Definitive Report - Report No 95, 1967

1. 16. The Committee previously examined this case at its sessions held in February 1965 and May 1966, when it submitted interim reports to the Governing Body which are contained in paragraphs 76 to 81 of the 82nd Report and 208 to 214 of the 90th Report respectively.
2. 17. Honduras has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 18. This case refers to the assassination of Mr. Humberto Portillo, referred to as a " Christian trade union leader " in the complaint presented by the Latin American Federation of Christian Trade Unionists. The observations initially sent by the Government on 20 May 1964 appeared to attribute this and other crimes to a clandestine organisation whose purpose was to promote agitation among workers and their unions. These observations referred to Mr. Portillo as a " trade union leader ". The Committee examined the abovementioned documents at its session held in February 1965 and recommended the Governing Body to request the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the investigations which the Government had stated it would make to clear up this matter.
2. 19. At its session held in May 1966 the Committee took note of a further communication from the Government, dated 18 January 1966, which stated in substance that the investigation undertaken had not up to that time established the identity of the criminal or criminals or the motive for the crime, but that, in the opinion of the Government, there were no grounds for supposing the murder of Mr. Portillo to be necessarily connected with trade union activities and that in any case the Government was not responsible in any way for what had happened. The information submitted to the Committee to enable it to consider the case was not detailed or consistent enough to show whether the act denounced by the Latin American Federation of Christian Trade Unionists and which in itself constituted a crime was in any way connected with freedom of association. In these circumstances the Committee recommended the Governing Body in paragraph 214 of its 90th Report to express the hope that all steps necessary to establish the truth would be taken and to request the Government to keep it informed of any fresh information that might come to light.
3. 20. The Government answered this request for information by a communication dated 18 November 1966 from which it appeared that the motive for the crime and the identity of its perpetrator were still unknown. The Government went on to state that it had made inquiries in order to ascertain whether Mr. Portillo was in actual fact a trade union leader, and attached an attestation signed by the Vice-President of the Authentic Trade Union Federation of Honduras (F.A.S.H.) which stated that Mr. Portillo had never been a member of any of the member unions of F.A.S.H or held any office of employment in that organisation. The Government therefore considered that the person in question was not a trade unionist, although that circumstance in no way affected the continuation of the inquiry concerning his death.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 21. Summing up the case, the Committee notes that, in the first place, the complaint referred to Mr. Portillo as a " Christian trade union leader " without giving further details. In the second place, the Government, after referring to Mr. Portillo as a trade union leader in its initial communications and giving indications that his assassination had been an act of terrorism aimed at workers and their unions, had subsequently stated that it had reached the conviction that he was not a trade unionist, and had reported that the investigation of the crime had produced no results up to the time of writing.
2. 22. In the circumstances, in view of the discrepancy between the terms of the complaint and those of the Government's observations as regards Mr. Portillo's capacity as a trade union leader, and bearing in mind the vagueness of the information set forth in the complaint and the fact that the investigation carried out by the authorities has not brought to light the exact circumstances of the crime, it does not appear that sufficient proof has been furnished to show that the assassination of Mr. Humberto Portillo raises any question relating to the exercise of trade union rights which would warrant further examination of this complaint.

23. The Committee therefore recommends the Governing Body to decide that the case does not call for further examination.