Interim Report - Report No 135, March 1973

157. These cases (with the exception of Case No. 678, which refers to subsequent complaints) were examined by the Committee at its session in February 1972, when it submitted to the Governing Body, at its 185th Session, a report thereon, which is contained in the Committee's 129th Report. At that session the Governing Body received from the Government of Spain a communication dated 29: February 1972, of which the Committee had no opportunity to take cognizance. In these circumstances the Governing Body decided to refer back to the Committee for further examination the cases concerning Spain together with the aforementioned communication from the Government. Subsequently the Committee received another communication from the Government, dated 13 May 1972. In its communication dated 29 February 1972, the Government, inter alia, had raised objections to the effect that some of the complaints contained expressions which were offensive to the Spanish Government and that they expressed support for clandestine organisations. In its communication of 13 May 1972, the Government declared itself ready to co-operate with the Committee but once again expressed reservations on certain points to which it had already referred in its communication of 29 February 1972.

1. 157. These cases (with the exception of Case No. 678, which refers to subsequent complaints) were examined by the Committee at its session in February 1972, when it submitted to the Governing Body, at its 185th Session, a report thereon, which is contained in the Committee's 129th Report. At that session the Governing Body received from the Government of Spain a communication dated 29: February 1972, of which the Committee had no opportunity to take cognizance. In these circumstances the Governing Body decided to refer back to the Committee for further examination the cases concerning Spain together with the aforementioned communication from the Government. Subsequently the Committee received another communication from the Government, dated 13 May 1972. In its communication dated 29 February 1972, the Government, inter alia, had raised objections to the effect that some of the complaints contained expressions which were offensive to the Spanish Government and that they expressed support for clandestine organisations. In its communication of 13 May 1972, the Government declared itself ready to co-operate with the Committee but once again expressed reservations on certain points to which it had already referred in its communication of 29 February 1972.
2. 158. When it met on 30 May 1972, the Committee considered the situation with respect to the various cases pending with regard to Spain. In the report which it submitted to the Governing Body at its 186th Session, the Committee stated (paragraph 6 of its 131st Report, approved by the Governing Body at that session) that, while it was unable to agree with the Government's reservations on certain questions of principle raised in its letter of 13 May 1972, the Committee noted with interest the Government's statement that it was prepared to co-operate with the Committee, and the fact that the Government had supplied observations concerning some of the allegations by a communication dated 26 May 1972. The Committee decided to adjourn its examination of the various cases until its next session, pending receipt of the Government's observations on the other outstanding matters.
3. 159. At its meeting held on 6 November 1972 the Committee gave further consideration to the situation with respect to the cases concerning Spain, and in the report it submitted to the Governing Body at its 188th Session (paragraph 8 of its 133rd Report, approved by the Governing Body at that session), the Committee noted with interest that, by four communications dated 23 October and one communication dated 28 October 1972, the Government had forwarded its observations on Cases Nos. 612, 637, 658, 667 and 678. Considering that these observations had been received too late to permit them to be examined in substance, the Committee decided to adjourn its examination of the cases in question until its February 1973 Session.
4. 160. The Committee observes that in these five communications the Government again refers to the statements it made in its communications of 29 February and 13 May 1972, reiterating and reaffirming the points made therein. More specifically, in some of its communications of 23 October 1972, the Government renews its objections to certain complaints on the ground that they concern organisations which under Spanish law are non-existent, or quote their pamphlets or contain insulting expressions. The Government nevertheless states that, as further proof of the Spanish Government's desire to co-operate voluntarily with the ILO, it is supplying information on the understanding that, as repeatedly stated by the Committee, "the fact that a government replies to a request for information on a specific complaint does not imply that the government recognises the accuracy or - even less - the validity of the complaint but merely that it is co-operating with the Committee and with the Governing Body".
5. 161. Before proceeding with its examination in substance of the various cases, the Committee wishes to point out, as it has done in the past, that it can assume no responsibility for the terms in which complaints are presented to it, but that respect for itself and for the task entrusted to it calls for the observance of the proprieties appropriate to the procedure followed and that the use of language calculated to embitter rather than to elucidate controversy should be avoided.
6. 162. Spain has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

• Case No. 612
  163. 163 The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) sent a communication dated 27 October 1969 in which it stated that Antonio Maleta Egaña, José Luis González del Rio and Emilio Cabezudo Martinez had been brought to trial and sentenced for belonging to the General Workers' Union (UGT) and for having attended training courses abroad, on their return from which they set about canvassing for members. According to the text of the judgement, supplied by the complainants, such acts constituted an offence of illicit association within the meaning of sections 173(3) and 174(1), third paragraph, of the Penal Code, since the UGT had been declared illegal by a Decree dated 12 September 1936 and by Acts dated 10 February 1939 and 17 May 1958.
  164. 164 The complainants further stated that the following workers had been sentenced for belonging to the UGT and for having attended trade union training courses abroad; Gregorio Illoro Ruiz, Nicolás Martinez Esturo, José Andrés Paul Tejedor, Ramón Lucio Garcia Delgado, José Ramón Ureta González, José Luis Echave Asensio, Miguel Loizaga Garrastachu, Francisco Gamiz Ruiz, Santiago Tapia Hernández, Gregorio Bárcena Madariaga, Teodoro Pinilla Marchal, Ignacio Muñoz Merino, José Luis Cámara Ricondo, Juan José Berrocal Uribechevarria, Arturo Agüero Riaño, Avelino Copa Gutiérrez, Adolofo Jiménez Garaigorobil and Eduardo López Albizu. By a further communication dated 30 October 1969, the ICFTU sent a copy of the judgement pronounced on 13 October 1969 in this case, whereby sentence was pronounced upon the persons concerned for the offence of illicit association.
  165. 165 The World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) sent a communication dated 13 May 1970 containing allegations as to the arrest of numerous trade unionists and workers accused of illicit association and of taking part in various strikes.
  166. 166 The International Metalworkers' Federation (IMF) sent two communications dated 29 April and 11 May 1970 containing allegations concerning, respectively, the sentencing of a person for supposedly trying to organise the National Confederation of Labour (CNF), and the sentencing of various others for supposedly being members of the UGT. Bearing in mind the fact that, under the Committee's procedure, complaints from international organisations of workers which do not have consultative status with the ILO are receivable only if they refer to matters directly affecting organisations affiliated to the international organisations in question, the Committee, on the basis of additional information supplied by the IMF on 30 July 1970, recommended the Governing Body to decide that the complaint of 11 May 1970 was receivable and that the complaint of 29 April 1970 was irreceivable. The complaint of 11 May 1970 refers to the sentencing of José Agustin Serrano Sebastián, Salustiano Sold Albiñabarre, Enrique Alonso Iglesias, Félix Garcia Fanjul, Eusebio Virto Dañobeitia, Luis Maria Tellaeche Vilumbrales, Agustin Alday Ochoa y Olano, Santiago Martinez Gómez and Pablo Checa Aznar.
  167. 167 In its first communication, dated 10 April 1970, the Government announced that Santiago Tapia, Juan José Berrocal, Adolfo Jiménez, José Luis Echave, Eduardo López Albizu, Arturo Agüero and Ignacio Muñoz (mentioned above in paragraph 164) had been released, while Gregorio Illoro Ruiz and Nicolás Martinez Esturo (mentioned in the same paragraph) had been sentenced to terms of several years' imprisonment and were serving their sentences.
  168. 168 In its further communication of 23 October 1972, the Government refers to the complaints presented by the ICFTU on 27 and 30 October 1969 and to the IMF's complaint of 11 May 1970. The Government announces that the persons referred to in these complaints were judged by the competent courts, none of them having been charged on account of trade union activities. All those whom the court found guilty are now free as a result of the amnesty granted by Decree No. 2326/71 of 23 September 1971.
  169. 169 The Government has still not furnished its observations: on the complaint of the WFTU as set forth in its communication of 13 May 1970.
  170. 170 The Committee observes that the complaints of the ICFTU and the IMF, concerning which the Government has furnished its observations, refer to the sentencing of various workers accused of being members of the General Workers' Union and of taking part in activities connected with that organisation or with other trade union organisations. The Government's statement that none of the persons referred to was charged "on account of trade union activities" would appear to be based on the fact that the UGT has been declared illegal in Spain. In this connection the Committee must point out once again, as it has in the paste, that a situation in which workers' organisations are not permitted if they are constituted outside the trade union organisation recognised by law, is contrary to the principle that workers have the right to establish organisations of their own choosing without previous authorisation. Moreover, the imposition of penalties upon workers on account of their membership of such organisations is contrary to the principle that workers should be free to join the organisation of their choice.
  171. 171 In these circumstances, the Committee recommends the Governing Body: (a) to take note of the Government's statement that the persons referred to in paragraphs 163, 164 and 166 have been amnestied, and are now free; (b) to draw the attention of the Government to the remarks set forth in paragraph 170; and (c) to request the Government to furnish its observations on the complaint referred to in paragraph 165.
• Case No. 637
  172. 172 The WFTU sent a communication dated 22 July 1970 containing allegations as to the repression by the police of a demonstration by building workers in Granada in support of certain claims. The police intervention resulted in the death of three workers. The WCL, in a communication dated 27 July 1970, referred to and supplied detailed information in connection with the same incidents. This information may be summarised as follows. When collective negotiations with the employers were broken off on 20 July 1970 the workers decided to come out on strike, and the following day they marched in a peaceful demonstration through the side streets of Granada to the outskirts of the city, where building works were going on. From there they were ordered to return to the trade union building, and they waited outside that building while a Committee representing the workers went in to see the delegate of the official trade union. When this move proved fruitless it was decided to continue the strike, and the workers (approximately 3,000), in two large groups, set off to return to their homes. Afraid to separate in case they were arrested, the workers were charged by the police, by whom they were surrounded, and began to run in all directions. It was at that moment that the police made use of their firearms and killed and wounded a number of workers. Later, some policemen also opened fire upon workers who were taking wounded comrades to hospital.
  173. 173 By a communication dated 26 August 1970, the WCL supplied additional information sent from Spain by the National Committee of the Workers' Catholic Action Brotherhood (HOAC). It appears from this information, which gives a detailed account of the events which occurred, that violence was used by both the forces of order and the demonstrators before the police opened fire. The document states that "it is not easy to determine the extent to which this counter-attack (by the demonstrators) really placed the police in danger. It appears to have actually done so in one specific case". The HOAC adds that it may be seen from this information how much truth there was in the government statement televised and published in the press, which was couched in the following terms: "This morning, without waiting for the resumption of the talks for the negotiations of the new collective labour agreement for the building industry, which were broken off yesterday, a number of incidents took place in various streets in Granada, culminating in a move by a large crowd of demonstrators which made it necessary for the police to be summoned. As soon as the police arrived they were attacked by the demonstrators, who overturned a bus belonging to the armed police and three other vehicles, as well as a number of private cars, using as projectiles bricks, stones and other objects, while at the same time detonations were heard whose origin is being investigated. As a result of the attack upon the police, PC Manuel Torres Burgos was very seriously wounded; Captain Francisco Cabreros Anta, who was in command of the force, was badly hurt and thirty-five other policemen received minor injuries. In view of the gravity of the situation, the disproportion in the numbers and the repeated nature of the attacks, it was necessary to repel the onslaught, as a result of which a number of demonstrators were injured, three of them fatally - Antonio Cristóbal Ibánez, Manuel Sánchez Mesa and another who has not yet been identified - while six others received serious injuries. On account of the seriousness of these incidents, which occurred without any apparent motive, an urgent inquiry into them has been ordered. The Civil Government, which deeply deplores what has happened, further wishes it to be made known that it will not tolerate any breach of public order, which will be maintained by every necessary means."
  174. 174 In its communication dated 23 October 1972, the Government supplies the following information. In respect of the events that took place in Granada on 21 July 1970 various steps were taken by the competent authorities. As a consequence two persons charged with the offence of insulting the armed forces were given light sentences and have since been freed. As regards the action taken by the police, an immediate inquiry was carried out by the competent authority to ascertain the facts and establish who was responsible. The inquiry was discontinued when it was proved that those allegedly responsible had acted in legitimate self-defence.
  175. 175 In a number of cases in the past in which the dispersal of public meetings or demonstrations by the police involved loss of life, the Committee has attached great importance to the immediate holding of an impartial inquiry into the circumstances and to the regular legal procedure being followed to determine the justification and responsibility for the action taken by the police.
  176. 176 The Committee observes in the present case that from the detailed information supplied by the complainants it would appear that during the demonstration which took place in Granada in connection with a labour dispute, acts of violence were committed both by the demonstrators and by the police, and that the latter finally resorted to the use of their firearms, with the result that three workers died and a number of others were wounded. The Committee also observes that the authorities carried out an inquiry, which established that the members of the police allegedly responsible had acted in legitimate self-defence.
  177. 177 In these circumstances the Committee can only recommend the Governing Body to take note of the information supplied by the complainants and by the Government.
• Case No. 658
  178. 178 By a communication dated 2 February 1971, the ICFTU announced that the following trade unionists had been arrested: Enrique Mugica Herzog, Nicolás Redondo Urbieta, Ambrosio Gutiérrez González, Felipe González Márquez and Cristóbal Caliz Almirón. On 15 February 1971, the ICFTU sent further information to the effect that the persons named had been charged with the offence of illicit association, and one of them also with that of illegal propaganda. According to the indictment, these persons had been present at a meeting between members of the so-called Spanish Socialist Workers' Party and members of the General Union of Workers. At the meeting-place (the home of one of the accused) propaganda leaflets and other documents had been found. The persons concerned had been released on bail.
  179. 179 The Government's first observations were furnished by a communication dated 11 May 1971, in which it confirmed that the above information was correct. The case was undergoing preliminary investigation.
  180. 180 At its session in November 1971, the Committee decided that the Government should be asked to supply additional information as to the outcome of the preliminary investigation and - unless this investigation resulted in a non-suit - to furnish the text of the judgement and the grounds adduced therefor.
  181. 181 In its further communication dated 23 October 1972 the Government states that the persons in question were arrested for having organised subversive groups to make attacks against the security of the State and for having been found in possession of propaganda inciting to violence. The evidence will be pronounced upon when judgement is passed by the courts on the case now before them. All the accused are at present at liberty.
  182. 182 In these circumstances, the Committee recommends the Governing Body: (a) to take note of the fact that the persons concerned have been provisionally released; and (b) in accordance with its usual practice, to request the Government to supply the text of the judgement handed down in this case, together with the grounds adduced therefor.
• Case No. 667
  183. 183 The IMF and the ICFTU each sent a communication dated 24 May 1971 and the WCL sent one dated 27 May 1971. All these communications contained allegations relating to the arrest, upon his arrival in Madrid, of Carlos Pardo, an official of a German trade union. According to the first two complainants, Mr. Pardo had been accused of illegal propaganda, in which he was said to have engaged in the Federal Republic of Germany.
  184. 184 In its communication of 23 October 1972 the Government denies that Mr. Carlos Pardo was arrested on the charge indicated, or that an attempt was thus made to interfere with trade union freedom in another country, as claimed in one of the complaints. The Government maintains that Mr. Pardo was arrested on 15 May 1971, when he arrived in Spain from abroad, so that he could be questioned about various matters thought to be of an unlawful nature, including his activities in connection with subversive groups inside the country. When he was placed at the disposal of the judicial authority, the latter ordered his release and he is now outside Spain. The Government adds that Mr. Pardo had been sentenced previously in Spain for offences under ordinary law.
  185. 185 The Committee has maintained on a number of occasions that in all cases in which trade union leaders are preventively detained, these measures may involve a serious interference with the exercise of trade union rights, and has always emphasised the right of all detained persons to receive a fair trial at the earliest possible moment.
  186. 186 The Committee observes that in the present case Mr. Carlos Pardo was arrested so that he could be questioned about matters thought to be of an unlawful nature, and then placed at the disposal of the judicial authority, which ordered his release. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to take note of the information supplied by the Government, and in particular of the fact that Mr. Carlos Pardo is now at liberty outside Spain, and to decide that this case does not call for further examination.
• Case No. 678
  187. 187 The WFTU sent a communication dated 14 February 1972 containing allegations as to the arrest, in Madrid, of Carmen Frías Arroyo and Angel de la Cruz Bermedo on account of their trade union activities. The latter is President of the Social Section of the Provincial Press, Radio and Television Union.
  188. 188 The IMF sent a communication dated 10 March 1972 containing allegations as to the arrest of nine workers accused of illicit association and trade union activities in connection with an organisation affiliated to the IMF. The workers in question are José Maria Zufiaur Narvaiza, José Luis Longarte Fernández, José Luis Zunzarren Aberasturi, Manuel Zaguirre Cano, Antonio Martinez Ovejero, Nicolás David Mora, José Luis Aldasoro, Isidoro Gálvez Garcia and José Maria de la Hoz.
  189. 189 In its first communication concerning these complaints, dated 26 May 1972, the Government stated that the persons referred to were not in any way accused of engaging in trade union activities, but of engaging in subversion, and that they had all been released on bail following the appropriate judicial proceedings. In its second communication, dated 28 October 1972, the Government states that the fact that some of these persons hold trade union office is quite unconnected with their arrest. The Government explains that the persons mentioned in the WFTU's complaint have been charged with setting up a subversive organisation, while those referred to in the IMF's complaint have been charged with engaging in activities designed to organise a nation-wide subversive body at a meeting attended by delegates from various parts of the country. In both cases the accused are still at liberty and the judicial proceedings are taking their course.
  190. 190 By various communications dated 14 and 15 March and 17 April 1972, the WFTU, the IMF, the ICFTU and the WCL made allegations concerning intervention by the police in demonstrations organised by workers at the Bazán Dockyard in El Ferrol, who were on strike, as a result of which two workers died and a number of others were injured or arrested. The IMF stressed the fact that the action taken by the workers was in protest at the signing of a collective agreement, which they found unsatisfactory, with the official trade union body, and at the dismissal of six workers because they had taken part in an earlier strike. The WFTU, for its part, stated that the repression of labour disputes formed part of a policy for concerted action by the Ministry of Labour, the Ministry of the Interior and the official trade unions with a view to stifling the workers' struggle to secure the granting of their just social demands, and breaking their strikes. The WFTU added that attention had been focused upon such forms of concerted action in two confidential documents emanating from the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of the Interior in which instructions were given to the official trade unions, plans were set forth for intervention by the Government with a view to preventing labour disputes, inclusive of the detention of those held responsible for "unlawful activities", it was stipulated that it was the task of the Civil Governor to assess the political implications of a dispute and provision was made for the imposing of sanctions in respect of workers' meetings and the taking of court action against their leaders.
  191. 191 In its communication of 26 May 1972, the Government stated that the events that had taken place in El Ferrol were now being considered by the courts, which were hearing the charges against the persons involved, and that it was consequently impossible to provide any final information on the subject at that time. The Government was nevertheless in a position to state that the Spanish authorities had evidence that certain groups of agitators, trained and subsidised from abroad, had caused serious public disturbances involving threats to the safety of persons and property. These groups had violently attacked a small number of members of the security forces, who were merely attempting to block their passage, with the result that twenty persons were injured, including the two officers in charge. The security forces were accordingly obliged to fire into the air to dissuade the attackers, who nevertheless persisted in their attacks. It was only at this point that the security forces found themselves obliged, in defence of their own lives, to use their weapons, firing into the ground, as might be seen from the fact that most of the injured were wounded in the legs. Unfortunately, continued the Government, the death of two members of the attacking group was to be regretted.
  192. 192 As regards the documents mentioned by the WFTU, the Government stated that they were a pure fabrication and that any conclusions that it was claimed possible to deduce from them were therefore wholly without foundation. "The contents had already been published by certain sections of the press, which seems to indicate that they were originated and diffused by persons who unremittingly attempt to use every opportunity (including the ILO, which they endeavour in this way to implicate in their activities) of pursuing their slanderous campaigns against the Spanish Government."
  193. 193 In its communication of 28 October 1972, the Government states that the judicial proceedings arising out of the disorders which occurred at El Ferrol are continuing. Some of the accused have been released on bail and others have remained in custody.
  194. 194 In view of the fact that the various matters referred to in the allegations made in this case are at present being considered by the courts, the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
       • (a) with regard to the allegations relating to the arrest of persons on charges of illicit association and other trade union activities;
       • (i) to take note of the fact that the persons mentioned in paragraphs 187 and 188 are provisionally at liberty; and
       • (ii) to request the Government to supply the text of the judgements pronounced in the legal proceedings concerned, together with the grounds adduced therefor;
       • (b) with regard to the events which took place at El Ferrol, to request the Government to be good enough to furnish information as to the outcome of the proceedings initiated to ascertain the facts and establish who was responsible, and to supply the text of the judgement handed down in this respect, together with the grounds adduced therefor.