartism and respect for civil liberties and rights, the Government will not be able to deliver on its promises to achieve economic and inclusive growth. We note in this respect, the passage of the National Tripartite Forum Act. However, this Act was signed into law by the President of Zimbabwe days before the ILC. Regrettably, there was an absence of tripartite consultations in the adoption of the Act, and there are numerous areas that raise serious concerns. Concerns have also been raised about the absence of full and frank consultations over the hasty introductions of other pieces of legislation. A few days ago, just ahead of the ILC, the Government has produced a Labour Bill and shared it with the ZCTU. Clearly, no meaningful consultations with social partners took place on the new contents of this current Bill prior to its official publication. We regret that a cursory look at the Bill reveals that key aspects remain incompatible with the Convention. We take section 55, for example, where the registrar of trade unions has been given power to hear and determine disputes pertaining to day-to-day management of the union or employers’ organization. The registrar’s decisions will be final. We note this provision is in contrast with the observation of the Committee on Freedom of Association that conflicts within a trade union should be resolved by its members or by appointing an independent mediator with the agreement of the parties concerned, or through the intervention of the judicial authorities. The social partners must be immediately consulted to revise this new Bill.

In addition, the Government has just published the Maintenance of Peace and Order Bill a few days ago, to amend the POSA. This Bill has also been published without meaningful consultation with the social partners. Section 7 of the Bill provides, for burdensome and winding procedures for convening public demonstrations and processions. The new Public Order Bill will do nothing but give the security forces license to continue the heavily repression of the right to freedom of assembly. Zimbabwe’s non-compliance with the Convention remains severe, and we are more convinced of that after hearing the Government’s response. We deplore the fact that there are new violations of the right to freedom of association in practice. The legislative steps undertaken so far have been wholly inadequate in order to remedy the numerous contradictions of the legislation with international labour standards. We urge the Government to invite a high-level tripartite mission of the ILO. The mission would be helpful, and assist, and ensure that the Government returns to a path of social and economic stability and progress, especially through compliance with its obligations under international labour standards.

Employer members – I think it is fair to begin by thanking all of the speakers, and certainly we have taken into account the perspectives shared. Thank you in particular to the distinguished Government delegate, Madam Minister, for the detailed information that was shared.

I think it is fair to say that this is a complicated case with a long history, and if we pick up the history of this case, beginning in 2009 with the Commission of Inquiry, we see that there have been issues repeatedly raised and brought to the attention of the Government, but without follow-up at that time. The Employers’ group is hopeful that perhaps a change in perspective accompanied the 2017 high level technical assistance mission that took place, specifically to assess to obstacles to the implementations of the Recommendation of the 2009 Commission of Inquiry, as well as the full implementation of the Convention, both in law and practice, as was requested by the Committee in its June 2016 session and we know the high level technical assistance mission of 2017 made a number of recommendations, some of which we are discussing today.

Now, there is a new Government and certainly in respect of the Government’s submissions today, there seems to be an openness and willingness to consider these issues and take measures that perhaps did not previously exist, and some of the submissions today from the Government, appear promising, such as the Government’s indication of a promised repeal of the POSA with a new Public Order Bill, promising also is the establishment of the TNF as a framework in which to engage in social dialogue with both employers’ and workers’ organizations. It sounds promising that the Government also provided information today regarding measures in relation to the Public Service Act, amendments to the Health Services Act, to make sure that it is in sync with the rights under the Public Service Act, and of course also promising the Government’s indication of its willingness to accept technical assistance to continue on this path to compliance both in law and in practice.

Clearly some concerns remain and as noted by a number of government speakers, it appears to the Employers’ group to be appropriate to proceed with, what I will call, cautious optimism, and that is to encourage the Government to implement the measures that have been discussed this evening in consultation with the social partners, mindful of many observations made by the experts in relation to these fundamental points, and to seek technical assistance of the ILO on this path.

As part of this process, the expectation is also that information continues to be provided as requested to the Committee of Experts so that further assessment and consideration of the promises made, and the measures described this evening, can be monitored and encouraged.

Conclusions of the Committee

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted concern regarding the Government’s failure to implement specific elements of the recommendations of the 2009 Commission of Inquiry. The Committee noted persisting failure issues of non-compliance with the Convention, including allegations of violations of the rights of the freedom of assembly of workers’ organizations. The Committee also noted the Government’s stated commitment to ensure compliance with its obligations under the Convention and to the process of social dialogue, including through the framework for Tripartite Negotiating Forum (TNF).

Taking into account the discussion, the Committee calls upon the Government to:

- refrain from the arrest, detention or engagement in violence, intimidation or harassment of trade union members conducting lawful trade union activities;

- ensure that the allegations of violence against trade union members are investigated, and where appropriate, impose dissuasive sanctions;

- repeal the Public Order and Security Act (POSA), as it has committed to do so, and to ensure that the replacement legislation regarding public order does not violate workers’ and employers’ freedom of association in law and practice;

- revise or repeal the Public Service Act and, as necessary, the Health Services Act, to allow public sector workers freedom of association in consultation with the social partners;

- amend the Labour Act, in consultation with workers’ and employers’ organizations, to come into compliance with the Convention; and finally

- to continue to engage in social dialogue with the workers’ and employers’ organizations in connection with the framework of the TNF.

The Committee urges the Government to accept a direct contacts mission of the ILO to assess progress before the next International Labour Conference.

Government representative – I want to thank you for giving me the floor to make some remarks on behalf of my Government, following the presentation of the conclusions on the case of Zimbabwe. Regrettably, my Government does not accept the direct contacts mission, which your Committee has recommended. The non-acceptance of the mission is based on the following:

My delegation is convinced that Zimbabwe has made remarkable progress in addressing the legislative and other concerns of the Committee of Experts. The Government of Zimbabwe is committed to strengthening social dialogue, working with social partners. It is apparent that a fact finding mission to courts of Zimbabwe will disturb the momentum that is already there following the commission of the Tripartite Negotiating Forum (TNF).

The Government and social partners have affirmed their commitment to social dialogue. Zimbabweans are looking forward to the results of the engagements, not yet another inquiry by the International Labour Organization.

The call for the high-level tripartite mission does not take into account submissions made by African governments and Cuba, which acknowledged the progress made by Zimbabwe. They also asked the office to provide technical assistance to Zimbabwe. The European Union (EU) was inclined to give social dialogue a chance, by making reference to its formal re-engagement with the Zimbabwean Government, only this month. The Employers’ group also took note of the progress made in Zimbabwe and expressed the need for technical assistance.

In conclusion, let me inform this Committee that, notwithstanding the foregoing, the Government of Zimbabwe shall provide regular updates, through reports to be submitted to the Committee of Experts, in accordance to article 22 of the ILO Constitution.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2013, Publication: 102nd ILC session (2013)

A Government representative indicated that his Government had accepted all seven recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and the ILO technical assistance package and that it had committed itself to working together with the social partners and the Office for the implementation of those recommendations. In accordance with the Committee’s conclusions adopted in 2011, the Government was making progress towards the implementation of the Action Plan which had been endorsed by the social partners as a roadmap for carrying out the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry in a focused and systematic manner. His Government appreciated the fact that the Committee of Experts had noted the progress made in the area of capacity building involving several state actors who interfaced directly or indirectly with trade unionists. However, capacity-building activities had not been limited to state actors but were extended to non-state actors such as independent arbitrators, designated agents of the employment councils/bargaining councils and lawyers in private practice. Subject to availability of resources, the capacity-building training programmes should be taken regularly to involve new players. Progress had also been noted by the Committee of Experts in the area of strengthening social dialogue, particularly as regards the proposed establishment of a chamber for social dialogue. A zero draft of the Tripartite Negotiating Forum (TNF) Bill was now in place. This draft was drawn up in December 2012 after approval by Cabinet of the principles of the TNF legislation and the Attorney-General’s Office was currently working towards the actual draft bill. The speaker went on to say that the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission Act was passed into law in October 2012 paving the way for the Commission to start its work. However, due to budgetary constraints, the Commission did not have readily available resources to roll out its programmes. Yet, the Government and the social partners held information-sharing sessions with the members of the Commission as well as the Organ on National Healing, Reconciliation and Integration (ONHR). These two structures needed to mainstream human rights in the world of work and to this end, senior officials from the ONHR were part of the state players who received capacity building in the area of international labour standards. As regards the complaint submitted to the ILO by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) concerning alleged cases of suspension and mass dismissal of workers who had participated in strikes and protests at their respective workplaces, the speaker stated that such cases were the subject to domestic remedies provided for in the Labour Act. The Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) should advise the concerned workers to approach the district labour offices in their respective areas. Otherwise, the Ministry of Labour had no information about the alleged cases of suspension and mass dismissal of workers. Concerning the situation of Ms Hambira, the General Secretary of the General Agricultural and Plantation Workers’ Union of Zimbabwe (GAPWUZ) who was allegedly in forced exile, the Government representative reiterated that Ms Hambira had no pending case and that she was never arrested nor was she a wanted person. Just like any other Zimbabwean living abroad, Ms Hambira was free to return when she deemed fit and therefore the recommendation that the Government should take necessary measures to ensure her safety upon her return was unfounded.

Referring to the comments of the Committee of Experts concerning the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) and the alleged difficulties of the ZCTU in organizing public gatherings to commemorate the International Women’s Day and Labour Day in 2012, the speaker acknowledged that the ZCTU encountered similar problems in Masvingo, a provincial capital, during preparations for the 2013 Workers Day celebrations. The POSA was never meant to apply to bona fide trade union activities and it had an exclusion provision to that effect. Through information-sharing sessions pertaining to the relationship between international labour standards and national laws and practices, state actors were becoming increasingly aware of the thin dividing line between trade unionism and politics. Only three such information sharing sessions had been conducted since 2011 involving about 90 law enforcement agents and many of the law enforcement agencies in the outer areas still needed to be included. Once those agencies were covered, there would be zero incidents in which POSA would be invoked. Three more workshops were planned with the law enforcement agencies at the national level in July/August 2013, as well as the organization of information-sharing sessions to all of the ten provinces, and of a tripartite workshop before the end of the year with the participation of law enforcement agencies. The planned workshop involving the social partners and law enforcement agencies would help build bridges between trade union representatives and the law enforcement agencies and could be the platform to finalize the draft code of conduct of players in industrial relations. Beyond the code, the focus would be placed on a training handbook on human rights in the world of work. This information would help the law enforcement agencies in particular and other state actors in general to make informed and objective decisions. Levelling the playing field, including ensuring that the POSA could not infringe upon legitimate trade union rights, required a new mind set beyond amending the POSA. The Government had withdrawn all pending cases involving trade unionists who had been arrested under POSA in line with one of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. As for three cases pending before the Supreme Court, the speaker indicated that the ZCTU would need to petition the court in question. Concerning the labour law reform, the speaker made reference to the new Constitution, assented to by the President on 22 May 2013, which addressed the issue of freedom of association and collective bargaining as they related to both the private and public sectors in section 65 on labour rights. This constitutional provision gave effect to ILO Conventions on freedom of association and collective bargaining. In the area of the public sector, the new provisions meant that full-fledged collective bargaining was replacing consultative arrangements. Sections 58 and 59 of the Declarations of Rights also provided for freedom of association and assembly as well as freedom to demonstrate and to present petitions provided they were exercised peacefully. Those constitutional provisions complied with the principles of the Convention. In addition, the Cabinet was currently discussing the draft principles for the harmonization and review of labour laws and a Cabinet task force had been constituted in October 2012 to examine them. The Government representative concluded by thanking the Office for providing technical and financial support in connection with the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. His Government would not only ensure that the resources were used well but would also ensure that there was compliance with the provisions of Convention No. 87 and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), both in law and practice.

The Employer members recalled the historical developments leading up to the present discussion, including the ILO technical assistance package launched in Harare in August 2010, which involved a high-level information-sharing session with senior ILO officials, an agreed upon roadmap of key activities between September and December 2010 and consultations with the social partners concerning a February 2011 timeline to implement those activities. The Government had, prior to the discussion of the case in 2011, provided information in writing regarding the measures it had purportedly taken to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and the Committee of Experts’ requests, and had indicated that it would submit a detailed reply concerning those measures in its next report. However, before the 2011 discussion, the Government indicated that progress had not been made owing to administrative obstacles, although work had begun on the basis of the roadmap, and that, if it was listed by the Committee in a future session, it would be able to report on its progress. Although the report submitted in 2011 was constructive, the Government needed to adopt substantive changes in line with the Convention’s requirements. The Employer members urged the Government to provide a detailed report outlining the outcome and status of reported initiatives, including the participation of Supreme Court judges in a training course on international labour standards, two training workshops on human rights and trade union rights for the police, security forces and the Attorney-General’s Office, the recently approved principles for the TNF legislation and the Human Rights Bill to operationalize the Human Rights Commission that had been passed by Parliament and was before the President. They additionally requested further information without delay concerning initiatives to undertake a full review, in cooperation with the social partners, of the application of the POSA in practice, concrete steps to enable the promulgation of clear lines of conduct for the police and security forces with respect to human and trade union rights, as well as the establishment, in cooperation with the ILO, of a handbook of international labour standards and national legislation for various actors in the labour market. The Employer members urged the Government to provide further information on steps taken to bring the POSA into line with the Convention, in consultation with the social partners, as well as on developments regarding the revision of the Labour Act, the Public Service Act and other relevant laws and regulations, and the December 2012 consensus-building workshop towards drafting a labour law reform bill. The Employer members concluded by stressing the importance of bringing both national law and practice fully into compliance with the Convention and reporting on progress made in this regard.

The Worker members recalled that the question of respecting the principles of freedom of association in Zimbabwe had given rise to the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry in 2009 that had identified a number of violations and had submitted a series of recommendations to the Government. The first recommendation dealt with harmonizing legislation, and it was evident that the Government had shown a certain resistance in that area because the draft principles adopted by the social partners had still not been approved by the Cabinet and the Senate had rejected the amendments to the POSA. Regarding the second recommendation (the cessation with immediate effect of all anti-union practices), certain cases had been withdrawn but anti-union practices still occurred: the dismissal of union delegates in June 2012 during a collective action in a diamond mining enterprise, the exile of the General Secretary of GAPWUZ following threats made against her; and interference by the police and security forces in union affairs. The third recommendation concerned the creation of a Human Rights Commission to receive and deal with complaints, but it had not yet been set up. The fourth recommendation dealt with legal training for the social partners and security forces. Training had been given, with ILO technical assistance, but it was not enough. While progress had been noted in the labour courts, the same could not be said for Supreme Court magistrates or for the police, whose attitudes had not changed. With regard to the fifth recommendation (strengthening the rule of law), seminars had been organized for magistrates but had not yet produced conclusive results. Lastly, in respect of the sixth recommendation (strengthening social dialogue), the bill to establish the TNF, which would signify progress, had yet to be adopted by the Cabinet. Training workshops on freedom of association and collective bargaining had nevertheless been planned for conciliators and arbitrators. In practice, however, difficulties remained: for example, for seven years the public authorities had refused to grant authorization to the metal and energy union, and employers did not negotiate in good faith or respect signed agreements or arbitration decisions, and even withheld union dues. The Worker members considered that while some slight progress was noticeable in the implementation of the Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations, the Government seemed unwilling to make the legislative changes requested or to ensure the functioning of the relevant institutions, and, all the while, union rights were being systematically violated.

The Employer member of Zimbabwe stated that the Government’s attitude had significantly improved since the time the complaint under article 26 of the Constitution was filed. Considerable ground had been covered and the progress now reported by the Government was real. The Government had been fortunate to receive technical assistance from the ILO although more had yet to be done. Concerning the harassment of trade unionists by law enforcement agents, the speaker preferred not to comment on this issue as employers were not directly affected. Referring to the TNF legislation, which was being drafted, he confirmed that employers had agreed on the guiding principles. The speaker concluded by stating that, in view of the marked progress, the examination of this case should be brought to a close.

The Worker member of Senegal recalled the seriousness of the case, which had been examined several times by this Committee in view of the harassment and persecution of trade union officials and the existence of a number of acts that were not in line with the Convention and encouraged anti-union practices. The legislative amendments required were taking time to materialize and the police and security forces were still using the POSA against trade unionists with total impunity. The Government should acknowledge the seriousness of the situation and show evidence of its will to change. It should make the legislative amendments requested and ensure that they were applied through a rigorous labour inspection system and an independent judiciary; ensure that the POSA was not used to penalize trade unionists and issue clear instructions to the police in that regard, and also build police capacity and enhance their knowledge of international human rights instruments; and guarantee sustainable social dialogue mechanisms that would ensure social stability. In so far as the replies given by the Government to the supervisory bodies’ questions did not demonstrate any real change, no commitment could be made, and the Committee should make explicit and firm recommendations to the Government.

The Worker member of Zimbabwe stated that when workers in Zimbabwe wished to join unions, they were not only likely to face discrimination by their employers but also harassment and attacks by the law enforcement agencies, particularly workers from the diamond mining sector. The Commission of Inquiry, which had found that systematic and systemic violations of Convention Nos 87 and 98 had been perpetrated by the State and its law enforcement agencies, had requested the Government to bring its laws, in particular the Labour Act, the Public Service Act and the POSA, into compliance with international labour standards. The Government had also been requested to end all anti-union practices, to operationalize the Human Rights Commission and to strengthen social dialogue. However, the legislative reform process was stagnant. While tripartite discussions had resulted in a draft labour law amendment in 2012, Cabinet had not yet brought the amendment to Parliament. This led to believe that the Government had never had the intention to amend neither the labour laws nor the POSA, which meant that workers were still governed by laws which made them vulnerable and subject to violations. Another important recommendation of the Commission of Inquiry was to bring all outstanding and pending court cases against trade unionists to an end. However, only seven out of 12 criminal cases had been withdrawn, notably the charges against union leaders remained. Police and state intelligence services were regularly attending the meetings of unions. Police had banned the International Human Rights Day celebrations on 10 December 2012 and had first prohibited the May Day processions in 2013 in one of the commemoration venues and had then permitted them under very strict and harsh regulations. Anti-union discrimination in employment also continued, in particular in state-owned companies. In a company in the diamond mining sector, partly owned by the Government, 1,022 workers had been dismissed for having participated in a strike. The dismissed workers had appealed to the Labour Court for reinstatement but the matter was pending since one year. So far, the Government had only carried out two trainings for police and security forces. Given the systematic nature of attacks against trade unionists conducted by police, the significance of these trainings was only minimal, and no orders to respect and protect trade union rights had been given to guide and inform law enforcement agencies. The speaker expressed concern at the emergence of new cases of violations of trade union and human rights perpetrated against workers and trade unionists exercising their legitimate rights as guaranteed by Convention No. 87. Three years after the adoption of the report of the Commission of Inquiry, as well as technical and financial support offered by the ILO, there were no tangible changes in law or practice. The Government continued to display its lack of political will to comply with the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and respect for the rule of law.

The Government member of Swaziland stated that the statement made by the Government representative demonstrated the significant progress made by Zimbabwe in addressing the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. For instance, the principles for harmonization of the labour legislation, which had been agreed upon by the Government and the social partners, were being discussed in Cabinet, and the recently adopted Constitution effectively domesticated Conventions Nos 87 and 98. Her Government encouraged the Government of Zimbabwe to address the outstanding issues such as the finalization of the lines of conduct for the police and the security forces, and called on the Office to continue to provide the necessary support to the Government, in particular technical assistance to enhance capacity.

The Worker member of Denmark recalled that since 2002, this Committee had been attempting to establish a constructive dialogue with the Government of Zimbabwe with a view to finding solutions to the serious violations of these Conventions. On several occasions, the Government of Zimbabwe had made promises but nothing or little had changed. Among its many recommendations, the Commission of Inquiry had called for the Human Rights Commission to be rendered operational as soon as possible. It had also recommended ensuring that the Human Rights Commission and the Organ for National Healing and Reconciliation were adequately resourced so that they could contribute to the defence of trade union and human rights in the future. He took note of the indications provided by the Government concerning the passing of the Human Rights Bill and the crafting of activities involving these institutions. However, four years after its establishment, the Human Rights Commission was still not operational and its Chairperson had resigned in December 2012 due to lack of independence and funding of the Commission. In April 2012, the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights had found the Government guilty of human rights violations, and this decision had been endorsed at the African Union Heads of State Summit in January 2013. Moreover, the ZCTU had announced in May 2013 that they would mobilize workers to boycott the forthcoming polls if reforms agreed in the Global Political Agreement were not implemented.

The Government member of Zambia acknowledged the efforts made by the Government of Zimbabwe in addressing the key outstanding issues raised by the Committee, with regard to its obligations under Conventions Nos 87 and 98. Based on the Government’s report, the country had made significant strides in tackling the matters before this Committee. The Government, in consultation with the social partners, had agreed on principles for the harmonization of labour legislation, had reviewed the labour laws which were now being considered in Cabinet, and had addressed issues relating to the domestication of Conventions Nos 87 and 98. The Government was in the process of putting in place the TNF aimed at strengthening social dialogue and had undertaken a series of training of Government officials and social partners, from 2011 to 2013, in an effort to build capacity. Her Government considered that such efforts ought to be encouraged and called upon the Office and the Committee to note and continue to support the joint implementation efforts of the Government and the social partners.

The Worker member of Swaziland expressed his disappointment that the POSA was still in force and had been systematically used in order to repress basic civil liberties and trade union rights. Police and security forces had been harassing trade unionists with interrogations and interruptions of trade union meetings which could often only be conducted with the presence of security agents. Any opinion or act considered detrimental to public order or interest was punishable by imprisonment. The Government had done nothing to prove its commitment to amend the aforementioned Act. In 2013, a private member bill, that could have introduced changes, was rejected by the Senate of the National Assembly. Moreover, the Supreme Court had ruled that only Cabinet could initiate legislative amendments. He also expressed serious concern about the situation of Ms Hambira.

The Government member of Malawi took note of the progress made in the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry regarding the observance by Zimbabwe of Conventions Nos 87 and 98. Her Government called on the ILO to continue providing technical assistance to the Government so as to ensure that the recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry were fully implemented.

The Worker member of Australia expressed deep concern over the continuing lack of progress with respect to workers’ and trade union rights in Zimbabwe, including the right to organize for workers in the public service. The various restrictions imposed on the basic labour rights of public sector workers had been the subject of criticism by the Commission of Inquiry and the Committee of Experts. Public servants in Zimbabwe only had limited rights to form and join trade unions, to collectively negotiate and to strike. The law also prohibited strikes in “essential services”, a term used in a much broader way than permitted by ILO jurisprudence, which included, for example, occupations such as railway engineers, electricians and pharmacies. In addition, other services could be deemed “essential” by the Minister, with the effect of arbitrarily depriving workers in these occupations of any right to take industrial action, without granting them any compensatory guarantees. The Commission of Inquiry had also observed the extensive violation of trade union rights of teachers, including numerous cases of dismissal or transferral for participating in legitimate trade union activities. Since 2009, the Government had been repeatedly assuring the international community that it intended to address all these deficiencies, in particular to reform the law in relation to the basic rights of public servants to organize and to collectively bargain by harmonizing the Labour Act and the Public Service Act. It had also taken advantage of ILO technical assistance in this respect without showing any real, tangible and substantial progress on these issues. The Teachers Union of Zimbabwe continued to report harassment of union members for participating in legitimate trade union activities and government interference in union affairs. She strongly urged the Government to bring national laws and practice into conformity with Convention No. 87, including with respect to workers engaged in the public service.

The Government member of Kenya noted the progress made by the Government in implementing the principles of Convention No. 87 and its commitment to continue conforming to the recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry in 2009. He further noted that the Government had initiated a labour law reform and had strengthened social dialogue, and underlined the Government’s need for sustained technical assistance to implement the remaining recommendations and entrench freedom of association. The Government was urged to pursue its efforts to promote the principles of Convention No. 87 with a view to implementing an inclusive social dialogue, in particular within the framework of the TNF.

The Worker member of Angola expressed her dissatisfaction with the continued lack of progress in the adoption of the agreed measures to promote civil rights. She recalled that the Committee of Experts had called for improved social dialogue and that several seminars had been held with ILO technical assistance. However, despite the social partners’ agreement, there had been no legislation on a forum for tripartite negotiations. Moreover, the set of draft guidelines for legislation on the subject that had been adopted and approved by Cabinet in June 2012 had not yet been promulgated. She pointed out that the current mandate of Cabinet and Parliament ended on 29 June 2013 and that the next Government would have to start all over again. The Government had endorsed the Kadoma Declaration “Towards a Shared National Social and Economic Vision” but, although the document emphasized the importance of good labour relations and trade union rights, the mutually agreed mechanism for the social partners to follow up the declaration had never materialized. Given the lack of progress that had been made towards social dialogue, she appealed to the Committee to insist on active, immediate and sincere participation by the social partners in bringing about changes that could ensure full application of Convention No. 87.

The Government member of Botswana recalling that this case had been discussed for a long time, stated that notable progress had been achieved. His Government expressed satisfaction at the efforts and the commitment made by the Government and the social partners towards full compliance with Convention No. 87, and called on the Committee to encourage and support the Government to achieve this outcome.

The Worker member of Nigeria stated that the application of the current legal framework had continued to bypass workers and their organizations and make mockery of the application of the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144), ratified by Zimbabwe. The need for an urgent, timely and collaborative reform process had been underlined by the Commission of Inquiry, and Zimbabwe had benefitted from technical assistance to achieve this outcome with very little to show. The speaker added that acts of anti-union discrimination against trade union members and officials remained widespread, and workers were not adequately protected due to legislative gaps and insufficient measures to curtail anti-union discrimination. The Supreme Court continued to issue decisions that licensed employers to refuse to reinstate unlawfully dismissed workers. The Court had developed the principle that unlawfully dismissed workers must look for alternative employment. If workers failed to prove that they had taken measures to this end, the damages awarded to them, which were neither adequate nor dissuasive, would be reduced even further (for example, Olivine Industries (Pvt) Ltd v. Caution Nharara Judgment No. SC88/05). The speaker also indicated that the right to establish workers’ organizations without previous authorization was seriously hampered by the registration procedure. Pursuant to section 33 of the Labour Law any person who wished to make any representation to the registrar relating to the application could do so, and the registrar had to take all representations into account. This provision was used by employers in order to impair the registration of trade unions. The Zimbabwe Metal Energy and Allied Workers Union (ZMEAWU), into which several branch unions had merged in 2007, had applied for registration seven years ago. The Zimbabwe Diamonds and Allied Workers Union had applied for registration in April 2013. Lastly, the speaker urged the Committee to take account of the lack of progress in improving existing legal regulations. Acceptance of technical assistance had been used as a pretext for reforms that lacked genuine political commitment.

The Government representative noted with appreciation the statements acknowledging the progress that had been achieved so far and encouraging the Government to pursue its work. The incidents mentioned by the Worker members had not been brought to the attention of the Government and would be duly examined as soon as signalled to the authorities. With respect to Ms Hambira, Secretary-General of the GAPWUZ, the Government representative stated that she was free to return to Zimbabwe and that the Government was ready to consider proposals from the workers, if any, so that this matter could be resolved. Concerning the labour law reform, while noting the desire to move forward with greater speed, the speaker indicated that this was a process and results could not be expected over night. As regards the situation in the diamond sector, the issues needed to be brought to the attention of the Ministry of Labour so as to enable the Ministry to engage in finding solutions to obstacles encountered by workers in this industry. The lack of resources of the Human Rights Commission was due to the fact that the entire Government did not have adequate resources at its disposal. The speaker highlighted his Government’s commitment to continue to give effect to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and to keep the Office and the Committee of Experts up to date on future developments.

The Employer members expressed their appreciation to the Government for its responsiveness to the submissions of the Committee. They were pleased that the Government had accepted the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and had taken some positive steps towards bringing national legislation into line with Conventions Nos 87 and 98. It was clear however that more needed to be done to ensure full compliance with these Conventions. The Employer members urged the Government to continue taking positive steps together with the social partners. They expected that the steps taken to enact the legislative reform would soon be completed and that information in this regard would be provided at the next meeting of the Committee of Experts. The Employer members further encouraged the Government to dedicate resources for the education and training of police and security forces so as to enhance understanding of Convention No. 87 and ensure that the application of the POSA was in line with that Convention. As regards the strengthening of social dialogue, they expected that the bill concerning the TNF was in line with Convention No. 87 and would be adopted without delay. The Employer members also encouraged the Government to fully operationalize the Human Rights Commission. Lastly, they supported the upcoming proposal of the Worker members for a technical assistance mission in order to ensure continued progress in Zimbabwe.

The Worker members recalled that in 2009, the Commission of Inquiry had found systematic violations of trade union rights and had issued several recommendations, the implementation of which had been assessed by the different speakers. The Government had certainly introduced some measures, but none of them had resulted in definitive decisions or specific results. Moreover, it had never undertaken to put an end to the discrimination and violence suffered by trade unionists, and the police and security forces continued to commit violent acts and interfere in union business, and social dialogue had scarcely been strengthened. The Worker members requested that the Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations be implemented forthwith. They also requested the Government to accept a high-level technical assistance mission in order to speed up the implementation of the recommendations, identify the obstacles and ensure the full respect of Convention No. 87 in law and in practice, and to report back to the Committee of Experts. If the Committee would still be unable, the following year, to see evidence of effective progress in the application of the Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations, serious consideration would be given to using article 33 of the ILO Constitution, which provided for measures to be taken in such cases.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the oral information provided by the Government and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted that the outstanding issues concerned the need to bring the relevant legislative texts into line with the Convention so as to guarantee freedom of association rights to workers, both in the private and public sectors, and the need to ensure that the POSA was not used to infringe upon legitimate trade union rights and in this respect, to ensure that training on human and trade union rights for the police and security forces continued, to carry out together with the social partners a review of the application of the POSA in practice, and to elaborate and promulgate clear lines of conduct for the police and security forces.

The Committee noted the information on the capacity-building activities for social partners and non-state actors that had taken place in 2012 and 2013 with the ILO technical assistance. It further noted the planned activities for July–August 2013 with law enforcement agencies and the cascading of such sessions to all ten provinces. The Committee further noted the information on the process of the labour law review and harmonization, which, according to the Government, involved the social partners, as well as on the guarantees for freedom of association, in both the private and the public sectors, and the right to demonstrate under the new Constitution.

The Committee expressed the firm hope that the law and practice, including the Labour Act and the Public Service Act, would be brought fully into line with the Convention in the very near future and encouraged the Government to continue cooperating with the ILO and the social partners in this respect. The Committee requested the Government to: ensure the continued training of the police and security forces with a view to ensuring the full respect of human and trade union rights; take steps for the elaboration and promulgation of clear lines of conduct for the police and security forces; and ensure the POSA is applied in a manner that is in conformity with the Convention. The Committee urged the Government to provide the resources necessary for the full and rapid operationalization of the Human Rights Commission. The Committee further requests the Government, as it had suggested, to discuss the proposals of the workers’ organizations on possible concrete steps to be taken to ensure the safety of Ms Hambira, General Secretary of the General Agriculture and Plantation Workers’ Union of Zimbabwe (GAPWUZ), upon her return to the country. The Committee invited the Government to accept a high-level technical assistance mission to assess the obstacles to the rapid implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and the full implementation of Convention No. 87, both in law and in practice. The Committee requested that this information, as well as a detailed report from the Government, be transmitted to the Committee of Experts for examination at its next meeting this year.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2011, Publication: 100th ILC session (2011)

The Government provided the following written information.

In March 2010, the Government of Zimbabwe accepted the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. It also accepted the support (technical and financial) offered by the Office. In August 2010, the ILO Assistance Package was launched in Harare back to back with a high-level information-sharing session involving the International Labour Office and senior government officials drawn from the Ministries of Labour, Public Service, Justice, Home Affairs, Foreign Affairs, Office of the President and Cabinet, Public Service Commission, Attorney General’s Office, Labour Court and the Ombudsperson’s Office. A roadmap of the implementation of key activities between September and December 2010 was put in place with the concurrence of the social partners. Broad consultations on the harmonization and review of labour laws commenced during the period. In February 2011, the timelines of the implementation of the agreed activities were revised in consultation with the social partners. A new roadmap focusing on the key issues was adopted by the social partners. In March 2011, the Ministry engaged the Office (International Labour Standards Department) to finalize the programmes and the budget during the 310th Session of the Governing Body. April 2011, the agreed activities were commenced with the support of the Office. May–June 2011, the Office finalized the programmes and modules to be used in the dialogue sessions and capacity-building programmes for the law enforcement agencies and judicial officials.

The Government provided the following information with regard to the implementation of the agreed activities to give effect to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry.

(1) A Government meeting to examine the draft principles of harmonization and review of labour laws was held on 20 April 2011 at Compensation House. The meeting took place and comments were factored in. (2) A tripartite technical meeting concerning draft principles of harmonization and review of labour laws was due to be held on 27 April 2011 at Rainbow Towers, Harare, but was postponed to 18 May 2011. (3) Bilateral planning between the Ministry of Labour and Social Services and Ministry of Youth on the formulation of the implementation matrix of the employment policy framework and the preparation of the agenda of the inaugural meeting of the Employment Forum was undertaken on 28 and 29 April 2011 at Rainbow Towers, Harare. The concept note for the inaugural meeting of the Employment Forum was formulated. (4) The inaugural meeting of the Decent Work Country Programme National Steering Committee was held on 4 May 2011 at Rainbow Towers, Harare. The Ministry prepared the terms of reference of the Committee, which were agreed by the social partners. The meeting was held, and was officially opened by the Hon. Minister. (5) On 5 May 2011, the following were addressed: (a) follow-up with the Attorney General’s Office concerning the list of trade unionists that have pending court cases under the Public Order and Security Act (POSA); (b) communicating with Ministry of Justice regarding the CEACR’s comments and direct requests on issues pertaining to the Prisons (General) Regulations (Convention No. 29) and the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act (Convention No. 105); (c) communicating with the Department of Social Services regarding the Reform of the Children’s Act in the wake of the CEACR’s comments in the context of Convention No. 182; and (d) communicating with NSSA–OHS in the context of the CEACR’s comments concerning Conventions Nos 81 and 155. These are legislative concerns which the CEACR raised in respect of other pieces of legislation which relate to labour issues. The Attorney General’s Office is looking into the issue of the pending cases of the trade unionists. (6) A tripartite technical meeting concerning draft principles of harmonization and review of labour laws was held on 18 May 2011 at Rainbow Towers, Harare. The Ministry presented a zero draft and all 11 draft principles were adopted. The ZCTU proposed new draft principles which are to be considered during the period 12–15 July 2011. The dates were agreed upon. (7) An inaugural meeting of the Employment Forum was held on 20 May 2011 at Rainbow Towers, Harare. The Employment Forum was launched and the social partners participated. (8) A tripartite workshop on social dialogue with special emphasis on legislative agenda of social dialogue chambers; lessons from NEDLAC, was held at the Kadoma Hotel. The social partners participated in the workshop. This was a prelude to the negotiation of the draft legislation principles of the Tripartite Negotiating Forum (TNF), to take place during the period 12–15 July 2011. (9) The first capacity-building workshop to orient the new members of the Zimbabwe Decent Work Country Programme National Steering Committee was held on 26 and 27 May 2011 at the Kadoma Hotel. Members drawn from Government, the ZCTU and EMCOZ were inducted. (10) A meeting of the principals from government and the social partners to receive the draft principles of harmonization and review of labour laws was due to be held on 26 May 2011 in the 12th floor boardroom, Compensation House. This was postponed to allow the technical committee to consider the new proposals from the ZCTU. The proposals are to be considered during the period 12–15 July 2011. (11) The finalization of Memoranda to Cabinet Committee on Legislation (CCL) by the officials from the concerned government ministries was due to be undertaken on 27 May 2011 in the 12th floor boardroom, Compensation House. This had to be postponed and will take place only once the principals have considered the draft principles from the technical committee. (12) The principles are due to be submitted to the CCL on 30 May 2011. This will happen once the principals have considered the draft principles. (13) A meeting to formulate the principles for the TNF is planned for 12–15 July 2011 at the Troutbeck Inn, Nyanga. The TNF technical committee was mandated to come up with draft principles. (14) A round-table discussion of the interface between international labour standards and national laws involving the Human Rights Commission, the Organ for National Healing, Reconciliation and Integration, Ombudsperson and social partners is planned on 19 July 2011 at Rainbow Towers, Harare. The programme is being developed by the ILO (International Labour Standards Department). (15) A first capacity-building workshop for the law enforcement agencies (all ten provinces will be covered resources permitting) is planned on 20–22 July 2011 at Rainbow Towers, Harare. The programme is being developed by the ILO (International Labour Standards Department). (16) A first capacity-building workshop for the judiciary and labour officers (all ten provinces will be covered, resources permitting) is planned on 25–29 July 2011 at the Kadoma Hotel. The programme is being developed by the ILO (International Labour Standards Department). (17) A meeting between the ministry officials and the general secretaries of all the registered employment councils to discuss the comments of the CEACR regarding the legislative application of the Weekly Rest (Industry) Convention, 1921 (No. 14), is planned on 2–3 August 2011 in Nyanga. The issue of the ILO supporting the meeting is to be discussed, as it only emerged when all the outstanding comments of the CEACR were being examined. (18) A second capacity-building workshop for the judiciary and labour officers is planned on 26–30 September 2011 at the Kadoma Hotel. The dates have been agreed to by the ILO (International Labour Standards Department), which is the facilitator. (19) A third capacity-building workshop for the judiciary and labour officers is planned on 12–16 December 2011 at the Kadoma Hotel. The dates have been agreed to by the ILO (International Labour Standards Department), which is the facilitator.

In conclusion, the Government of Zimbabwe has taken all measures necessary to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and related requests from the Committee of Experts. As demonstrated above, the Government of Zimbabwe is working with the social partners and the Office. The Government of Zimbabwe intends to submit a comprehensive report concerning the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry in its next report.

In addition, before the Committee, a Government representative, the Minister of Labour and Social Services, recalled that her Government had accepted the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and was fully committed to their implementation with the technical assistance of the Office, which, together with the Government and the social partners had launched its “technical assistance package” in August 2010. A roadmap covering key issues to be addressed had been agreed upon by the Government and the social partners on that occasion. While she regretted that there was little progress to be noted as yet due to certain administrative obstacles, she affirmed that work had now begun on the basis of an agreed roadmap. She indicated that her Government and the social partners had agreed, on a technical level, on draft principles for the harmonization and review of the labour laws, which took into account the comments and observations of the Committee of Experts, as well as the legislative recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. In July 2011, a meeting of the principals in the Government, labour and business would be convened to consider these draft principles prior to their submission to Cabinet for approval. Furthermore, work had already commenced to create an independent social dialogue mechanism. The Government and its social partners would be meeting in July 2011 to finalize the draft principles for the legislation on the Tripartite Negotiating Forum. Further, work had begun to give effect to the recommendation of the Committee of Experts relating to the promotion of employment in line with the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122). The National Employment Policy Framework, formulated with the involvement of the social partners, was now in place; the Employment Forum, the organ responsible for the coordination of the implementation of the national employment policy, had been launched. Beginning in July 2011, further capacity-building activities were scheduled to take place. These would involve Government officials, including the law enforcement agencies, which in their daily duties interfaced with workers. The idea was to bring knowledge about international labour standards to Government officials beyond the confines of the Ministry of Labour, in particular to those agencies and high-ranking officials that dealt with the application of the Public Order and Security Act (POSA). She expected a transformation and new approach by these departments to issues involving organized workers and employers. Dialogue sessions on international labour standards and human rights in the world of work would also be carried out with the Organ for National Healing, Reconciliation and Integration, the Human Rights Commission and the Office of the Ombudsperson. These new bodies had been set up to promote national cohesion and human rights. The Ministry of Labour’s agenda was to ensure that human rights in the world of work were taken on board. She called on the Committee to give the implementation of these dialogue sessions and capacity-building programmes a chance. She also indicated that it was in this context that all the outstanding cases referred to by the Committee of Experts were being looked into. The Government was also looking into the allegation that the Secretary-General of the General Agriculture and Plantation Workers Union had been forced into exile. The list of trade unionists alleged to had been arrested under the POSA while performing trade union duties, as referred to in the report of the Commission of Inquiry, had been submitted to the Attorney General’s Office. The Attorney General’s Office had indicated that it was liaising with all the concerned area prosecutors with a view to ascertaining the nature of the cases. She expected to get feedback from the Attorney General’s Office in due time. She concluded by thanking the Committee for having afforded her delegation the opportunity to inform it about the implementation of the Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations which, in her view, should not be viewed as an event, but as a process. She also thanked the Office for the support and the extra mile which the International Labour Standards Department had agreed to walk with Zimbabwe. Her Government might not have covered a lot of ground yet, but was determined to fulfil its part of the bargain. As an expression of her Government’s political will and commitment, the Minister of Public Service and the Chairperson of the Public Service Commission were present at the Conference, along with the Ministry of Labour delegates. Should her Government be listed at the next Committee’s session, it would be able to report on progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry.

The Employer members recalled that this was the fourth examination of the application of the Convention by Zimbabwe. In 2007 and 2008, the Conference Committee conclusions had been placed in a special paragraph (in 2008, the special paragraph on the continued failure to implement). During the last two discussions of the case, the Government had not appeared before the Committee. In the 2008 conclusions, the Committee had urged other governments that had ratified the Convention to give serious consideration to the submission of an article 26 complaint and had called upon the Governing Body to approve a Commission of Inquiry pursuant to article 26 of the ILO Constitution. The complaints examined by the Commission of Inquiry set up in 2009 referred in particular to serious allegations of violations of basic civil liberties, including the quasi-systematic arrest, detention, harassment and intimidation of trade union leaders and members for the exercise of legitimate trade union activities. In its recommendations, the Commission called for: the harmonization of the relevant legislative texts, and particularly the Labour Act, the Public Service Act and the POSA, with Conventions Nos 87 and 98, as requested by the ILO supervisory bodies; the cessation with immediate effect of all anti-union practices, as documented in its report; the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission to be rendered operational as soon as possible, with adequate resources; the provision of training on freedom of association and collective bargaining, civil liberties and human rights to key personnel in the country, most notably the police, security forces and the social partners; the reinforcement of the rule of law and the role of the courts in Zimbabwe, by ensuring that the courts were respected, properly resourced and provided with appropriate training and support; the continued strengthening of social dialogue; and the continuation of ILO technical assistance in these areas. Turning to the Government’s remarks, they observed that the Government had only focused on the two last points and had not given the real context. They encouraged the Government to address the other points.

The Worker members observed that the case had been examined by the Committee on several occasions and that in November 2008, it had given rise to a complaint under article 26 of the ILO Constitution alleging the Government’s failure to respect Conventions Nos 87 and 98. The Commission of Inquiry that had been set up to examine that complaint had submitted its report to the Governing Body in March 2010. In the Government’s reports on the application of the aforementioned Conventions, it had undertaken to cooperate with the ILO and to comply with the Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations, specifically by amending the legislation in force to bring it in line with Conventions Nos 87 and 98, by putting a stop to anti-union practices with immediate effect, by continuing the process that the Commission of Inquiry had started whereby people could be heard by the Human Rights Commission and by the Organ for National Healing, Reconciliation and Integration, by providing training on freedom of association and collective bargaining, civil liberties and human rights for key personnel in the country, by strengthening the juridical framework and the role of the courts and of social dialogue, and by continuing to collaborate with the ILO. Those recommendations had been accepted by the Government in March 2010, and in August 2010 the ILO had launched its technical assistance programme. Referring to the written information communicated by the Government, the Worker members stressed that, despite the acceptance of the aforementioned conclusions and recommendations, there had been few tangible results, notwithstanding the many meetings that had taken place or were planned. In August 2010, the Government had announced its intention to amend the POSA so as to prohibit its use against trade unions, while recognizing the need to conduct an awareness-raising campaign among members of the police and security forces. The Government now had to demonstrate that the relevant laws and regulations actually existed. In fact, it appeared that, in spite of the roadmap on the essential action to be taken that had been drawn up in collaboration with the social partners, anti-union harassment and arrests aimed both at the leaders of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) and at other trade unions, notably the General Agriculture and Plantation Workers Union of Zimbabwe (GAPWUZ), continued to take place. The Worker members attached great importance to the application in law and in practice of the principle of freedom of association, and they regretted the lack of information provided by the Government on the implementation of the Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations with respect to: the effective timetable for bringing the legislation into line with the Convention; the possibility for Zimbabwe’s Human Rights Commission to receive complaints of violations of human rights and trade union rights perpetrated since 1990; the effective involvement of the Government in the preparation of the training activities mentioned in the roadmap (notably, the training scheduled for September 2011 on the development of clear lines of conduct for the police and security forces) so as to demonstrate its support for the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry; the participation of representatives of the labour and criminal courts in the activities scheduled for December 2011 with a view to strengthening the rule of law and the role of the courts; and the strengthening of the role of social dialogue in the development of all policies concerned with labour issues. Finally, they emphasized the need for the ILO to find adequate funding for the technical assistance activities called for by the Commission of Inquiry and to develop effective cooperation with other international institutions in this respect.

The Worker member of Zimbabwe recalled that this was the first discussion of this case following the establishment of the Commission of Inquiry in 2009, which had visited Zimbabwe and gathered information from individuals who had volunteered to submit their experiences of human and trade union rights violations. He further recalled that, following the acceptance by the Government of Zimbabwe of the findings and recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, the ILO had proposed a technical assistance package to support their implementation. Unfortunately, instead of taking advantage of the “package”, the Government had waited for cosmetic get-togethers during the month of May in anticipation of the International Labour Conference in June 2011. He stated that, while a tripartite technical committee was engaged in the labour law reform, this process was taking longer than expected. It was the Government’s lethargic manner that the ZCTU was worried about. He recalled that the labour law reform had been originated with a piecemeal amendment of the Labour Relations Act in 1992 and 1996, and continued in 2002 with the harmonization of the Public Service Act and the Labour Act, before being followed by yet another de-harmonization of the two Acts and a return to the status quo in 2002. Instead of implementing the Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations, the Government had further trampled on trade union rights by arresting and denying workers their constitutional right to commemorate internationally recognized events, such as International Women’s Day on 8 March 2011, Workers’ Day on 1 May 2011, and Health and Safety Day on 6 June 2011. In Harare and Bulawayo, for example, police had been advised by the ZCTU of its intention to mark International Women’s Day. In Harare, processions had been denied. In Bulawayo, the police had denied the commemorations altogether. The ZCTU had applied to the Magistrate Court on 7 March 2011 to have the commemorations legalized. The Court had granted permission. However, on the day of the commemoration, about 30 police officers dressed in riot gear, wielding baton sticks, had disrupted the event and arrested 19 trade union leaders. Another 20 officers had raided the venue, threatening anyone who dared to participate in the event. On May Day 2011, the police had either refused the ZCTU permission to commemorate or denied permission for processions in many centres around the country. Noting the serious consequences it would have had on the morale of workers, the ZCTU had made an urgent application to the High Court to challenge the widespread refusals. Despite the order to allow all ZCTU commemorations to be staged without police interference, in some centres the police had still prohibited commemorations from taking place. He argued that some of the Commission’s recommendations could have been implemented already without funding from the ILO. For example, the Government could already have advised the police and other security agencies not to interfere with trade union activities, as guaranteed by section 26 of the POSA. It could also have ensured that all anti-union practices ceased, in particular in places where workers had previously been dismissed because of their union activities, as had been the case with the entire union executive in the postal and telecommunications sector, including the present speaker. To demonstrate its good will, the Government could have withdrawn court cases involving trade unionists, as requested by the Commission of Inquiry. Currently, Ms Gertrude Hambira was in exile after receiving threats from senior members of the army in respect of her trade union operations. The Committee of Experts had recalled for the third time that the civil service and the prison services staff should enjoy collective bargaining rights. The current labour law reform appeared to keep the Labour Act and the Public Service Act as two separate laws, i.e. one for the private sector and another for the civil service. The ZCTU suspected that, by maintaining two separate pieces of legislation, the Government was avoiding the demand by civil servants to affiliate to the ZCTU. The right to strike did not exist unless workers illegally resorted to collective job actions. In many cases, strikes were both politicized and criminalized, leading to arrests, torture or detention of workers. In July 2009, the TNF had been on a study tour to South Africa to learn from the South African experience on making tripartism work in practice. While it had been a good learning tour, it had brought no concrete results. Other than signing and launching the Kadoma Declaration by the President, the policymaking TNF had not met again. The ZCTU called on the Government to commit to specific timelines for the completion of the labour law reform, ensuring that civil servants, prison staff and the police enjoyed collective bargaining rights under the National Employment Council (NEC), based on a single harmonized labour legislation. Lastly, the critical recommendations concerning civil liberties, the rule of law and good governance did not require funding and could have been implemented. The Government should inform the Committee of the reasons for failing to do so.

The Employer member of Zimbabwe noted that the Government had appeared before the Committee to report on the follow-up to the recommendations of the ILO Commission of Inquiry, which it had accepted in full. He was not aware of the allegations of non-compliance raised by the Worker member of Zimbabwe, otherwise he would have immediately called for a meeting of the TNF. Three points needed to be raised: the written information supplied by the Government; the state of social dialogue in Zimbabwe; and the election of the Government of Zimbabwe to the ILO Governing Body. As regards the first point, he stated that the Government’s report on the steps taken so far to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry was accurate. In relation to the second point, while recognizing that social dialogue still faced enormous challenges, he declared himself optimistic about it and stated that the country had to sit down and find solutions with the involvement of social partners. While believing that the Government was sincere and was doing its best, this did not imply, however, that the allegations of the violation of Conventions Nos 87 and 98 were without foundation. The acts resulting in the derailing of social dialogue originated from other arms of the State, which might not understand social dialogue. In this regard, the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry was anxiously awaited. As to the third point, he thanked the governments that had elected the Government of Zimbabwe to the Governing Body, which represented an honour for the country. While some ILO members were of the view that Zimbabwe should not be elected because of alleged continuing violations of Conventions Nos 87 and 98, he considered that the Government was aware of the onerous responsibility it was taking on by sitting on the ILO Governing Body, its members having a higher level of accountability than other ILO members. Such a level of responsibility would strengthen the responsibilities of the Government with respect to compliance with ILO Conventions. He concluded by underlining that the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry were a solid foundation for Zimbabwe and progress made in implementing them so far had showed room for improvement. The process of implementing the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry should be expedited.

The Government member of Hungary, speaking on behalf of the Governments of Member States of the European Union (EU) attending the Conference, as well as the candidate countries (Croatia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro and Iceland), the potential candidate countries (Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina), Norway, and the Republic of Moldova, noted with interest the launch of the ILO technical assistance package in August 2010, which aimed to support the Government and the social partners in implementing the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry so as to ensure full freedom of association and protection of the right to organize in the country. Recalling the Government’s statement in reply to the 2009 report of the Commission of Inquiry that the recommendations would be implemented in the context of its current legislative and institutional reform programme and that ILO support was welcome, she strongly expected that the long awaited harmonization of the labour laws and the amendment of the Labour Act and the Public Service Act would soon be finalized and that the legislation would be brought in full compliance with the Convention. Noting with regret the allegations submitted by the ZCTU related to the banning of trade union activities, she urged the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure, in law and practice, the right of trade unions to organize, without any interference, including by the police and security forces. In particular, she urged the Government to ensure that the POSA was not used to infringe upon legitimate trade union rights, including the right of workers’ organizations to express their views on the Government’s economic and social policy. Recalling the Government’s strong commitment expressed at the launch of the ILO technical assistance package to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, she urged it to take all the necessary measures to ensure full compliance with all aspects of the Convention, and thereby guarantee full respect for freedom of association and protection of the right to organize.

The Government member of Switzerland aligned herself with the statement of the Government member of Hungary.

The Government member of Swaziland considered that Zimbabwe should be commended for accepting to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and ILO assistance. The Government was committed and willing to take all the necessary measures to address the comments made by the Committee of Experts: a roadmap for the implementation of the recommendations had been put in place in consultation with the relevant stakeholders, and the harmonization and review of labour laws had been undertaken. He thanked the ILO for its continued support to Zimbabwe and requested the Committee to give Zimbabwe an opportunity to fully implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and submit a progress report in time for consideration by the Committee of Experts.

The Worker member of China recalled the Committee of Experts’ report, which stated that the tripartite constituents in Zimbabwe had identified seven priority activities to be carried out from September to December 2010, and that further activities, to be carried out in 2011, were in the process of being developed in consultation with the social partners. He underlined the importance of social dialogue as an invaluable mechanism for reducing social tensions in times of crisis and designing measures to fit national policies. While unions were encouraged by the strengthening of social dialogue, which was fundamental to implementing the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, he was not optimistic about social dialogue in practice, since there had been no tripartite policy meetings for two years in Zimbabwe. He urged the Government and the social partners to accept the need for tripartism and the appeal by the ZCTU. He feared that the signing and launching of the Kadoma Declaration and labour law reform was window dressing rather than substance. He recalled that social dialogue structures and processes could resolve important economic and social issues, encourage good governance, advance social and industrial peace and stability and boost economic progress. For this dialogue to be effective, there needed to be respect for the fundamental rights of freedom of association and collective bargaining. Autonomous, independent and strong workers’ organizations were critical for effective social dialogue, and he urged the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the POSA was not used to infringe upon the legitimate rights of workers’ organizations to express their views on the Government’s economic and social policy.

The Government member of Namibia noted that the Commission of Inquiry had completed its work in December 2009, and expressed his satisfaction that the Government was committed to implementing its recommendations. He called on the Government, employers and workers of Zimbabwe to engage in constructive social dialogue that would lead to the implementation of the Convention. He also requested the ILO to continue to provide the country with technical assistance.

The Worker member of Norway stated that the Commission of Inquiry’s report gave detailed information about serious violations of labour rights, reported frequent arrests, detentions, assaults and torture as weapons of intimidation and harassment against trade unionists, described the breakdown of collective bargaining and social dialogue and the lack of institutional protection for trade union rights, and identified several aspects of the law that were not in conformity with ILO Conventions Nos 87 and 98 and which needed to be repealed. Although the Government had accepted the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, the situation had not improved, which demonstrated a lack of political will to implement those recommendations. She urged the Government to follow up and implement in totality the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry in both law and practice, and to bring its labour legislation into conformity with Conventions Nos 87 and 98. For trade unions in Zimbabwe to exercise their freedom of association, expression and movement, it was imperative that all repressive laws, such as the POSA, be repealed. The Government needed to desist from interfering in trade union activities, stop the harassment of trade union leaders and members and drop all pending charges against trade unionists under the POSA. Constructive and meaningful dialogue could only be held in an environment of common understanding, trust and mutual respect among the social partners. Unfortunately, this kind of environment was currently wishful thinking.

The Government member of Cuba declared that the Government was making positive efforts to comply with the Convention and emphasized the important role played by ILO technical cooperation. She pointed out that account had to be taken of the Government’s implementation of all the ILO technical assistance measures and recalled some of the measures highlighted by the Government, including the meetings held to examine the provisional principles for the harmonization and revision of the national legislation. She concluded by emphasizing that the facts showed the Government’s political will to comply with the provisions of the Convention and encouraged the Government to maintain an open dialogue with the social partners and continue with the technical cooperation.

The Worker member of Ghana drew attention to the Government’s responsibility for a huge number of trade union rights violations and its failure to create an environment which was conducive to the free exercise of the right to freedom of association. Employers in Zimbabwe trampled on workers’ rights and rarely faced any negative consequences. On the contrary, they could often count on the Government’s support. He referred to concrete incidents, including physical assaults against trade unionists and dismissals and fines in retaliation for taking part in strikes. This exemplified how the lack of enforcement of trade union rights by the authorities encouraged other parties, including some public sector employers, to violate them, which was unacceptable. He sincerely hoped that the Conference Committee would acknowledge this in its conclusions.

The Worker member of Zambia recalled that trade union rights were human rights, and for any society to progress, it was imperative that these fundamental rights were upheld and respected. He noted the efforts of local governments, but regretted that persistent political tensions led to breaches of trade union rights. He condemned over 119 trade union violations that had occurred during the past two years and denounced police action that often disregarded even court orders. He concluded by stating that freedom of association as enshrined in the Convention which Zimbabwe had ratified in 2003, had clearly not been materialized and this brought into serious question the Government’s will to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry.

The Worker member of Brazil referred to the information supplied by the Government concerning the steps taken to implement the Convention and indicated that there were no technical reasons for Zimbabwe to be on the Committee’s list of cases for non-observance of Convention No. 87 since progress had been made. She criticized the use of the Convention as a pretext for putting pressure on a country for political reasons and economic interests. She pointed out that since the country had started to demand compliance with the agreement on land resettlement, economic sanctions had been imposed, all because the country wished to develop a national economy independent of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. She stated that the attacks related to mineral wealth and that the countries of the North had accumulated a large part of their riches on the basis of slavery, colonization and an aggressive policy of plundering and violence against the countries of the South. She stressed that the Committee should concentrate on the hard facts and congratulated the country for its efforts to implement the ILO’s recommendations and support its struggle to retain control over its resources. She concluded by emphasizing that it was a serious mistake to accept that major multinationals should continue to exert pressure to have countries included on the list for reasons which had nothing to do with the fundamental principles of the ILO.

The Government representative appreciated the support expressed for the roadmap that her country was following in implementing the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and addressing the outstanding issues raised by the Committee of Experts. Her country’s socio-political landscape was characterized by underlying dynamics which were the subject of other forums, such as the Southern African Development Community and the African Union. She pointed out that the totality of the Zimbabwe landscape was being reformed and the labour market had not been spared. The issues or incidents quoted and the continued restrictions over trade union meetings or activities cited were the very subject of the planned activities starting from July 2011. The Office would be working with the Ministry in Harare in July 2011, and dialogue sessions with the concerned organs of the Government would also commence at that time. This was about changing a mindset, which would only be achieved through knowledge sharing. She therefore again appealed to the Committee to provide the opportunity to implement her Government’s objectives, with the support of the Office. The political will and the commitment of the Government were not questionable. The Government had sincerely accepted the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, it had designed a set of activities to be pursued to give effect to those recommendations, and those activities were the backbone of the agreed roadmap, which the Office was supporting.

The Employer members stated that they had expected something more concrete and tangible than mere expressions of goodwill. Unlike previous discussions, that of today had been constructive. However, the Government had been emphasizing process over substance. The Government needed to initiate and adopt substantive changes in line with the Convention’s requirements. Priority should be placed on those parts of law and practice that infringed individual and civil liberties. The Employer members supported the recommendations of the Worker members and called for the conclusions to be included in a special paragraph of the Committee’s report.

The Worker members observed that the core of the discussion revolved around the follow-up to the very specific and unambiguous recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. The recommendations to the authorities included the cessation with immediate effect of attacks against trade unionists, the establishment of a Human Rights Commission, training in human rights for the security forces, the strengthening of the rule of law, and the amendment of legislation to bring it in line with the Conventions. Consequently, the Worker members asked that the following recommendations be included in the conclusions: (i) that a timetable showing fixed deadlines for bringing legislation into line with the Convention be prepared and respected; (ii) that all violations of human rights and trade union rights perpetrated since 1990 be placed on the agenda of the Human Rights Commission; (iii) that concrete steps be taken to organize workshops on the drafting of clear rules of conduct for the police and security forces, and the preparation and dissemination of training materials, so as to demonstrate the Government’s endorsement of the Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations; (iv) that participation in the events planned for December 2011, with respect to the strengthening of the rule of law and the role of the courts, be expanded to include a broader public, comprising not just the labour courts but the criminal courts as well; transparency was essential for all cases brought to court and sanctions should be commensurate with the seriousness of the complaints; (v) social dialogue had to be revived and the Government should consult the social partners on the development of the new policies; and (vi) the ILO should find adequate funding so as to be able to continue providing technical assistance and should share its assessment of the situation in Zimbabwe with other international institutions in order to ensure better collaboration and a more effective implementation of the Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations. They called on the Governing Body to continue following up Zimbabwe’s compliance with the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and requested the Government, at the earliest opportunity, to provide detailed information in response to the comments of the Committee of Experts. Finally, they endorsed the Employer members’ proposal that the conclusions on the case be included in a special paragraph of the Committee’s report.

The Employer members reaffirmed their agreement with the Committee’s conclusions. Upon further consideration, unlike other governments, after recent Commissions of Inquiries, the Government of Zimbabwe had accepted the Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations and had formulated a roadmap for the purpose of implementing those recommendations. However, this roadmap focused primarily on process over substance. More substantive progress had to be demonstrated by next year. The Employer members did not support including the conclusions on this case in a special paragraph of the Committee’s report this year, but would revisit this next year if there was no real and concrete progress on the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry.

The Worker members took note of the statement by the Employer members and said that their refusal to include the conclusions on this case in a special paragraph of the report of the Committee gave rise to problems. This case remained serious regarding violations of civil liberties and freedom of association, as well as the situation confronting trade union leaders. It was not certain that the Government had the political will to move forward. The recommendations set out in the conclusions were clear and detailed. They constituted a roadmap and the ILO should ensure constant monitoring of the progress achieved in their application. The Committee of Experts needed to assess the situation in its next report. For their part, the Worker members would closely follow the evolution in the application of the Convention and would assess the situation at the next session of the Conference.

The Worker member of Zimbabwe expressed his disappointment regarding the Committee’s conclusions. He hoped that the Government of Zimbabwe would indeed implement the measures presented by the Government representative to the Committee, but expressed doubt that this would occur due to a lack of political will.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed.

The Committee recalled that the Commission of Inquiry appointed under article 26 of the ILO Constitution to examine the observance by the Government of Conventions Nos 87 and 98 had completed its work in December 2009 and submitted its report to the Governing Body at its March 2010 session. The Committee recalled that the Government had accepted the Commission’s recommendations that the relevant legislative texts be brought into line with Conventions Nos 87 and 98; all anti-union practices – arrests, detentions, violence, torture, intimidation and harassment, interference and anti-union discrimination – be ceased with immediate effect; national institutions to continue the process the Commission had started whereby people can be heard, in particular, referring to the Human Rights Commission and the Organ for National Healing, Reconciliation and Integration; training on freedom of association and collective bargaining, civil liberties and human rights be given to key personnel in the country; the rule of law and the role of the courts be reinforced; social dialogue strengthened in recognition of its importance to the maintenance of democracy; and ILO technical assistance to the country continued.

The Committee noted the statement of the Government representative reaffirming her Government’s political will and commitment to ensuring the implementation of the Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations and expressing her deep appreciation for the assistance afforded by the ILO in this regard. While she had regretted that there was little progress to be noted as yet due to certain administrative obstacles, she had affirmed that work had now begun on the basis of an agreed roadmap. In particular, draft principles for the harmonization and review of the labour laws had been agreed with the social partners, taking into account the comments of the Commission of Inquiry and the Committee of Experts. In addition, the tripartite partners were finalizing the draft principles for the legislated Tripartite Negotiating Forum (TNF). She had stated that issues related to the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) were high on the dialogue sessions with high-ranking officials in the targeted government ministries and agencies, and expected a transformation and new approach by these departments to issues affecting workers’ and employers’ organizations. She had indicated that her Ministry was working on placing labour rights on the agenda of the Organ for National Healing, Reconciliation and Integration, the Human Rights Commission and the Office of the Ombudsperson.

The Committee noted with concern new allegations of violations of freedom of association in practice and, in particular, those relating to the forced exile of the General Secretary of the General Agriculture and Plantation Workers Union of Zimbabwe (GAPWUZ), as well as several instances of banning of trade union activities. In this respect, the Committee recalled the importance it attached to respect for basic civil liberties, including freedom and security of the person and freedom of assembly, which were crucial to the effective exercise of freedom of association and constituted a fundamental aspect of trade union rights. The Committee requested the Government to ensure that the POSA was not applied in practice in a manner contrary to this fundamental principle and to carry out a full review of its application in practice with the social partners. It urged the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the GAPWUZ leader could come back to the country and that her safety was ensured.

The Committee noted the launch of the ILO technical assistance programme and the written and oral information that had been provided on the activities that had taken place already and those that were scheduled to take place before the end of 2011. In particular, the Committee noted that the outstanding cases of trade unionists arrested under the POSA had been identified and urged the Government to ensure that these cases were withdrawn without further delay.

The Committee noted the process of the labour law review and harmonization initiated in the country and welcomed the fact that this process involved the social partners. The Committee urged the Government to proceed with this work and all other measures for the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry as a matter of urgency and recommended to the Government to elaborate a roadmap to this effect with clearly delineated timelines, which should be strictly respected. Priority should be given to addressing all concerns related to fundamental civil liberties and all human rights violations, including those relating to trade union rights, which should be included in the review to be carried out by the Human Rights Commission. Concrete steps should be taken for the preparation of workshops ensuring that the police and security forces were trained for the full respect of human and trade union rights and to enable the elaboration and promulgation of clear lines of conduct in this regard.

The Committee expressed the firm hope that the law and practice would be brought fully in line with the Convention in the very near future, encouraged the Government to continue cooperating with the ILO and the social partners in this respect, and asked the Government to provide a detailed report to the Committee of Experts in this regard for examination at its next meeting.

The Employer members reaffirmed their agreement with the Committee’s conclusions. Upon further consideration, unlike other governments, after recent Commissions of Inquiries, the Government of Zimbabwe had accepted the Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations and had formulated a roadmap for the purpose of implementing those recommendations. However, this roadmap focused primarily on process over substance. More substantive progress had to be demonstrated by next year. The Employer members did not support including the conclusions on this case in a special paragraph of the Committee’s report this year, but would revisit this next year if there was no real and concrete progress on the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry.

The Worker members took note of the statement by the Employer members and said that their refusal to include the conclusions on this case in a special paragraph of the report of the Committee gave rise to problems. This case remained serious regarding violations of civil liberties and freedom of association, as well as the situation confronting trade union leaders. It was not certain that the Government had the political will to move forward. The recommendations set out in the conclusions were clear and detailed. They constituted a roadmap and the ILO should ensure constant monitoring of the progress achieved in their application. The Committee of Experts needed to assess the situation in its next report. For their part, the Worker members would closely follow the evolution in the application of the Convention and would assess the situation at the next session of the Conference.

The Worker member of Zimbabwe expressed his disappointment regarding the Committee’s conclusions. He hoped that the Government of Zimbabwe would indeed implement the measures presented by the Government representative to the Committee, but expressed doubt that this would occur due to a lack of political will.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2008, Publication: 97th ILC session (2008)

The Chairperson of the Committee invited the Government representatives to participate in the discussion. In addition, to confirm the absence of the delegation of Zimbabwe, which had been duly accredited and registered before the Conference, she referred to the working methods of the Committee. The refusal of a government to participate in the work of the Committee represented a considerable obstacle to the achievement of the main objectives of the International Labour Organization. For this reason, the Committee could discuss the substance of those cases regarding governments registered and present at the Conference who decided not to appear before the Committee. The discussion regarding such cases would be reflected in the appropriate part of the report, concerning both individual cases and the participation in the work of the Committee.

The Worker members indicated that the Government of Zimbabwe had embarked in a systematic and malicious spate of activities in violation of the Convention, including arrests, detentions, brutality and harassment of trade union leaders, activists and human rights defenders. Under the same government administration, Zimbabwe had once been a democracy and a food basket for the southern African region, with a strong currency, but had since allowed itself to degenerate into a despotic State that had let its economy run into the abyss through bad governance.

The Government's flagrant disregard for the Zimbabwean people manifested itself by discretionary denial of civil liberties through the constant use of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act of 2006 and the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) to regulate trade union activities. The Worker members reported that, regrettably, Mr Wellington Chibebe had been arrested for the second time, together with Mr Lovemore Matombo, the President of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU). They had been incarcerated in remand centres for 12 days and were currently out on bail. A request of the subregional ILO representative to visit them had been rejected. Both ZCTU members and ordinary workers had become victims of torture, arrests, victimization and displacement. In the rural areas, many teachers had been victimized and brutally beaten in front of their pupils; 67 teachers had to be hospitalized, and Mr Raymond Mazongwe had been arrested and later released.

The Government should be reminded of the Resolution concerning trade union rights, adopted by the Conference in 1970, which pointed out that the absence of civil liberties such as those enunciated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights removed all meaning from the concept of trade union rights. Similarly, the Committee on Freedom of Association had stated that the rights of workers' and employers' organizations could only be exercised in a climate free from violence, pressure or threats against the leaders and members of the organizations, and that it was for governments to ensure that this principle was respected.

The Government of Zimbabwe had deliberately boycotted this Committee and perennially undermined its advice concerning trade union rights and civil liberties. The Worker members therefore called upon the Committee to strongly urge the Government to stop using the POSA in trade union affairs; to repeal the Criminal Law that criminalized trade union activities; to stop demanding prior authorization of trade union activities; to discontinue violence, harassment, detentions and brutality against both trade unionists and ordinary citizens; to withdraw all cases against trade union leaders; to compensate all victims of torture; allow displaced citizens to return peacefully to their homes; to resuscitate social dialogue and to apply the Convention in law and in practice. Finally, the Worker members wished to call for an ILO mission to the country and urged the Committee to include the conclusions in a special paragraph.

The Employer members stated that the Government of Zimbabwe continued to enact legislation that paralysed freedom of association, in particular the POSA, and to initiate criminal proceedings against trade union leaders participating in public demonstrations. The Government had also refused a high-level technical assistance mission of the ILO. However, by ratifying the Convention, the Government of Zimbabwe undertook international obligations to bring its law and practice into line with the Convention. This included the protection of civil liberties.

Regrettably, this was the second year that the Government had not appeared before the Committee, although it had participated in the discussions of the Committee this year. In accordance with the Committee's working methods, as revised at the present session, the discussion of this individual case would therefore be included in Part II of the Committee's report, and should also be mentioned in a special paragraph for continued failure to apply the Convention.

This case involved flagrant violations of the most basic elements of freedom of association. There was evidence of assaults, arrests, torture and police violence against trade union leaders. There was an absence of civil liberties, including freedom of speech, movement, association, assembly, as well as freedom and security of persons. This case was about a country that rejected human rights, including the most fundamental cornerstone of the ILO, freedom of association.

The Employer member of South Africa stated that the events in Zimbabwe were a tragedy. The atrocities and human suffering were beyond description. Workers were being denied rights and were persecuted for standing up for justice. The situation also affected employers. The Government's refusal to appear before the Committee was evidence for its disrespect for the ILO and its fundamental principles. Given the continuing violation of the Convention by the Government, it was time for introspection not only for Zimbabweans, but also for African and international leaders to use all appropriate means to avert further human suffering. Millions of workers had left the country and families were being split.

The Worker member of Zimbabwe stated that Convention No. 87, one of the pillars by which democracy was measured and tested, was under threat due to the Government's refusal to abide by the previous conclusions of the Conference Committee. The issue before the Committee was whether Zimbabwe had improved with respect to its observance and application of the Convention since the Committee's discussion in 2007. This was unfortunately not the case.

In 2007, the Committee had discussed the need for labour law reform to allow public servants to be part of mainstream unions, with the authority to negotiate their conditions of service by way of a National Employment Council. He noted with grave concern the Government's dithering on this distortion in the country's industrial relations which had been criticized by the Committee of Experts. Surprisingly, after the 2002 harmonization of the Public Service Act (PSA) with the Labour Act, the Government had reverted to the PSA in 2005 without consultation with relevant industrial relations stakeholders. Furthermore, prison service staff and the police were still not allowed to form trade unions.

The Worker member also recalled that the Labour Act was not in compliance with even the minimum international labour standards. Chapter 28:01, section 2A, merely referred to international labour standards, and the courts refused to apply them because the relevant Conventions had not been incorporated into domestic law. This was the essence of the problem faced by trade unions in their everyday struggle to protect their members.

The Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) had suffered its fair share of brutality from the Government. The Government refused to learn from its previous acts and omissions. On 13 September 2006, a number of workers, among them ZCTU leaders, who had gathered to raise the authorities' awareness of the unbearable poverty levels and the need for access to anti-retroviral drugs, had met with the worst kind of police brutality. The torture they had gone through merely for expressing themselves was beyond any description. Arrests and detentions remained the norm.

After May Day commemorations organized by the ZCTU, on 8 May 2008, police had visited the homes of its leaders, including the speaker himself, and arrested them. They had been charged with "communicating falsehoods which where prejudicial to the State" and later released on bail, on condition that they made no political statements. However, it was impossible to know what exactly was considered political or non-political when dealing with issues in the workplace and at national level. ZCTU members had also suffered violence in the context of the 2008 elections, with civil servants and teachers having been targeted the most because they were thought to be opinion-makers in their communities. Yet, the ILO supervisory bodies had requested the Government to respect the right of workers to operate in a free and democratic environment.

Although the POSA was rarely being used at present, its place had been taken by the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act of 2006. The Worker member stated that this Act had been used to infringe the right of the ZCTU and its affiliates to express their views on the Government's economic and social policy. He himself was due to stand trial under the Act on 23 June 2008.

The Government member of Slovenia spoke on behalf of the Governments of Member States of the European Union, and the candidate countries of Turkey, Croatia and The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the countries of the Stabilization and Association Process and the potential candidates Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, the EFTA countries Norway and Switzerland, as well as Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova and Armenia.

He deeply regretted that the Government of Zimbabwe once again refused to participate in the discussion of the Committee and urged the Government to resume its dialogue with the ILO immediately and to accept a highlevel technical assistance mission of the ILO under the terms requested by the Committee in 2006. The deterioration of the situation relating to trade unions rights in Zimbabwe remained alarming. He shared the continuous concerns of the Committee of Experts with respect to the POSA. The Government should take all necessary measures to ensure that the POSA was no longer used to infringe the rights of workers and their organizations.

He further noted with great concern acts of anti-union discrimination and interference under the Criminal Law related to political activities of trade union members and agreed with the relevant findings of the Committee on Freedom of Association. The Government should drop all charges connected to trade union activities and abstain from measures of arrest and detention of trade union leaders or members for reasons connected with such activities. The Government was requested to provide full and detailed information with respect to the cases of Mr Matombo and Mr Chibebe.

He further stressed the interdependence between civil liberties and trade union rights. A truly free and independent trade union movement could only develop in a climate of respect for fundamental human rights. The Zimbabwean people had the right to enjoy freedom of expression without harassment, intimidation or violence and to live under the protection of the rule of law. He therefore urged the Government to restore full respect for the rule of law and take immediate steps to end the continuing human rights violations.

The Worker member of Botswana declared that the acts of violence in Zimbabwe were also targeting teachers, students and education communities. The Zimbabwe Teachers Association (ZIMTA) and the Progressive Teachers' Union of Zimbabwe (PTUZ) witnessed many acts of violence such as killings, torture and other forms of abuses against teachers in rural areas. In the context of the national elections of 2008, teachers had been accused of influencing the vote as role models of their communities. In some areas, teachers had been told to vacate their schools or to relocate, while others had been threatened. Most violence had allegedly been perpetrated by war veterans and the youth militia. Some teachers had been arrested or abducted by the Central Intelligence Organization operatives. Furthermore, thousands of teachers had been prevented from voting in the first round because they had deliberately been deployed outside their voting wards as polling officers. This was a violation of the constitutional right of teachers to elect their political leaders.

The PTUZ had reported that at least 250 schools in 23 districts throughout the country had been affected by some forms of violence in the period between 3 and 9 May 2008. In some instances, teachers had been beaten in front of pupils and community members. Sixty-seven teachers had been hospitalized in Harare, Kotwa, Karoi, Rusape, Bonda, Howard, Guruve, Marondera and else- where; 139 teachers had to flee their schools and 213 teachers' houses had been looted. Many teachers had fled to neighbouring countries and were unlikely to return, worsening the brain drain in the education sector.

On 15 May 2008, Mr Raymond Majongwe, the General Secretary of the PTUZ, had again been briefly arrested by the police at the High Court of Zimbabwe where he had been attending a hearing of trade union leaders. His arrest had occurred following advertisements posted by the PTUZ deploring the fact that teachers were being beaten and harassed at their workplaces. Mr Raymond Majongwe had regularly been harassed and detained for voicing demands aimed at improving the crippled education system in Zimbabwe. On 6 October 2007, the police had intervened brutally to disperse a World Teachers' Day celebra- tion, arrested Mr Majongwe and interrogated him for hours. Earlier, his passport had been seized to prevent him from leaving the country to attend an international trade union meeting. The acts of violence committed by the Government against teachers and trade unionists were to be condemned. The Zimbabwean authorities were urged to respect all human rights and trade union rights. Public Service International, Education International and the ILO should send special missions to Zimbabwe.

The Government member of the United States stated that her Government noted with profound regret that the Committee was discussing this extremely serious case without the participation of the Government of Zimbabwe. Her Government was deeply disturbed by the pervasive and systematic abuse of worker and human rights in Zimbabwe. The Government of Zimbabwe's unequivocal record regarding trade union rights, confirmed by both the Committee of Experts and the Committee on Freedom of Association, included obstruction, harassment, imprisonment, and reprisals, constituting massive, flagrant and defiant violations of Convention No. 87, freely ratified by Zimbabwe. Recent events demonstrated that respect for the rule of law in Zimbabwe continued to deteriorate.

Despite the fact that the offer of ILO assistance did not constitute a sanction but help which might have positive effects, the Government regrettably and persistently refused to accept an ILO high-level mission to deal with the ongoing violations of Convention No. 87. Regardless of whether it accepted a high-level mission, the Government of Zimbabwe had an immutable international obligation to implement the provisions of Convention No. 87 both in law and practice, and to report to the ILO on its actions in this regard. She hoped that the Government would reconsider its attitude towards the ILO supervisory system, but stressed that as a minimum it must urgently take the necessary steps to grant all citizens their fundamental worker and human rights.

The Worker member of the United Kingdom stated that on 13 September 2006, the ZCTU had planned a demonstration to protest against the high cost of living and high taxation and to demand anti-retroviral drugs for HIV sufferers. The notification under the POSA had been given to the police, which authorized the demonstration. Soon af- ter the demonstration had begun, the leaders of the ZCTU and affiliated unions had been rounded up by the police and ordered to sit on the road. ZCTU leaders, including President Matombo, General Secretary Chibebe and Vice-President Lucia Matibenga had been taken to the Matapi police station. After having been subjected to severe and prolonged physical violence by police officers, they had been charged on the spot under the POSA with planning an illegal demonstration intended to overthrow a constitutionally elected Government.

The ZCTU leaders had suffered numerous injuries, including broken bones and lacerations during this incident, but had been denied medical assistance and access to lawyers for two days. On 15 September, they had been taken to a hospital. Nevertheless, only Mr Wellington Chibebe received treatment and only after the intervention of the ZCTU lawyers and a member of the non-governmental organization Doctors for Human Rights (DHR). Despite having suffered several serious injuries, he had only been operated on four days later and had been tried in secret on the hospital premises. The other colleagues, including Lucia Matibenga, Denis Chiwara, James Gumbi and George Nkiwane, had been returned to the police cells, without any treatment. They had been sent to court the next day and were granted bail. The court ruled that the beatings in the cells had to be investigated and the perpetrators brought to justice. However, since the police had been responsible for the investigation, almost two years after these horrific events, no charges had been brought against the officers who had committed the torture, nor the senior officers who had ordered it.

The Worker member of the United States stated that the case was a testimony of the ZCTU fight against labour injustice and state tyranny. The Government had repressed a peaceful mass demonstration by ZCTU in September 2006. The atrocious detention, beatings and injuries inflicted on ZCTU leaders and members at the time were widely known. The President of Zimbabwe seemed to have thought that the truth could be covered up by refusing entry into Zimbabwe of a delegation of the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists, a constituency organization of the American Federation of Labor - Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO). The AFL-CIO had already started distributing information on the repression of the ZCTU's demonstration.

The Government could not hide the truth when it came to de jure violations of the Convention. For example, the 2005 Labour Amendment Act denied public service em- ployees the right to form and join trade unions, collectively bargain or strike. Authentic labour organizations were undermined by the legal recognition of so-called workers' committees. Moreover, the law impeded the right to strike by imposing a 50 per cent voting requirement, compulsory conciliation periods, compulsory two-week advance notice and unilateral referrals to compulsory arbitration. Employers had a legal right to permanently replace strikers, and individual strikers were liable for economic damages. The Government's definition of essential services was not in line with ILO jurisprudence, and illegal strikes could result in five years imprisonment upon conviction. Given these flagrant violations of the Convention, the Committee was urged to mention this case in a special paragraph of its report.

The Worker member of South Africa provided examples of the severe violations of trade union rights and harassment of trade union leaders in Zimbabwe. On 28 February 2008, the General Secretary of the ZCTU had applied for authorization to hold a Women's Day commemoration meeting on 8 March. The Government had not authorized the meeting and the ZCTU therefore had taken the matter to the court, which ruled in favour of the union. For May Day this year, the ZCTU had applied for 34 venues, out of which five had been denied. The reasons for the refusal had not been given immediately in some cases, while in others the refusal had been notified on the day of the event. The ZCTU had had to cancel the com- memoration events despite the fact that some workers had already gathered and that costs had already been incurred for the events.

The harassment and victimization of ZCTU leaders had further escalated on 6 May, when the police had gone to the houses of the ZCTU's General Secretary and President. The two leaders had been arrested, interrogated for more than six hours and charged with incitement to rise against the Government and with falsehoods because they had told workers that people were being killed during the current political violence. Bail had initially been refused on the ground that the two leaders were dangerous. It had later been granted, but under the unacceptable condition that they should not speak at any political gatherings. Their cases would be heard on 23 June 2008, and they were liable to a fine of level 14, imprisonment for a period of 20 years or both. Violence was the order of the day in Zimbabwe. Parents were being beaten in front of their children. People were fleeing to neighbouring countries. She expressed distress at the way the Zimbabwean authorities were treating trade unionists and requested that the charges against the two ZCTU leaders be dropped.

The Government member of Cuba stated that her interventions had always aimed at encouraging the governments to fulfil their obligations regarding both the submission of reports and the cooperation with the ILO supervisory bodies. In this case, the situation was not clear and the reason for the absence of the Government unknown. Consequently, increased efforts should be made to establish contacts with the Government of Zimbabwe. The defiance shown by the Government could be the effect of its dissatisfaction over the results achieved by the Committee. Her delegation did not support any decision regarding the application of measures or sanctions against any government before having exhausted the contacts and technical assistance required.

The Government member of Canada also speaking on behalf of the Government members of Australia and New Zealand, expressed profound concern about serious violations of freedom of association in Zimbabwe, which was essential to the existence of democratic society. He shared the view of the Committee that a truly free and independent trade union movement could only develop in a climate of respect for fundamental human rights. Failure to establish such a climate was among the root causes of the crisis in governance in Zimbabwe.

Following the general elections on 29 March 2008, trade union leaders, including the President of the ZCTU and its Secretary-General, Mr Lovemore Matombo and Mr Wellington Chibebe, and the Secretary-General of the Progressive Teachers' Union, Mr Raymond Majongwe, had been subjected to harassment and arrest. In Zimbabwe, trade unionists suffered serious infringements of their rights. They were subjected to politically motivated violence, killing, intimidation and harassment. In order to overcome the current political and economic crisis, the Government must ensure that social and political actors were given the space to defend workers' rights so that they could play a constructive role in resolving the crisis.

The POSA, despite amendments made, had been used to infringe the rights of workers' organizations. The Government was urged to ensure that trade unions were allowed to carry out their activities and exercise their rights guaranteed under the Convention, to restore full respect for the rule of law and to end human rights violations. Canada, Australia and New Zealand supported the work of the Committee of Experts, especially its effort to solicit further information and its suggestion that Zimbabwe receive a high-level technical assistance mission.

The Worker members pointed out that, while the Government of Zimbabwe advocated impunity, the workers called for dialogue; while the Government propagated violence, the workers called for peace; while the Government advocated injustice, the workers called for justice; and while the Government perpetuated brute force, the workers advocated the force of truth. Evidence of violence after the 2008 general elections was available on the Internet.

The Government of Cuba had supported sanctions against Apartheid in South Africa, but its position concerning Zimbabwe now seemed to be considered hypocritical. The Government of Zimbabwe was now taking people's identification documents away so that they could not obtain food rations or vote. It had also decided to prohibit non-governmental organizations from supplying food. Such desperate and inhuman measures must be discouraged.

The Worker members suggested that the Conference Committee take certain measures. First, the Committee should consider sending a tripartite high-level mission, composed of members of the Governing Body, to conduct inquiries and to assist the Government in finding solutions to the current problems. Second, the Committee should ask all Governments which had a diplomatic presence in Zimbabwe to observe the trial of Mr Chibebe and Mr Matombo, due to start on 23 June 2008. Their presence would serve as the eyes and ears of those who could not be there. The Worker members also called on the Government of Zimbabwe to take various measures. Social dialogue must be restored. The Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act must be repealed. All charges against trade unionists must be withdrawn. It must be ensured that the POSA would not be used against trade unions. No victimization, harassment, detentions or arrests against trade unionists or citizens should take place. Victims of torture must be compensated. Those who had been displaced from their homes must be given other accommodation.

The Employer members endorsed the statement by the Worker members and their recommendations. This discussion marked a shameful day for Zimbabwe. The Government had lost its legitimacy and moral authority. It could have and should have accepted an ILO high-level mission, taken ILO advice on how to implement Convention No. 87, provided freedom of speech, guaranteed political freedom, ensured security, provided for a right of assembly, realized the right of association and protected basic civil liberties, but it would not have. The Employer members recalled that the most serious cases could be subject to a complaint under article 26 of the ILO Constitution. The Employer members urged the 147 other Members of the ILO which had ratified Convention No. 87 to join such a complaint against Zimbabwe and the Governing Body to approve a commission of inquiry provided for under this procedure.

The Government member of Cuba specified that the attitude of her Government with regard to apartheid could by no means be considered hypocritical. She recalled that the fight against apartheid, far from having been limited to mere statements, involved the sacrifice of many Cuban people. She reiterated that her Government would not support any decision regarding the application of measures or sanctions against any government before the contacts and technical assistance required had been exhausted.

The Worker members highlighted the exceptional statement of the Employer members on this case and expressed their thanks in this regard.

Conclusions

The Committee deeply deplored the persistent obstructionist attitude demonstrated by the Government through its refusal to come before it in two consecutive years and thus seriously hamper the work of the ILO supervisory mechanisms to review the application of voluntarily ratified Conventions. The Committee recalled that the contempt shown by the Government to this Committee and the gravity of the violations observed had led this Committee to decide last year to mention this case in a special paragraph of its report and to call upon the Government to accept a high-level technical assistance mission.

The Committee further deplored the Government's refusal of the high-level technical assistance mission that the Committee had invited it to accept. The Committee observed with profound regret that the comments of the Committee of Experts referred to serious allegations of the violation of basic civil liberties, including the quasi-systematic arrest and detention of trade unionists following their participation in public demonstrations. In this regard, the Committee further regretted the continual recourse made by the Government to the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) and lately, to the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act of 2006, in the arrest and detention of trade unionists for the exercise of their trade union activities, despite its calls upon the Government to cease such action. The Committee also observed that the Committee on Freedom of Association continued to examine numerous complaints regarding these serious matters.

The Committee took note with deep concern of the vast information presented to it concerning the surge in trade union rights and human rights violations in the country and the ongoing threats to trade unionists' physical safety. In particular, it deplored the recent arrests of Mr Lovemore Matombo and Mr Wellington Chibebe and the massive violence against teachers as well as the serious allegations of arrest and violent assault following the September 2006 demonstrations.

The Committee emphasized that trade union rights could only be exercised in a climate that was free from violence, pressure or threats of any kind. Moreover, these rights were intrinsically linked to the assurance of full guarantees of basic civil liberties, including freedom of speech, security of person, freedom of movement and freedom of assembly. It recalled that it was essential to their role as legitimate social partners that workers' and employers' organizations were able to express their opinions on political issues in the broad sense of the term and that they could publicly express their views on the Government's economic and social policy. The Committee therefore urged the Government to ensure all these basic civil liberties, to repeal the Criminal Law Act and to cease abusive recourse to the POSA. It called upon the Government immediately to halt all arrests, detentions, threats and harassment of trade union leaders and their members, drop all charges brought against them and ensure that they were appropriately compensated. It called upon all Governments with missions in the country to be present at the trial of Mr Matombo and Mr Chibebe and follow closely all developments in relation to their case.

The Committee urged the Government to cooperate fully in the future with the ILO supervisory bodies in accordance with the international obligations that it voluntarily assumed by its membership in the Organization.

The Committee firmly urged the Government to ensure for all workers and employers full respect for the civil liberties enunciated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights without which freedom of association and trade union rights were void of any meaning. It urged the Government to accept a high-level, tripartite, special investigatory mission in this case of flagrant disregard for the most basic freedom of association rights. It urged the other governments that had ratified this Convention to give serious consideration to the submission of an article 26 complaint and called upon the Governing Body to approve a commission of inquiry.

The Committee decided to include its conclusions in a special paragraph of its report. It also decided to mention this case as a case of continued failure to implement the Convention.

The Worker members highlighted the exceptional statement of the Employer members on this case and expressed their thanks in this regard.

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

The Chairperson informed members of the Committee that the Director of the International Labour Standards Department had received that very afternoon when the Government was due to appear before the Committee, a letter from the Minister of Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare, Mr Goche, as follows:

Following the listing of the Zimbabwe Government this year, as on the previous five occasions, I wish to inform you that the government has determined not to appear before you this year because of the following:

The Committee of Experts does not appear to be raising any new issues, rather, it repeats the same charges to which we have comprehensively responded over the previous appearances. Given the foregoing, it is now the determination of the Zimbabwe government no longer to be an accomplice to the abuse of this august mechanism of the Committee on the Application of Standards of the ILC. Government remains ready to engage with the ILO Office and any other groups who seek to ameliorate the conditions of the worker in Zimbabwe, anywhere and at anytime, in good faith.

The submission by the government of Zimbabwe in D.10, appearing before the Committee of Standards dismisses the political consideration of Zimbabwe's issues during the previous appearances. This was a fair response to the issues raised by the Committee of Experts with respect to the technical issues as raised but was never an indication of our intent to appear before the Committee of Standards.

The set-piece of the Committee on Application of Standards does not appear to serve the cherished goals we have outlined above.

The Chairperson, after having discussed with the two Vice-Chairpersons, considered that there was sufficient information to hold a discussion on the case. Nevertheless, together with the two Vice-Chairpersons, they decided to close the debate and mention this case in a special paragraph of the report of the Committee and hold a debate on the case in a plenary session of the Conference.

The Employer members said that the situation created by the Government of Zimbabwe's position was highly regrettable, insulting to the Committee and to the ILO supervisory system as a whole. Only the previous day, the Committee had accepted to reschedule the Government's presentation in spite of the fact that the Government had been aware since 15 May 2007 that it was on the list of countries likely to be called to appear before the Committee. In addition, the Employer members noted that the Government had communicated information in document D.10 that it had prepared for the discussion of the case. The Employer members recalled that the Committee could, as it had done with the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2005, discuss the case on the basis of document D.10. The discussion would be reflected in Part II of the Committee report and, in keeping with the practice followed in the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the case would also feature in a special paragraph in Part I of the Committee's report.

The Employer members recalled that the Committee was required, in the present case, to examine two of the fundamental elements required to ensure the exercise of freedom of association as defined in the Convention, i.e. first, that civil and political liberties were protected effectively. Based on information available to the Committee, union leaders in Zimbabwe were victims of torture, harassment, arrests and police violence. The second element necessary to the exercise of freedom of association was freedom of speech. This also seemed to be lacking in the Zimbabwean situation if the number of arrests carried out on the basis of the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) were taken into account. In order for these conditions to be fulfilled, freedom of association required above all else the existence of the right to freedom and personal security, freedom of movement, freedom of the right to organize and to free speech. These rights could not be restricted to purely trade union issues. The Employer members judged the situation in Zimbabwe to be especially serious.

The Worker members addressed certain broad attacks made by the Government of Zimbabwe in document D.10 before going to the substance of the discussion. Firstly, coming before the Conference Committee was due to the Government having violated the Convention which it had voluntarily ratified in 2003 through no colonial influence but under the leadership of President Mugabe. Secondly, they reminded the Government that the Committee of Experts' report had nothing remotely colonial or partisan that related or even intimated a political agenda aimed at changing the regime and that such a view was a product of a fertile imagination and desperate attempt to divert focus from the real issue which related to the effective application of the Convention in Zimbabwe. Therefore the Worker members were convinced that the arguments raised in document D.10 were misplaced, misdirected, irrelevant and unfortunate. They stated that the Government of Zimbabwe was in the premier league of serial and pathological offenders who flagrantly, persistently and systematically denied the people of Zimbabwe the freedom to exercise their fundamental rights, including their right to freedom of association as enshrined in the Convention. The attitude of the Government constituted total defiance, flagrant disregard of the entire ILO supervisory machinery and was a complete travesty of justice, and indeed was very regrettable and should not be allowed to prevail without reprimand.

The Worker members recalled that, on Monday, 4 June 2007, the Government had voluntarily signed in to appear before the Committee on Wednesday, 6 June 2007, in the afternoon and had been scheduled accordingly; it had then asked for a postponement on Wednesday afternoon, even after having communicated its position in document D.10 - which was not stated in diplomatic language - and had finally decided to boycott its appearance before the Committee, at the 11th hour. This arrogant attitude demonstrated that, on the ground, workers and the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) members in particular, were given even worse treatment. As this was a case of repeated failure to cooperate with the ILO, continued violation of the Convention and, further, as the situation on the ground demonstrated escalated repression, violence and brute force against workers and ZCTU leadership, in particular, the Worker members appealed to the members of the Committee to ensure that the conclusions of the discussion be stated in a special paragraph. The Worker members indicated that a number of Government representatives were present in the room observing the proceedings, who he identified by name. In conclusion, they cited one of Martin Luther King Junior quotes where he stated that there comes a time when a man-made law becomes incongruent with the dictates of social justice and human dignity, and noted that the quote reflected perfectly the situation currently prevailing in Zimbabwe.

The Worker member of Zimbabwe stated that, contrary to the assertions contained in the written information provided by the Government, the principles governing freedom of association continued to be violated every day in Zimbabwe in practice. Referring to the Public Order and Security Act (POSA), he emphasized that, although the provisions of the Act did not apply to the activities of workers' and employers' organizations in principle, the situation was totally different in practice. His organization, the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), was systematically obliged to obtain prior authorization from the police to go on strike or to hold meetings. That was a sine qua non condition and the police attended those meetings without any restriction. He read out to the Committee an extract of a letter by the police, in reply to a communication by the ZCTU indicating its desire to organize a trade union meeting. With respect to the accusations made by the Government contained in the written information provided claiming that individuals in the ZCTU were politicians and not true trade unionists, which would justify the strong-handed intervention of the police under the POSA, he reminded the Conference that when the old leaders of the ZCTU had decided in 1999 to set up an opposition political party (the MDC), the ZCTU members who had met in extraordinary congresses had immediately adopted a resolution which stated that the union would continue to be independent from any political party and guided by the principles contained in the Resolution concerning the independence of the trade union movement adopted by the International Labour Conference in 1952. In that regard, he stressed that the ZCTU did have members belonging to the MDC, but also members who belonged to the party in power. The exercise of freedom of association in Zimbabwe was rendered difficult because the Government considered that all questions raised by the trade union movement were a priori political, and thereby fell under the scope of the POSA. In those conditions, the independent trade union movement in Zimbabwe could not engage in legitimate and lawful activities to defend the interests of their members because all trade union activity was incriminated in principle. The ZCTU members were of the view that trade unionists belonged to the human species, like any other social category and, as such, they had the right to enjoy their civil and political rights, like any other citizen. Indeed, as reiterated on numerous occasions by the supervisory bodies of the ILO, the absence of those freedoms negated the very meaning of trade union rights.

He reminded the Conference Committee of the visit to Zimbabwe of the Director of the International Labour Standards Department in August 2006, when she had met all the social partners and noted that the lack of social dialogue in the country was the source of numerous problems. For that reason, she commended them to sign the tripartite Kadoma Declaration, entitled "Towards a shared national economic and social vision", a declaration adopted in 2001 by the three social partners as a first step towards remedying the mutual and profound mistrust which prevailed among the tripartite constituents of the country. Finally, he concluded his statement by reiterating that it was very risky to be a trade unionist in Zimbabwe.

The Worker members fully supported the statement of the Worker member of Zimbabwe, indicating that the situation of trade unionists in Zimbabwe was extremely dangerous. In this respect, they emphasized the fact that the trade unionists present at this Conference were in great danger and called on the ILO to ensure their safe journey home.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2006, Publication: 95th ILC session (2006)

The Government communicated the following written information.

The Government of Zimbabwe has been appearing before the Conference Committee on Application of Standards since 2002. In the previous four appearances, Convention No. 98 - Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949, was used as the basis of the listing. This year, Convention No. 87 - Freedom of Association and the Protection of the Right to Organise, has been used as the basis of listing the Government of Zimbabwe. In all the previous appearances, the interventions from the Workers' group and indeed from the representatives of the European Union and its associated members focused on political issues of Zimbabwe which were not linked to the terms of the appearances. In addition, the conclusions of the Officers of the Committee were in all instances biased hence the contestation and rejection by the Government of Zimbabwe of the suggested direct contacts mission in 2005.

The Government of Zimbabwe is of the view that unless the International Labour Conference's Committee on Application of Standards' working methods are urgently revised, it runs the risk of gradually being transformed into a political platform for castigating and ridiculing developing countries which are perceived otherwise by the West. In the case of Zimbabwe, its former colonial power has, since 2000, internationalized the political differences between the two countries over the land issue. Workers' organizations, mainly from Europe, being coordinated by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) are working in cahoots with individuals in the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) who have an appetite for donor money to advance the political agenda of Zimbabwe's former colonial power at every session of the International Labour Conference (ILC) as well as in Zimbabwe.

The listing of Zimbabwe at this session of the ILC is premised on Convention No. 87 - Freedom of Association and the Protection of the Right to Organise. In the report of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations on page 132, reference is made to individual cases which fall within the purview of the Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA). These cases were ably responded to by the Government and some were finalized by the CFA. In addition, the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) was cited. It is interesting to note that the majority of the cases cited on page 132 are the same cases which the Workers' group, ZCTU included, were making reference to during the previous appearances. These cases were dismissed by the Government as either unfounded or of a political nature. Some of the incidences covered in the cases are still to be finalized by the CFA due to lack of adequate information and in some instances, unconvincing arguments on the part of the complainant, in this case, ICFTU. The Committee of Experts noted that POSA does not apply to trade union activities or public gatherings which are not political. Surprisingly, it remains concerned that POSA "may be used in practice so as to impose sanctions on Trade Unionists for conducting a strike, protest, demonstration or other public gathering".

The Committee of Experts' fears are unfounded and it is unfortunate that its position was influenced by the incidences cited in Cases Nos. 2313 and 2365 which were examined by the CFA. As responded to by the Government, the cited incidences did not relate to trade union activities but rather political matters. It is common knowledge that certain individuals within the ZCTU are political and work in cahoots with the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), the National Constitutional Assembly (a quasi-political organization) and the Crisis Coalition of Non-Governmental Organizations led by the current Secretary-General of the ZCTU. Their agenda is to topple the democratically elected Government of Zimbabwe at the instigation of the foreign powers which want a regime change in Zimbabwe. POSA is about protecting the sovereignty of Zimbabwe and its citizens. It has nothing to do with trade union activities pursued by an insignificant percentage of the population. Accordingly, POSA will remain intact notwithstanding the outcry which is associated with the trade union organizations with political inclinations. Legislation, similar to POSA, exists in several countries whose governments are mindful of their duties to protect their citizens against internal or external elements which are motivated to bring about disorder. Genuine trade unionists in Zimbabwe have no problems with POSA and no reasons to fear it as it does not apply to its meetings. It is only those who are promoting a foreign political agenda of regime change that are against POSA. POSA is not at cross-purpose with the Labour Act (28:01) which governs industrial relations in Zimbabwe.

In addition, before the Committee, a Government representative (Minister of Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare) recalled that the Conference Committee had discussed the application by his country of Convention No. 98 in four consecutive sessions between 2002 and 2005 and that the only difference this year was Zimbabwe's listing for discussion on the application of Convention No. 87. In his Government's view, the interventions in previous sessions had not focused on the issues arising from the application of Convention No. 98 and had shifted to a political discourse. Hence there was the perception by the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) member States, especially the Africa group, that Zimbabwe's appearance on the case list was politically motivated. He urged the Committee to focus on matters falling within its competence and leave aside issues of a political nature. Turning to the comments of the Committee of Experts, the speaker stated that individual cases of workers dismissed taken up by the Committee of Experts and the Committee on Freedom of Association were trivial and political in nature. He questioned whether the Committee would really wish to examine workplace disputes, ordinarily handled by national dispute settlement machineries. Regarding the Public Order and Security Act (POSA), the speaker assured the Committee that the relevant Act was never meant to interfere with trade union activities. Instead, the POSA had been enacted with a view to dealing with the problem of terrorism and protecting Zimbabwe's sovereignty, order and peace. He recalled that POSA had been adopted on the behest of governments who had urged his country to toughen its laws after the terrorist attacks of 2001. Issues pertaining to trade union activities were dealt with by the Labour Act, which was in full conformity with the requirements of Convention No. 87.

The Employer members recalled that the Conference Committee had discussed the application by Zimbabwe of Convention No. 98 on a number of occasions. They acknowledged that some progress had been made but pointed out that important issues had still to be resolved. Since it was the first time that the Committee discussed the case of Zimbabwe under Convention No. 87, it was important for the Government to understand what its obligations were under both Convention No. 87 and Convention No. 98. A key aspect of Convention No. 87 concerned the interdependence of civil liberties and trade union rights. According to the ILO supervisory bodies, restrictions on civil and political activities constituted serious inhibitions of freedom of association. Free and independent trade unions could only develop in an environment of freedom and respect of civil and political rights. In this context, the speaker made a reference to the case of Nicaragua, which was of major importance for the Employer members. Although they understood the Government's wish to separate the political issues from those arising under Convention No. 87, they maintained that the two were inseparable. The provisions of Convention No. 87 presupposed the right to freedom and security of person, the right to freedom of movement, the right to freedom of opinion and expression, as well as the right to freedom of assembly and association. This meant that trade union activities could not be restricted solely to trade union matters, since they were intertwined with political questions.

The Worker members expressed their regret about the fact that in its reply the Government had hardly touched on the concerns voiced by the Committee of Experts but had rather confined itself to general comments which had not responded to the latter's requests. In their view, there was no doubt that the Government of Zimbabwe engaged in gross and flagrant violations of fundamental human rights, including the right to freedom of association, despite the fact that it had ratified and hence undertaken to abide by the ILO Conventions on freedom of association. They stressed that Zimbabwe was not being discussed for a consecutive sixth year because of its land reform policy, its international status or geographical size, but merely because of its flagrant disregard of Convention No. 87. The Worker members drew the Committee's attention to the fact that the Government had often relied on the provisions of the POSA for the purpose of imposing a ban on gatherings, demonstrations and strikes and harassing trade union leaders. In support of their submissions, the Worker members presented to the Committee a number of refusals by the authorities to carry out public meetings and demonstrations. In one case where the request to commemorate women's day was granted, the restrictions imposed by the authorities included the prohibition of singing or shouting slogans, of explicitly or implicitly raising or discussing political issues, and a strict timetable for the event and the monitoring by security forces. In this context, the Worker members invited the Government to acknowledge the importance of the resolution adopted by the International Labour Conference in 1970, according to which "the rights conferred upon workers' and employers' organizations must be based on respect for those civil liberties which have been enunciated, in particular in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and that the absence of these civil liberties removes all meaning from the concept of trade union rights".

The Worker members also referred to the cases pending before the Committee on Freedom of Association as evidence of Zimbabwe's disrespect of trade union rights. They pointed to instances of arbitrary arrest and injury of trade unionists and trade union leaders (Case No. 2313), dismissal and deportation of South African trade unionists for participation in strike action (Case No. 2365), anti-trade union dismissal of the recently re-elected president of the Zimbabwean Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), Mr. Lovemore Matombo, and the withholding of owed payment (Case No. 2328), police raiding the headquarters of the ZCTU (Case No. 2184) and manhandling of its recently elected Secretary-General, Wellington Chibebe (Case No. 2238). In closing, the Worker members also brought to the attention of the Conference the recent case of deportation of foreign trade unionists who were invited to participate in the congress of the ZCTU.

The Government member of Cuba stated that Zimbabwe had been placed on the list of countries called upon to provide explanations to the Committee, and on each occasion the Government had provided explanations that were easily understood by all. In particular, when perusing the report of the Committee of Experts, it could be seen that this was a case relating to the application of the national legislation of a State, which was merely an internal matter of a sovereign State. Therefore, the Government of Zimbabwe should be trusted to give proper effect to the POSA without violating its international commitments deriving from Convention No. 87, particularly as the Government had guaranteed that the Act did not apply to trade union activities or public assemblies which were not of a political nature, as indicated in document D.12. For this reason it was necessary to be careful when noting the present case, in which an attempt was being made to relate the internal situation of a country to compliance with international labour standards, which was tantamount to taking a position on a subject that was not within the mandate of the Committee. What should be done was to offer ILO technical assistance and cooperation.

The Government member of Austria took the floor on behalf of the Governments of the Member States of the European Union; the Acceding Countries Bulgaria and Romania, the Candidate Countries Turkey, Croatia, and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the Country of the Stabilisation and Association Process and potential candidate Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as the EFTA countries Iceland and Norway, members of the European Economic Area, aligned themselves with this declaration. He stated that, in the light of the Government's reply to the observations of the Committee of Experts contained in document D.12, a reaction was warranted. He strongly rejected Zimbabwe's assertion that the comments made by European Union Members States in earlier sessions of the Conference Committee on the country's obligations under Convention No. 98 focused on political issues, not directly linked to the question falling within the Committee's mandate. Social and labour standards were inseparable from human rights issues and by their very nature "political". It was therefore absolutely legitimate for the members of the Conference Committee to refer to the human rights situation in a given country in general when examining its compliance with the labour standards under scrutiny. In the opinion of the European Union, the language employed by the Government in document D.12 was polemic, even insulting and detrimental to the authority and work of the ILO supervisory system and called for its further strengthening. The speaker noted however that the oral presentation by the Government representative was more moderate in its tone than in document D.12. Turning to the application by Zimbabwe of Convention No. 87, the European Union Member States endorsed the concerns expressed by the Committee of Experts concerning the implications for the freedom of assembly of the POSA, which provided for the prohibition of trade union public meetings and gatherings that were deemed not to be for "bona fide purposes", without at the same time stipulating specific criteria for the determination of what constituted "bona fide purposes", thus opening the door for arbitrary decisions. They emphasized that workers' organizations should be free to voice their opinions on political issues in the broad sense of the term and to express their views publicly on a government's economic and social policies. They endorsed the requests made by the Committee of Experts in relation to Zimbabwe's application of Convention No. 87.

The Government member of Canada expressed his delegation's concern that the Government used the POSA to deny the rights of trade unionists to conduct a strike, protest, demonstration or other public gathering. In addition, the Canadian Government had protested against the arrest and detention of leaders and members of the ZCTU and had made representations for the respect of the right of freedom of expression and assembly and freedom of association. In particular, Canada had called on the Government of Zimbabwe to refrain from violence or undue force against peaceful protestors. Moreover, it was disturbing to note the frequent prevention of international labour union representatives from entering the country to meet with national trade unions and the Government should facilitate international exchanges between labour union representatives. The speaker mentioned his country's support for the labour movement in Zimbabwe, including research on the informal economy. He concluded by encouraging the Tripartite Negotiation Forum talks between the Government, business and the ZCTU that resumed last year.

The Government member of Nigeria, speaking on behalf of the Africa group, stated that the request of the Africa group for regional balance in the representation of countries in the selection of cases, formulated in 2005, had been acknowledged. Turning to the case under discussion, the speaker recalled that in its report, the Committee of Experts had stated that section 24 of the POSA, which had been criticized for conferring to the authorities a discretionary power to prohibit public gatherings, did not apply to gatherings of members of professional, vocational or occupational bodies held for non-political purposes or bona fide trade union purposes. The Africa group appreciated the concerns of the Committee of Experts, but since this particular issue was currently pending before the Committee on Freedom of Association under Cases Nos. 2313 and 2365, the Conference Committee should not have taken up the same issue before the former body was given sufficient time to conclude its examination. The Africa group believed that the simultaneous examination of the case by two supervisory bodies was counter-productive, putting the country in a position of feeling haunted and harassed. Turning to the question of the manner in which trade unions should articulate their demands, the speaker supported the idea of a practice that favoured tripartism and social dialogue instead of the threatening and antagonizing practices of holding protests, demonstrations and strikes. She referred to the experience of her country, which, in an effort to overcome similar problems, had discovered the value of social dialogue. African trade unionists should learn from this experience that workers' rights were best safeguarded through negotiation. She called upon the Committee to drop the case from the list of individual cases and invited the Office to strengthen the capacity of the social partners so that they would engage in meaningful social dialogue.

The Government member of Namibia stated that the Government of Zimbabwe had fully addressed the requests by the Committee of Experts. With respect to the POSA, its response had clearly shown that it did not limit or ban trade union activities. Noting his surprise at the inclusion of this case on the conference list, he called for more clarity and transparency in the methods in determining the list of individual cases, and for the discussions to avoid focusing on political issues.

The Government member of Kenya stated that the Government of Zimbabwe had responded to the issues raised, and pointed out that the situation in Zimbabwe was a particular mix of national and international politics. Given the close relationship between the ZCTU and the Movement for Democratic Change, the supervisory bodies should apply the principles of fairness and honesty and set aside cases where trade union activities were flavoured with politics.

The Government member of South Africa stated that this case was very general and lacked specific charges. He appealed to the Committee to separate political issues from trade union matters, since part of the problem was a trade union in Zimbabwe that was pursuing a political agenda. He also called on the Committee to grant its confidence to the Government of Zimbabwe in order to pursue the application of Convention No. 87 without the feeling of being harassed.

The Worker member of Zimbabwe stated that during the last five years the ZCTU had been harassed by the police and other security agencies, and in all cases of arrest the detained had been charged under the POSA, despite the fact that section 24 of the Act explicitly stated that trade unions were exempted from applying for permission to hold trade union meetings or processions. For the last five years the courts had ruled that the trade unions were innocent but the uniformed police continued to harass them. In order to be able to freely assemble for trade union activities, special permission was needed from the police, which very often was denied. He further expressed concern about the ruling of the Supreme Court that had overturned the legality of a strike for the very first time. Furthermore, during the 6th Congress held by the ZCTU, some of the invited guests were deported. The speaker pointed out that reforms regarding the prison services had not taken place, despite a Government majority in the parliament, and that civil servants remained without a collective bargaining framework. He concluded by stating that the situation in his country was confirmed in the observations of the Committee of Experts and that industrial relations and dispute settlement were now treated under POSA.

The Worker member of Germany stated that she was speaking as the Workers' spokesperson in the Committee on Freedom of Association. Whatever was discussed in the Committee on Freedom of Association with regard to specific cases was of utmost importance to the work of the present Committee.

The Government member of Nigeria raised a point of order claiming that the findings of the Committee on Freedom of Association were not the subject of discussion before the present Committee.

The Chairperson ruled on the point of order, that any kind of illustrative information was admissible before the Committee and requested the Worker member of Germany to restrict herself to providing such information.

The Worker member of Germany stated that the Committee on Freedom of Association had had to deal with the case of Zimbabwe only two weeks ago. Case No. 2365 concerned several trade union leaders who were in jail since 2004 without indication of reasons; with the dismissal of 56 workers of the Netone factory, who had participated in a strike because management had left the bargaining table; and the expulsion from Zimbabwe of a trade union delegation from South Africa. The case had been dealt with in the Committee for the third time. Since the Government had not yet answered the Committee's questions from June last year, two weeks ago the Committee had to deal with the Case without any reports from the Government. The case touched upon one of the most basic trade union rights concerning the defence of their economic and social rights - the right to strike.

In the case of the strike at the state telecommunications enterprise, Zimpost and TelOne, management had not paid the wage increases, to which it had been sentenced by a court of law. Management decided unilaterally to pay less than half of the wage increases decided by the court. The workers from TelOne approached the Minister in charge and the State Secretary, Karkoga Kasela, instructed management to find an out-of-court solution. Upon the management's refusal, the workers announced a strike, which began two weeks later, on 6 October 2004. On 12 October, some 25,000 workers (half of the workers of the post and telecommunications sector) joined the strike. On 21 October, the Government set up armed sentries in the major post and telecommunications offices throughout the country. The guards were used to intimidate the striking workers and local trade union leaders. One day before the beginning of this massive strike, the trade union leader Sikosana was arrested in Bulawayo, six further trade unionists were arrested in Gweru and only released after payment of a penalty. The speaker pointed out that the Committee on Freedom of Association had found that the arrest of trade unionists in this context, even briefly, was a fundamental violation of the right to freedom of association. The arrest of trade unionists in connection with their trade union activities related to the representation of their members constituted a serious interference into civil rights in general and in trade union rights. The present Government had only ratified Convention No. 87 in 2003. The question arose why the Government was not prepared to implement Convention No. 87.

Law and practice were, unfortunately, further than ever from being in accord with Convention No. 87. The Government should do all to implement the Convention, so that the workers of Zimbabwe and trade unionists could exercise their right of association without fear of repressive measures. She hoped that the Government would also be prepared to accept the offer of a direct contacts mission. This would be an important sign that the Government was prepared to cooperate with the ILO in the observance of Convention No. 87.

The Worker member of Brazil stated that the flagrant contradiction arising in the case of Zimbabwe was not between workers and the Government, but between a government of a poor and exploited African country and certain weighty superpowers which wished to continue to dominate and control the wealth of the planet. It exemplified the contrast between justice and injustice. For four consecutive years, the pretext for sanctioning Zimbabwe had been Convention No. 98. As had occurred the previous year, the report of the Committee of Experts clearly showed that there was no technical justification for Zimbabwe to appear on the list of the Conference Committee, although the pretext had changed, as the case now related to Convention No. 87. In reality, it was just a matter of finding a pretext to attempt to impose sanctions on Zimbabwe, which amounted to political interference that was totally beyond the principles of the ILO. She emphasized that the ILO could not let itself be taken over by the racial hatred of those who had upheld apartheid for centuries and who wished to continue dominating the land and wealth that belonged to the people of Zimbabwe. If it adopted this type of discrimination towards developing countries which were seeking to follow their own path, without respecting multilateral principles, the ILO would run the risk of becoming a political tool of the major powers which wished to impose their domination.

The Worker member of Nigeria stressed the solidarity between workers in different countries and between States. If his own and other African governments could live with strikes, they should encourage their sister government in Zimbabwe to do the same in the true spirit of sharing experiences. The speaker pointed out that the only job creation in Zimbabwe occurred in the informal sector and attempts by the ZCTU to organize them had been seriously hampered by the Government. This issue being at the heart of Convention No. 87, he called on the Government to stop interfering with the freedom of association, which was also detrimental to the prospect of social dialogue, and he asked the Government to fully respect the Convention and to engage in genuine social dialogue with the ZCTU.

The Worker member of Malaysia expressed his serious concern over the magnitude of the violations of Convention No. 87 and recalled that international trade union cooperation and solidarity were fundamental elements of the Convention. He recalled union-related workshops that had been broken up by the authorities. In this respect, he denounced the Government's deportation of international trade union delegations, including the General Secretary of COSATU, and urged the Government to immediately stop the repression of its own citizens and its interference against international trade union solidarity, to which the speaker himself had been exposed. He condemned the Government for its lack of respect for workers' rights and Convention No. 87.

The Worker member of South Africa noted that in most of Zimbabwe's neighbouring countries there was the freedom of association and the right to demonstrate. In her country, workers "toy-toyed" against everything they were unhappy about, a right enjoyed in most Southern African Development Community countries. She disagreed with the position of some government members that this case was a conspiracy by developed countries against Zimbabwe. This case was an unambiguous case of violation of Convention No. 87 and all countries should take a strong stand so that one day the workers in Zimbabwe could be free.

The Employer member of Zimbabwe stated that for the very first time the Government had instigated discussions with the social partners to bring about a turnaround in the economy. In his opinion, the present case stemmed from the Government's efforts to achieve macroeconomic stability. The Government had appeared several times before this Committee in connection with Convention No. 98 and this had resulted in certain steps to amend labour legislation, for which all social partners had to be complimented. However, the employers in Zimbabwe found the issues under discussion in this case too broad and distant from labour legislation. For example, the reference made to the POSA was connected to political issues. In addition, some cases referred to by the Committee of Experts dated back to 1997 while others were still pending either before the Committee on Freedom of Association or other authorities. The Zimbabwean employers did not feel comfortable to comment upon these pending cases. The speaker expressed his hope for stronger social dialogue which appeared to be developing through the tripartite Negotiating Forum and the National Economic Revival Council. He welcomed continued technical assistance from the ILO to facilitate the creation of an environment for business and investment to prosper and to create more wealth and employment.

The Government representative, in response to a comment by the Worker member of Germany, indicated that no trade union leader had been imprisoned since 2004. He stated that while there existed the right to make a procession, the Government had also to protect private property and the rights of other persons. For this reason, the police in Zimbabwe prescribed conditions on ZCTU demonstrations, which were often violent. He stressed the efforts that had been made to address labour issues through last year's meeting with the social partners. It was hoped this dialogue would lead to the adoption of a protocol for the stabilization of income and prices. Regarding the postal workers who were dismissed, the speaker pointed out that the courts had upheld these dismissals, and this was the rule of law. This did not prevent a discussion of certain administrative matters for helping dismissed workers in this case, and the Government was willing to pursue such discussions. No specific fault could be found with Zimbabwean labour law, and even the ZCTU had hailed the Labour Act as progressive. The speaker maintained that, in his country, certain trade unions were agitating for the destabilization of the country and had an open political agenda. For example, permission had been given for a commemoration of occupational safety and health week, at which a senior official from his Ministry was to speak. Yet, the attendees all sported political T-shirts and caps, which was inappropriate for a trade union event. Demonstrations of this nature occurred as his delegation was about to depart for Geneva to attend the International Labour Conference, and the demonstrators hoped to gain international attention. As for the expulsion of foreign trade unionists from Zimbabwe, he pointed out that all countries had immigration laws which allowed sovereign States to determine who could enter their country. He concluded by stating that this was a politically motivated case. He hoped the issues in this case could be addressed through social dialogue and he welcomed any usual technical assistance from the ILO.

The Employer members expressed their appreciation for the reasoned tone in which the Government had addressed the issues in the present session. It was evident from the discussion that the Government did not understand the difference between protection of trade union rights by the Committee on Freedom of Association, the obligations under Convention No. 87, or the difference between Conventions Nos. 87 and 98. They recalled that the ratification of Convention No. 87 required law and practice to be brought into line with the Convention, including the protection of the civil liberties of workers' or employers' organizations. While the Government had engaged in social dialogue, this was not the same thing as freedom of association. Social dialogue was a means, however, through which the Government could solve the problem, with ILO technical assistance. They hoped the Government would accept technical assistance in this case.

The Worker members expressed their regret about the fact that a large number of African governments had supported the Government of Zimbabwe in its defiance of Convention No. 87. They declared they would not be intimidated and were resolved to continue their quest for the recognition of their inalienable fundamental freedoms, as enshrined in the African Charter of Human and People's Rights, which, in their view, was flagrantly betrayed by those members of the Committee that supported the Government of Zimbabwe. They also disassociated themselves from the Worker member of Brazil, whose assertions did not represent the trade union movement. The Worker members asserted their right to address all issues arising under Convention No. 87, explaining that these were directly linked to their ability to find work and ensure adequate working conditions. They recalled that in August 2001 three workers of the government-owned ZISCO Steel Company were shot dead during a strike calling for better working conditions and pay. Despite their repeated calls to President Mugabe to order an investigation into the deaths, no inquiry had been carried out up to the present day. The Worker members further condemned the Government for systematically "politicizing" all socio-economic issues legitimately raised by the ZCTU as well as for its systematic and abusive attacks on the ICFTU whenever it raised issues of fundamental rights. In their opinion, it would be an abdication of duty if the collective voice of labour remained silent in the face of violations. Every country had security laws, but not every country used these laws against legitimate trade union rights. They expressed the hope that the support demonstrated by the African countries for the Government of Zimbabwe was merely an act of public relations or diplomatic solidarity and that behind the scenes the same countries would encourage the Government to comply with the standards set out in Convention No. 87.

The Government representative stated that his Government had never turned down technical assistance from the ILO. It would not, however, accept a direct contacts mission. It would accept a strengthening of the Subregional Office in Harare.

Following a pause prior to the adoption of the conclusion, the Workers members wished to draw the Committee's attention to the unacceptable attitude of the Zimbabwean Government delegation - they had committed some intolerable verbal and physical aggression on certain Worker delegates and ILO staff. The Worker members demanded the Government's excuses for this behaviour, otherwise they would request the incident to be reflected in the Provisional Record.

Another Government representative stated that he was not familiar with any "incident" and he had no intention of apologizing to a purely vacuous intervention by the Workers.

The Government representative refused to accept the conclusions in their present form. He reiterated that the high-level technical assistance mission emanating from the Conference Committee was not acceptable, rather the Government was willing to accept the usual technical cooperation. He further pointed out that his delegation was aware of the difference between a high-level technical assistance mission directed by the Committee and the usual technical assistance.

The Employer members affirmed that the Minister had accepted to receive enhanced technical assistance.

The Worker members concurred with the statement of the Employer members. Technical assistance had been accepted several times during the Committee's present session. The envisaged high-level technical cooperation would be carried out by the Office, and not by this Committee. They, therefore, felt that the conclusions were not out of context.

The Committee noted the information provided by the Government representative and the debate that followed.

The Committee observed that the comments of the Committee of Experts referred to the use of the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) in the arrest of, and the placing of charges against, trade unionists and union officers by reason of their trade union activities, as well as the discretionary power granted to authorities to prohibit public meetings and to impose fines or imprisonment in case of violations of any such prohibitions. The Committee also noted that the Committee on Freedom of Association examined several complaints against the Government regarding these serious issues.

The Committee noted in the Government's statement that the cases of the Committee on Freedom of Association that had been referred to by the Committee of Experts were not new and concerned small and trivial matters and that they had not been raised by the social partners with the Government. It further noted in the Government's statement that the POSA did not apply to the exercise of legitimate trade union activities. Trade union meetings that did not have a political purpose could take place without interference.

The Committee also noted with concern, however, the information provided concerning the situation of trade unions in Zimbabwe, the abusive use of the POSA to ban public demonstrations and the barring of entry into the country of certain international trade unionists.

The Committee requested the Government to take measures to ensure that the POSA was not used to impede the right of workers' organizations to exercise their activities, or to hold meetings and public protests relating to government economic and social policy. The Committee emphasized that the exercise of trade union rights was intrinsically linked to the assurance of full guarantees of basic civil liberties, including the rights to express opinions freely, and to hold assemblies and public meetings. Like the Committee of Experts, the Committee recalled that the development of the trade union movement and the acceptance of its ever-increasing recognition as a social partner in its own right meant that workers' organizations must be able to express their opinions on political issues in the broad sense of the term and, in particular, that they may publicly express their views on the Government's economic and social policy. The Committee insisted that no trade unionist should be arrested or charged for legitimate trade union activities. The Committee requested the Government to consider accepting a high-level technical assistance mission from the Office aimed at ensuring the full respect for freedom of association and basic civil liberties not only in law, but also in practice. The Committee expressed the firm hope that, in the very near future, it would be in a position to note concrete progress as regards observance of the rights embodied in the Convention and requested the Government to send a detailed report thereon in time for the next meeting of the Committee of Experts.

The Government representative refused to accept the conclusions in their present form. He reiterated that the high-level technical assistance mission emanating from the Conference Committee was not acceptable, rather the Government was willing to accept the usual technical cooperation. He further pointed out that his delegation was aware of the difference between a high-level technical assistance mission directed by the Committee and the usual technical assistance.

The Employer members affirmed that the Minister had accepted to receive enhanced technical assistance.

The Worker members concurred with the statement of the Employer members. Technical assistance had been accepted several times during the Committee's present session. The envisaged high-level technical cooperation would be carried out by the Office, and not by this Committee. They, therefore, felt that the conclusions were not out of context.

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

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

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

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

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

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

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

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

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

Follow-up to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry
(complaint made under article 26 of the Constitution of the ILO)

The Committee recalls that a Commission of Inquiry was established at the 303rd Session of the Governing Body (November 2008) to examine a complaint presented under article 26 of the ILO Constitution alleging the failure of the Government to observe Convention No. 87 and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98). The Committee observes that the Commission of Inquiry completed its work in December 2009 and that its report was submitted to the Governing Body at its 307th Session (March 2010).

The Committee takes note of the reply of the Government to the report of the Commission of Inquiry by virtue of article 29 of the ILO Constitution, which was noted by the Governing Body at its 308th Session (GB.308/6/2). The Government has indicated that the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry will be implemented in the context of its current legislative and institutional reform programme and welcomed the guidance and support of the ILO in their implementation.

The Committee recalls that in commenting on the observance of the Convention by the Government, it has been raising many of the same points examined by the Commission of Inquiry. It notes that the Commission has confirmed and expanded upon the concerns that this Committee, as well as the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards, have been raising as to the application of this fundamental Convention.

The Committee notes, in particular, that the Commission recommended that: the relevant legislative texts be brought in line with Conventions Nos 87 and 98; all anti-union practices – arrests, detentions, violence, torture, intimidation and harassment, interference and anti-union discrimination – cease with immediate effect; national institutions continue the process the Commission had started whereby people can be heard, in particular referring to the Human Rights Commission and the Organ for National Healing and Reconciliation; training on freedom of association and collective bargaining, civil liberties and human rights be given to key personnel in the country; the rule of law and the role of the courts reinforced; social dialogue strengthened in recognition of its importance in the maintenance of democracy; and ILO technical assistance to the country continued.

The Committee notes the comments made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ITUC) and the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) on the application of the Convention in their communications dated 24 August 2010 and 27 September 2010, respectively. The Committee notes that the allegations submitted by the ZCTU relate to the forced exile of the General Secretary of the General Agriculture and Plantation Workers Union of Zimbabwe (GAPWUZ) and instances of banning of trade union activities (workshop, commemoration events, processions and May Day celebration). The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on those serious allegations.

The Committee notes with interest the launch, on 27 August 2010, of the ILO technical assistance package, which aims to support the Government and the social partners in implementing the recommendations so as to ensure full freedom of association in the country. The Committee further notes with interest the strong commitment expressed on that occasion by all stakeholders to implement the recommendations. The Committee further notes that in order to give practical effect to this commitment, the tripartite constituents identified seven priority activities to be carried out in the period from September to December 2010 aimed, among others, at: finalizing a set of principles for the harmonization of labour laws and the amendment of the Labour Act; identifying and attempting to resolve outstanding cases of trade unionists arrested under the Public Order and Security Act (POSA); capacity building for provincial police, security forces, prosecutors and magistrates in relation to trade union rights; capacity building for judiciary, labour officers, conciliators and arbitrators in relation to trade union rights; and strengthening interface between social partners and national human rights institutions. Further activities to be carried out in 2011 are in the process of being developed in consultation with the social partners.

The Committee notes that the following activities have taken place already: (i) a seminar for government officials on international labour standards, human rights and social dialogue in the world of work; (ii) the launch of the Kadoma Declaration “Towards a shared economic and social vision” concluded by the Government and the social partners under the auspices of the Tripartite Negotiating Forum (TNF) in 2009; and (iii) an activity on the finalization of the principles of harmonization of labour laws and the amendment of the Labour Act.

The Committee notes the Government’s report on the outcome of the latter activity. The Government explains that the objective of this activity was to facilitate the amendment of the relevant legislation, and thereby give effect to the legislative recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. The set of principles was to be finalized and adopted at a workshop involving the key actors: members of the Tripartite Advisory Council, the principals of labour and business, the Public Service Commission, the Health Service Board, and with the participation of the ministers of labour and public service. The Government regrets that due to the absence at the meeting of ZCTU representatives, the desired outcome was not achieved. Nevertheless, the meeting allowed discussion of some urgent issues and consolidation of the principles which will now be reconsidered by the Tripartite Advisory Council.

The Committee understands that outstanding cases of trade unionists arrested under POSA have been identified. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the steps taken to ensure that these cases are withdrawn.

The Committee further requests the Government to provide in its next report detailed information on the outcome of the activities carried out under the technical assistance package and on all other measures taken to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry.  

Taking due note of the initiated labour law reform and harmonization process, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the relevant legislative texts will be brought in line with the Convention and recalls that the ILO supervisory bodies stressed the need to amend, in particular, the Labour Act and the Public Service Act, so as to ensure compliance with the following Articles of the Convention.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations without previous authorization

–      the need to ensure the right to establish and join trade unions of members of the public service and prison staff; and

–      the need to ensure the right to organize of managers (currently, under section 2 of the Labour Act, managers are considered to be employers).

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to elect their representatives in full freedom, organize their administration, and to formulate their programmes

–      the need to amend section 51 of the Labour Act, which concerns the supervision of election of officers of a trade union or employers’ organization so as to guarantee the right of employers’ and workers’ organizations to elect their representatives in full freedom and without interference from the authorities;

–      the need to amend sections 28(2), 54(2) and (3) and 55 of the Labour Act which confers on the minister extensive powers to regulate trade union dues as well as to regulate such matters as staff that may be employed by trade unions, their salaries and allowances, as well as the equipment and property that may be purchased by trade unions, so as to ensure that freedom of employers’ and workers’ organizations to organize their administration and dispose of all their fixed and movable assets unhindered;

–      the need to amend section 120(2) of the Labour Act, which confers on the minister the right to appoint an investigator who shall at all reasonable times and without prior notice, enter any premises (paragraph (a)); question any person employed on the premises (paragraph (b)); and inspect and make copies of and take extracts from any books, records or other documents on the premises (paragraph (c)), so as to ensure the right of the inviolability of trade union premises and to avoid any danger of excessive intervention in the internal administration of trade unions; and

–      the need to effectively guarantee the right to strike through, among other measures: (i) simplifying the procedure for declaring a strike; (ii) amending section 102 of the Labour Act providing for the right of the minister to declare any service essential; (iii) ensuring that a strike can be restricted or banned only in essential services in the strict sense of the term, that is those services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, so as to effectively ensure workers’ right to strike; and (iv) amending sections 107, 109 and 112 of the Labour Act providing for excessive sanctions in cases of unlawful collective action being organized.

Furthermore, referring to the conclusions of the Commission of Inquiry (paragraphs 558–562 of the report) and noting with concern the abovementioned recent ZCTU allegations, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures in order to ensure, in law and in practice, the right of trade unions to organize and carry out meetings, assemblies, demonstrations and pickets without interference by the police and security forces. In particular, it urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the POSA is not used to infringe upon legitimate trade union rights, including the right of workers’ organizations to express their views on the Government’s economic and social policy.

Noting the commitment of the Government to identify and attempt to resolve outstanding cases of trade unionists arrested under the POSA, the Committee urges the Government to intensify its efforts in this respect and to provide information in this regard in its next report. The Committee expresses the firm hope that it will be in the position to note that no charges are pending against trade unionists under the POSA when it examines next the application of the Convention in Zimbabwe. 

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

The Committee notes the discussion held on the application of the Convention by the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2008 in the absence of the Government’s delegation, despite it being duly accredited and registered before the Conference. The Committee notes that the Conference Committee had decided to mention the case of Zimbabwe in a special paragraph of its report, as well as to mention this case as a case of continued failure to implement the Convention.

While taking due note of the Government’s latest report in reply to its previous comments, the Committee observes the decision taken by the Governing Body at its 303rd Session to constitute a Commission of Inquiry into the non-observance by Zimbabwe of Conventions Nos 87 and 98. In these circumstances, and in accordance with usual practice which suspends the functioning of the supervisory machinery during the period of operation of a Commission of Inquiry, the Committee will renew its supervision of the application of the Convention in Zimbabwe once the Commission has concluded its work.

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

The Committee notes the discussion held on the application of the Convention in the Conference Committee in June 2007 and, in particular, that it had decided to mention the case of Zimbabwe in a special paragraph of its report. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the Government of Zimbabwe is prepared to host the Office with a view to receiving technical assistance to deal with the issues raised by the Committee. The Committee regrets that the Government refuses to accept the high-level technical assistance mission in the terms requested by the Conference Committee in June 2006. The Committee expresses the hope that the high-level technical assistance mission will be undertaken in the very near future.

The Committee also notes Cases Nos 1937, 2027 and 2365 examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association concerning serious allegations of violation of trade union rights, including allegations of arrest, detention and assaults of trade union leaders and members, attacks on trade union premises, deportation of and refusal of entry to foreign trade unionists, etc. (see 344th Report).

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the comments of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) dated 1 September 2006. The Committee notes that the Government disagrees with the ZCTU’s allegation that it continued to enact legislation meant to paralyse the right to freedom of association and states that all laws in Zimbabwe are subject to a transparent and democratic law-making process.

As regards the matters raised concerning the Public Order and Security Act (POSA), in the Government’s opinion, it serves no purpose to continue debating this issue as it was exhaustively dealt with in the Government’s various communications to the ILO. Referring to its previous request to take the necessary measures to ensure that the POSA is not used to infringe upon the right of workers’ organizations to express their views on the Government’s economic and social policy, the Committee urges the Government to ensure that no other charges are pending against trade unionists under the POSA for the exercise of legitimate trade union activity.

The Government further states that the ZCTU’s allegation that the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act of 2006 criminalizing public meetings and gatherings is misleading. According to the Government, the penal sanctions provided for by this Act relate to illegal gatherings and pubic meetings; the citizens of Zimbabwe are free to exercise their constitutional rights. The Committee notes from Case No. 2365 examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association that a number of trade union leaders and members have been charged under the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act in connection with their participation in the demonstration in September 2006. The Committee agrees with the findings and recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association and urges the Government to drop the charges brought for reasons connected to their trade union activities against trade unionists and to abstain from resorting to measures of arrest and detention of trade union leaders or members for reasons connected to their trade union activities.

With regard to the arrest of Mr W. Chibebe in August 2006, the Government indicates that Mr Chibebe has a pending court case on allegations of assaulting a fellow worker (police officer) on duty during the currency reform exercise. The Committee notes from the examination of Case No. 2365 that the Committee on Freedom of Association concluded that a number of procedural irregularities respecting the case against Mr Chibebe took place. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide full and detailed information respecting the arrest of Mr Chibebe and to transmit the text of any court judgment rendered in this regard.

The Committee notes that by its communication dated 28 August 2007, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) submitted further comments concerning the application of the Convention in law and in practice. The Committee notes that the ITUC comments refer to the legislative issues already raised by the Committee and to serious allegations concerning arrests, assaults and police violence against trade union leaders and members. In this respect, the Committee has, on numerous occasions, stressed the interdependence between civil liberties and trade union rights emphasizing that a truly free and independent trade union movement can only develop in a climate of respect for fundamental human rights. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations thereon.

The Committee requests the Government, in the context of the regular reporting cycle, to send for examination at the Committee’s next session, to be held in November–December 2008, its comments on all the issues relating to the legislation and the application of the Convention in practice raised in its previous observation and direct request (see 2006 direct request, 77th Session).

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

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to its previous direct request.

The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the following points.

Article 2 of the Convention. (a) Right of workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations. The Committee had previously noted that the Labour Act (Chapter 28:01) did not apply to the prison service (sections 2, 3(2)(b) and 5(a)) and requested the Government to take the necessary measures so as to guarantee the right to establish and join workers organizations to prison staff. The Committee regrets that no information was provided by the Government in this respect. Recalling that the functions exercised by prison staff should not justify their exclusion from the right to organize (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 56), the Committee reiterates its previous request and asks the Government to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

In its previous direct request, the Committee, noting that under the terms of the Labour Act (section 2), a manager was considered to be an employer, asked the Government to indicate how the right to organize of managers was ensured by the legislation and in practice. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that managerial employees, like other employees, enjoy the right to organize for furtherance of their interests in terms of sections 23 and 27 of the Labour Act. According to the Government, the categorization of workers is intended to avoid conflict of interest involving managerial staff and more so to prevent interference by employers into trade union activities. The Committee notes the list of established unions for managerial employees provided by the Government.

(b) Right of employers and workers to establish organizations without previous authorization. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that according to section 36(1) of the Labour Act, the Registrar could refuse an application for registration of a trade union or employers’ organization or federation and that the legislation did not provide for grounds on which such a refusal could be based. In this respect, the Committee asked the Government to indicate the grounds the Registrar may invoke to refuse the registration of a employers’ and workers’ organization. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that the registration of trade unions or employers’ organization is not compulsory, as they may exist and perform their functions without being registered. However, in the event that an organization seeks to be registered to enjoy privileges accorded to registered organizations, the Registrar can refuse an application for registration on the following grounds: (1) if it occurs that the organization had no constitution or that the constitution fails to meet the requirements; (2) there is no proof of membership; (3) the leadership has a known and proven track record of illegal conduct; (4) there is no proof of a grouping (i.e. minutes of a Congress); and (5) there are credible objections submitted during accreditation proceedings from stakeholders and existing trade unions in the particular industry indicating serious implications to the interests of workers in general. The Government adds that transparency of the registration procedure is ensured by virtue of section 40(4) of the Labour Act, which provides that the Registrar should indicate the reasons for the suspension of registration of the trade union. The same section also provides for the right to appeal to the Labour Court against the Registrar’s decision. The Committee considers that the grounds, which could be invoked by the Registrar to deny registration, should not impair the guarantees laid down in the Convention. In respect of the grounds listed by the Government, the Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the requirements which the trade union constitution should meet for registration purposes (ground 1). The Committee recalls that workers and employers have the right to establish organizations of their own choosing for furthering and defending their economic and social interests without previous authorization. That implies that existing trade unions or any other “stakeholders” should not be able to impair the right of workers to create other trade unions. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to clarify the meaning of “credible objections by stakeholders and existing trade unions” (ground 5) and to provide examples, if any, of denial of registration on that ground. As for the “illegal conduct” of trade union leadership (ground 3), the Committee refers to the comments below.

Article 3. (a) Right of workers to elect their representatives freely. With regard to the right of the Registrar to deny registration if the leadership of the workers’ or employers’ organization has a known and proven track record of illegal conduct, the Committee recalls that conviction for an act the nature of which is not such as to call into question the integrity of the person concerned and is not such as to be prejudicial to the performance of trade union duties should not constitute grounds for disqualification from trade union office. Thus, legislation which establishes excessively broad ineligibility criteria, for example by means of an open-ended definition or a long list including acts which have no real connection with the qualities of integrity required for the exercise of trade union office, is incompatible with the Convention (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 120). The Committee requests the Government to clarify whether all persons who have been convicted, regardless of the gravity or nature of the offence are disqualified from the trade union office.

The Committee had previously noted section 51 of the Labour Act, which concerned the supervision of election of officers of a trade union or employers’ organization. According to this section, the Minister may: set aside any election if it was not properly conducted or if the result of the election did not represent the views of the electors; postpone, or change the venue of, or procedure, for any election; assign responsibility for the conduct of elections to any trade union or employers’ organization; prohibit any person from conducting the election campaign; and make regulations for controlling and regulating elections and for fixing the qualifications for officers of trade unions and employers’ organizations. The Committee asked the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 51 of the Labour Act so as to ensure that the right of employers’ and workers’ organizations to elect their representatives in full freedom and without interference from the authorities was guaranteed. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 51 is intended to ensure proper conduct of elections in accordance with the rules and regulations. The Government points out that the law specifies what the Minister “may” and not “shall” do. The Minister may invoke this section upon credible representations from the concerned union members indicating improper conduct, which may have serious implications on the elections. In practice, the supervision of elections of officers of employers’ and workers’ organizations is conducted upon an invitation from the concerned organization. While noting the information on the practical application of section 51, the Committee points out that this section refers to the right of the Minister to supervise election of officers “where the national interest so demands”. The Committee once again recalls that the autonomy of organizations can be effectively guaranteed only if their members have the right to elect their representatives in full freedom. The Committee considers that legislative provisions, which enable the public authorities to interfere in the election procedure, are contrary to the principles of freedom of association (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraphs 112 and 115). The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend section 51 so as to ensure the right of employers’ and workers’ organizations to elect their representatives in full freedom and without interference from the authorities and to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

(b) Right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration and to formulate their programmes. The Committee had previously requested the Government to amend sections 28(2), 54(2) and (3) and 55 of the Labour Act which conferred to the Minister extensive powers to regulate trade union dues as well as to regulate such matters as staff that may be employed by trade unions, their salaries and allowances, as well as the equipment and property that may be purchased by trade unions. The Committee notes from the Government’s reply to the comments submitted by the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) in a communication dated 6 September 2005 that section 55 of the Act is intended to protect the interests of workers against the pegging of unsustainable trade union dues. No information was provided by the Government in respect of other abovementioned legislative provisions. The Committee is bound to once again recall that problems of compatibility with the Convention arise when the law gives authorities such powers as powers to specify the amount of dues members should pay to their organizations and the proportion of dues that have to be paid to the federations. The Committee further recalls that freedom of employers’ and workers’ organizations to organize their administration implies that these organizations should be able to dispose of all their fixed and movable assets unhindered (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraphs 126 and 127). The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend sections 28(2), 54(2) and (3) and 55 of the Labour Act accordingly and to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

The Committee had previously noted section 120 of the Labour Act. While noting that under its subsection 1, the Minister may order that any trade union or federation be investigated if there is a reasonable cause to believe that the property or funds of any trade union, or federation are being misappropriated or misapplied, or that the affairs of any trade union, or federation are being conducted in a manner that is detrimental to the interests of its members as a whole, the Committee requested the Government to amend subsection 2, providing that the Minister can appoint an investigator who shall at all reasonable times and without prior notice, enter any premises (paragraph (a)); question any person employed on the premises (paragraph (b)); and inspect and make copies of and take extracts from any books, records or other documents on the premises (paragraph (c)). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 120(1) is intended to guarantee remedy to concerned members of the organizations upon credible representations indicating improper conduct on the leadership or office bearers of the union, which has serious implications on the interests of the members of the organization. The Government points out that this section is only invoked in exceptional circumstances following credible representations from members of the organization. Moreover, the powers given to an investigator are in sync with the normal practice of auditing. The Government indicates that investigators are independent and in no way should be considered as an extension of administrative authority of the Government. The Committee considers that while there is no infringement of the right of organizations to organize their administration if the supervision is limited to the obligation of submitting periodic financial reports or if there are serious grounds for believing that the actions of organizations are contrary to its rules or the law (which should not infringe the principles of freedom of association), or if such a verification is limited to exceptional cases, for example in order to investigate a complaint, or if there have been allegations of embezzlement, problems of compatibility with the Convention arise when the law gives the authorities powers of control which go beyond the principles set forth above (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraphs 125 and 126). In this respect, the Committee once again points out that the provisions contained in section 120(2) give rise to two different sets of problems from the standpoint of freedom of association. As regards section 120(2)(a) and (b), the Committee recalls that the right of the inviolability of trade union premises necessarily implies that the public authorities may not insist on entering such premises without prior authorization or without having obtained a legal warrant to do so and any search of trade union premises, or of unionists’ homes, without a court order, constitutes an extremely serious infringement of freedom of association. Moreover, searches of trade union premises should be made only following the issue of a warrant by the ordinary judicial authority where that authority is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for supposing that evidence exists on the premises which are material to a prosecution for a penal offence and on condition that the search be restricted to the purpose in respect of which the warrant was issued. The Committee is of the view that paragraphs (a) and (b) of subsection (2), which authorize an investigator appointed by the Minister to enter trade union premises and question any person employed there at all reasonable times and without prior notice, clearly do not respect the principles enunciated above. Secondly, as regards paragraph (c) of subsection (2), which authorizes an investigator, at all reasonable times and without prior notice, to inspect and make copies and take extracts from any books, records or other documents on trade union premises, the Committee considers that the control exercised by the public authorities over trade union finances should not normally exceed the obligation to submit periodic reports. The discretionary right of the authorities to carry out inspections and request information at any time entails a danger of interference in the internal administration of trade unions. Moreover, as regards certain measures of administrative control over trade union assets, such as financial audits and investigations, the Committee considers that these should be applied only in exceptional cases, when justified by grave circumstances (for instance, presumed irregularities in the annual statement or irregularities reported by members of the organization), in order to avoid any discrimination between one trade union and another and to preclude the danger of excessive intervention by the authorities which might hamper a union’s exercise of the right to organize its administration freely, and also to avoid harmful and perhaps unjustified publicity or the disclosure of information which might be confidential. The Committee considers, consequently, that the powers of supervision contained in paragraph (c) of subsection (2) are excessive. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 120(2) so as to bring it into conformity with the Convention and to keep it informed of any measures taken or envisaged in this regard.

(c) Right to strike. The Committee had previously noted that under the terms of section 102 of the Labour Act, the Minister could declare any service essential and requested the Government to take the necessary measures to delete reference to this power of the Minister, which would have an effect of prohibiting the exercise of the right to strike, from section 102. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that in terms of section 102(b), the Minister declares a service essential after consultations with a tripartite advisory council. In Government’s opinion, this ensures that employers’ and workers’ views regarding the declaration of essential services cognizant of the national conditions and aspirations are considered. The Committee points out, however, that essential services are only those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 159). It therefore asks once again to amend section 102 of the Labour Act so as to bring it into conformity with the Convention and to keep it informed in this respect.

With regard to its previous request to amend section 104(3)(e), according to which, a strike action taken without an agreement of the majority of the employees is considered to be unlawful collective action so as to ensure when a vote by workers is required in order to call a strike, account is taken only of the votes cast and to keep it informed in this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that in practice, and in keeping with the principles of a secret ballot, the account is taken only of the votes cast.

Finally, the Committee had noted that, in the case of unlawful collective action being organized, excessive sanctions are provided. Sections 109 and 112 establish possible imprisonment of the individual engaged in an unlawful collective action, while section 107 gives the power to the Labour Court to dismiss the individual engaged in such action and to suspend or rescind the registration of the trade union involved in such action. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that the Labour Act penalizes unlawful collective action just as much as any other law penalizes criminal conduct. An unlawful collective action is an action not permitted in law, hence such conduct should be discouraged. This is premised on the fact that the Labour Act clearly lays out procedure required before one engages in collective action. In the Government’s opinion, this is meant to promote dialogue at workplaces and, at the same time, to preserve industrial peace. The Government further indicates that the desirability of a particular penalty or its legitimacy surely rests with the courts of law, as in some cases, unlawful job actions result in injury or death of innocent people. The Committee emphasizes that all penalties in respect of illegitimate actions linked to strikes should be proportionate to the offence or fault committed and the authorities should not have recourse to measures of imprisonment for the mere fact of organizing or participating in a peaceful strike. Further, concerning the sanctions of dismissal and dissolution, the Committee recalls that no one should be penalized for carrying out or attempting to carry out a legitimate strike and that, in any case, the sanctions imposed should not be disproportionate to the seriousness of the violations (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 178). Therefore, the Committee asks once again the Government to amend sections 109 and 112 of the Labour Act so as to bring it into conformity with Article 3 of the Convention and to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

It further notes the Government’s reply to the comments made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU). The Committee notes that the Government disagrees with the ICFTU and the ZCTU statements that trade union rights are violated in law. In particular, the Government indicates that contrary to the ICFTU’s statement: (1) managers have a right to join trade unions and go on strike; (2) the Minister is required to consult with the tripartite Advisory Council before deciding what constitutes essential service; (3) the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) does not apply to the activities of trade unions and employers’ organizations; and (4) revision of the Public Service Act is intended to make sure that its provisions are in conformity with the Labour Act and the Convention. Furthermore, the Government states that contrary to the ZCTU’s interpretation, section 51 of the Labour Act, which provides for the powers of the Minister with regard to the supervision of election of officers of trade unions or employers’ organizations, does not infringe the rights and principles of the Convention. According to the Government, this section is intended to ensure that constitutions and procedures of a trade union are followed during elections. Those who supervise elections do not go beyond the function of merely observing that the procedure and conduct of elections are followed in terms of the established rules and constitution of the trade union concerned. Furthermore, section 55 of the Act is intended to protect the interests of workers against the pegging of unsustainable trade union dues. The Government further denies the allegations of its involvement in establishment of the Zimbabwe Federation of Trade Unions (ZFTU) and of attempts to change the ZCTU leadership. The Committee notes that, with regard to the ICFTU allegations of arrests of trade unionists, the Government refers to the information it had submitted to, and had been examined by, the Committee on Freedom of Association.

The Committee notes that by their communications dated 12 July 2006 and 1 September 2006, respectively, the ICFTU and the ZCTU submitted further comments concerning the application of the Convention in law and in practice. The Committee notes that the ICFTU comments refer to the legislative issues already raised by the Committee and to serious allegations concerning arrests, assaults, death threats, acts of torture and police violence against trade union leaders and members. In this respect, the Committee has, on numerous occasions, stressed the interdependence between civil liberties and trade union rights emphasising that a truly free and independent trade union movement can only develop in a climate of respect for fundamental human rights. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations thereon.

The Committee recalls that, in its previous observation, it had requested the Government to take measures to ensure that the POSA is not used to infringe upon the right of workers’ organizations to express their views on the Government’s economic and social policy. While taking note of the Government’s indication that the POSA does not apply to the activities of trade unions and employers’ organizations, the Committee notes from Case No. 2313 examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association (see 343rd Report, paragraphs 1149-1169) that several trade union members and officers have been arrested and initially charged under this Act. In these circumstances, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the POSA is not used to infringe upon the right of workers’ organizations to express their views on the Government’s economic and social policy.

Finally, the Committee takes note of the discussion that took place at the Conference Committee in June 2006 and notes that, in its conclusions, the Conference Committee “requested the Government to consider accepting a high-level technical assistance mission from the Office aimed at ensuring the full respect for freedom of associations and basic civil liberties not only in law, but also in practice”. While noting that an official visit of the Director of the International Labour Standards Department at the invitation of the Government of Zimbabwe took place in August 2006, the Committee regrets that the Government has not yet accepted the suggested high-level technical assistance mission. The Committee expresses the hope that the Government will give a positive response to this suggestion in the very near future.

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

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

With reference to its observation, the Committee requests that the Government provide further information or clarification on the following points.

Article 2 of the Convention. (a) Right of workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations. The Committee notes that the Labour Act (Chapter 28:01) does not apply to the prison service (sections 2, 3(2)(b) and 5(a)). The Committee is of the opinion that the functions exercised by prison staff should not justify their exclusion from the right to organize (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 56). The Committee therefore requests that the Government take the necessary measures so as to guarantee the right to establish and join workers organizations to prison staff and keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

The Committee further notes that under the terms of the Labour Act (section 2), a manager is considered to be an employer. The Committee recalls in this respect that Article 2 of the Convention makes no distinction based on the nature of the functions or the hierarchical level of workers, who should all enjoy the right to organize, including managerial and executive staff. The Committee considers that provisions which prohibit workers in this category from joining trade unions in which other workers are represented are not necessarily incompatible with the Convention, provided they have the right to establish their own organizations and that the right to belong to those organizations is restricted to persons performing senior managerial or decision-making functions. By contrast, legislation which allows for the granting of fictitious promotions to unionized workers without actually according them management responsibilities, thereby effectively placing them in the category of so-called "employers" to whom the right to organize is not permitted, is not in accord with the Convention, since in effect it denies the right of association and artificially reduces the size of the bargaining unit (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 66). The Committee asks the Government to indicate how the right to organize of managers is ensured by the legislation and in practice.

(b) Right of workers and employers to establish organizations without previous authorization. The Committee notes that according to section 36(1) of the Labour Act, the Registrar can refuse an application for registration of a trade union or employers’ organization or federation. The Committee further notes that the legislation does not provide for grounds on which such a refusal could be based. The Committee recalls that provisions conferring to the competent authority discretional power to reject a registration request are tantamount to a requirement for previous authorization and are not compatible with Article 2 of the Convention. While noting that according to section 47, any person aggrieved by a decision of the Registrar not to register or certify a trade union or employers’ organization may appeal to the Labour Court, the Committee points out that the existence of the right to appeal to a court is not in itself an adequate safeguard; the competent judges should be able, on the basis of the record, to review the grounds for refusal given by the administrative authorities, which grounds should not be contrary to the principles of freedom of association (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 77). The Committee asks the Government to indicate in its next report, the grounds the Registrar may invoke to refuse the registration of a workers’ or employers’ organization.

Article 3. (a) Right of workers to elect their representatives freely. The Committee notes section 51 of the Labour Act, which concerns the supervision of election of officers of a trade union or employers’ organization. According to this section, the Minister may: set aside any election if it was not properly conducted or if the result of the election did not represent the views of the electors; postpone, or change the venue of or procedure for any election; assign responsibility for the conduct of elections to any trade union or employers’ organization; prohibit any person from conducting the election campaign; and make regulations for controlling and regulating elections and for fixing the qualifications for officers of trade unions and employers’ organizations. The Committee recalls that the autonomy of organizations can be effectively guaranteed only if their members have the right to elect their representatives in full freedom. The public authorities should therefore refrain from any interference, which might restrict the exercise of this right, whether as regards the holding of trade union elections or conditions of eligibility of representatives (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 112). The Committee asks the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 51 of the Labour Act so as to ensure the right of workers’ and employers’ organizations to elect their representatives in full freedom and without interference from the authorities is guaranteed.

(b) Right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration and to formulate their programmes. The Committee notes sections 28(2), 54(2) and (3) and 55 of the Labour Act which confer to the Minister extensive powers to regulate trade union dues as well as to regulate such matters as staff that may be employed by trade unions, their salaries and allowances, as well as the equipment and property that may be purchased by trade unions. The Committee observes that problems of compatibility with the Convention arise when the law gives authorities such powers as powers to specify the amount of dues members should pay to their organizations and the proportion of dues that have to be paid to the federations. The Committee further recalls that freedom of workers’ and employers’ organizations to organize their administration implies that these organizations should be able to dispose of all their fixed and movable assets unhindered (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraphs 126 and 127). The Committee therefore requests that the Government take the necessary measures to amend sections 28(2), 54(2) and (3) and 55 of the Labour Act so as to ensure the right of workers and employers’ organizations to organize their administration without interference by the public authorities and keep it informed in this respect.

The Committee also notes that section 120(1) stipulates that the Minister may order that any trade union or federation be investigated if the Minister has reasonable cause to believe that the property or funds of any trade union, or federation are being misappropriated or misapplied, or that the affairs of any trade union, or federation are being conducted in a manner that is detrimental to the interests of its members as a whole. Under the terms of subsection (2), the Minister can appoint an investigator who shall at all reasonable times and without prior notice, enter any premises (paragraph (a)); question any person employed on the premises (paragraph (b)); and inspect and make copies of and take extracts from any books, records or other documents on the premises (paragraph (c)). The Committee considers that the abovementioned provisions give rise to two different sets of problems from the standpoint of freedom of association. As regards section 120(2)(a) and (b), the Committee recalls that the right of the inviolability of trade union premises necessarily implies that the public authorities may not insist on entering such premises without prior authorization or without having obtained a legal warrant to do so and any search of trade union premises, or of unionists’ homes, without a court order, constitutes an extremely serious infringement of freedom of association. Moreover, searches of trade union premises should be made only following the issue of a warrant by the ordinary judicial authority where that authority is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for supposing that evidence exists on the premises which are material to a prosecution for a penal offence and on condition that the search be restricted to the purpose in respect of which the warrant was issued. The Committee is of the view that paragraphs (a) and (b) of subsection (2), which authorize an investigator appointed by the Minister to enter trade union premises and question any person employed there at all reasonable times and without prior notice, clearly do not respect the principles enunciated above. Secondly, as regards paragraph (c) of subsection (2), which authorizes an investigator, at all reasonable times and without prior notice, to inspect and make copies and take extracts from any books, records or other documents on trade union premises, the Committee considers that the control exercised by the public authorities over trade union finances should not normally exceed the obligation to submit periodic reports. The discretionary right of the authorities to carry out inspections and request information at any time entails a danger of interference in the internal administration of trade unions. Moreover, as regards certain measures of administrative control over trade union assets, such as financial audits and investigations, the Committee considers that these should be applied only in exceptional cases, when justified by grave circumstances (for instance, presumed irregularities in the annual statement or irregularities reported by members of the organization), in order to avoid any discrimination between one trade union and another and to preclude the danger of excessive intervention by the authorities which might hamper a union's exercise of the right to organize its administration freely, and also to avoid harmful and perhaps unjustified publicity or the disclosure of information which might be confidential. The Committee considers, consequently, that the powers of supervision contained in paragraph (c) of subsection (2) are excessive and therefore asks the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that section 120(2) of the Labour Act is amended so as to bring in into conformity with the Convention. The Committee further requests that the Government keep it informed of any progress made in this regard.

(c) Right to strike. The Committee notes that under the terms of section 102 of the Labour Act, the Minister can declare any service essential. The Committee notes that strike in essential services as defined in section 102 is prohibited and considered to be unlawful collective action under the terms of section 104(3)(a)(i). The Committee points out that essential services are only those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 159). It therefore asks the Government to take the necessary measures to delete reference to the power of the Minister to declare a service essential, and thus prohibit the exercise of the right to strike, from section 102 and to keep it informed in this respect.

Furthermore, a strike action taken without an agreement of the majority
of the employees is also considered to be unlawful collective action
(section 104(3)(e)). The Committee requests that the Government amend this section so as to ensure when a vote by workers is required in order to call a strike, account is taken only of the votes cast and to keep it informed in this respect.

The Committee also notes that, in the case of unlawful collective action being organized, excessive sanctions are provided. Sections 109 and 112 establish possible imprisonment of the individual engaged in an unlawful collective action, while section 107 gives the power to the Labour Court to dismiss the individual engaged in such action and to suspend or rescind the registration of the trade union involved in such action. In respect of the sanctions of imprisonment, the Committee emphasizes that all penalties in respect of illegitimate actions linked to strikes should be proportionate to the offence or fault committed and the authorities should not have recourse to measures of imprisonment for the mere fact of organizing or participating in a peaceful strike. Further, concerning the sanctions of dismissal and dissolution, the Committee recalls that no one should be penalized for carrying out or attempting to carry out a legitimate strike and that, in any case, the sanctions imposed should not be disproportionate to the seriousness of the violations (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 178). Therefore, the Committee asks the Government to amend sections 109 and 112 of the Labour Act so as to bring it into conformity with Article 3 of the Convention and to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s first report. It further notes the comments made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) in a communication dated 6 September 2005 concerning the application of the Convention in law and in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments thereon. The Committee takes note of the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Cases Nos. 1937, 2027, 2313 and 2365.

The Committee notes from Cases Nos. 2313 and 2365 examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association that several trade union members and officers have been arrested and initially charged under the Public Order and Security Act of 22 January 2002 (11:17) (POSA) for holding trade union workshops or demonstrations without authorization (Reports Nos. 334, 336 and 337, paragraphs 109-1121, 891-914 and 1633-1671 respectively). The Committee notes that the POSA and, in particular, its Part IV on public gatherings, confers discretionary power to the authorities to prohibit public gatherings and sanctions of fines and imprisonment for violation of any such prohibition. While noting that according to the Schedule, section 24 which concerns an obligation to notify the regulating authority of an intention to hold a public gathering, does not apply to public gatherings of members of professional, vocational or occupational bodies held for purposes which are not political or held by trade unions for bona fide trade union purposes, the Committee observes that the Act does not provide for any specific criteria concerning the determination of “bona fide purposes”. In these circumstances, and in light of the conclusions in the abovementioned cases, the Committee is concerned that this Act may be used in practice so as to impose sanctions on trade unionists for conducting a strike, protest, demonstration or other public gathering. The Committee recalls that the development of the trade union movement and the increasing recognition of its role as a social partner in its own right mean that workers’ organizations must be able to voice their opinions on political issues in the broad sense of the term and, in particular, to express their views publicly on a government’s economic and social policy (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 131). The Committee therefore requests that the Government take measures to ensure that the POSA is not used to infringe upon the right of workers’ organizations to express their views on the Government’s economic and social policy and to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

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