Report in which the committee requests to be kept informed of development - Report No 318, November 1999

1. 220. The Committee examined this case at its meetings in March 1995 (see 297th Report, paras. 484-537, approved by the Governing Body at its 262nd Session (March-April 1995)), March 1996 (see 302nd Report, paras. 447-479, approved by the Governing Body at its 265th Session (March 1996)), November 1996 (see 305th Report, paras. 327-371, approved by the Governing Body at its 267th Session (November 1996)), November 1997 (see 308th Report, paras. 404-450, approved by the Governing Body at its 270th Session (November 1997)), May 1998 (see 310th Report, paras. 432-473, approved by the Governing Body at its 272nd Session (June 1998)) and May 1999 (see 316th Report, paras. 570-617, approved by the Governing Body at its 275th Session (June 1999), during which it drew up interim conclusions.
2. 221. The Government furnished its observations in a communication dated 26 August 1999.
3. 222. Indonesia ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) in June 1998. It has also ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 223. During the course of its previous examination of this case, the Committee had noted that this case addressed very serious allegations of violations of trade union rights in Indonesia relating to the denial of the workers' right to establish organizations of their own choosing, the persistent interference by government authorities, the military and employers in trade union activities, and restrictions on collective bargaining and strike action. The case had also addressed serious allegations involving the murder, disappearance, arrest and detention of a number of trade union leaders and workers.
2. 224. The Committee had observed, however, that a series of measures had been taken by the Government over the previous year which had contributed to the positive development of the trade union situation in Indonesia. In particular, the Committee had noted that the Government ratified Convention No. 87 in June 1998 and received an ILO direct contacts mission to the country in August 1998, which had the mandate of assisting the Government in ensuring that its labour legislation was brought into full conformity with Conventions Nos. 87 and 98. The Committee had noted further that in line with the recommendations contained in the report of the direct contacts mission, the Government was redrafting its labour legislation in consultation with the social partners and with ILO technical assistance. On a practical level, all SBSI leaders and activists had been released from prison and the military had been issued instructions at all levels to refrain from intervening in labour disputes. The Committee had taken note of these developments with interest and had considered that they constituted significant progress with regard to freedom of association in Indonesia.
3. 225. At its June 1999 session, in the light of the Committee's interim conclusions, the Governing Body approved the following recommendations:
   • (a) Noting with interest that a series of measures have been taken by the Indonesian authorities over the past year which constitute significant progress with regard to freedom of association in Indonesia, the Committee trusts that this progress will continue and enable the industrial relations system prevailing in Indonesia to be brought fully in line with freedom of association principles.
   • (b) The Committee reiterates its request to the Government to institute without delay an independent judicial inquiry into the homicide of Mrs. Marsinah, a labour activist, which occurred over six years ago, so as to identify and punish the guilty parties. It requests the Government to keep it informed of the results thereof.
   • (c) Deeply regretting that Ms. Dita Sari, leader of Pusat Perjuangan Buruh Indonesia (PPBI), was arrested and detained for her participation in industrial action in the city of Surabaya on 8 July 1996, the Committee strongly urges the Government to ensure that the competent authorities take the appropriate measures for her immediate and unconditional release. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in this regard.
   • (d) The Committee draws the attention of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations to the legislative aspects of this case.

B. The Government's reply

1. 226. In its communication dated 26 August 1999, the Government first of all indicates that it agrees that there should be an independent judicial inquiry into the homicide of Mrs. Marsinah, a female labour activist who died in East Java Province in May 1993 further to her participation in strike action. The Government considers, however, that to guarantee and maintain the independent nature of such an inquiry, it should be instituted by an independent body and not by the Government itself. It is for this reason that on 25 June 1999, the Government approached the Indonesian National Commission of Human Rights which agreed to institute a judicial inquiry into this case. The inquiry team has visited Surabaya twice and contacted several related officials and institutions. The team has informed the Government that it needs more time to investigate in order to draw up its conclusions and recommendations.
2. 227. Turning to the issue of the detention of Ms. Dita Sari who was imprisoned following strike action, the Government states that Ms. Dita Sari was unconditionally released from prison on 5 July 1999 pursuant to Presidential Decision No. 68 signed on 2 July 1999. The Government further points out that Ms. Dita Sari has been free to carry out her trade union activities without any restrictions. For example, she recently participated in the ILO/Japan National Tripartite Seminar on Globalization and Industrial Relations which took place in Jakarta from 24-26 August 1999.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 228. The Committee notes that the remaining allegations in this case concern the homicide of Mrs. Marsinah, a labour activist, which occurred in May 1993 and the detention of Ms. Dita Sari, also a labour activist, who was imprisoned for having participated in strike action on 8 July 1996.
2. 229. As regards the alleged homicide of Mrs. Marsinah, the Committee had requested the Government (during its previous examination of this case), to institute without delay an independent judicial inquiry thereon, so as to identify and punish the guilty parties (316th Report, para. 608). In this respect, the Committee notes that on 25 June 1999 the Government approached the Indonesian National Commission of Human Rights which instituted a judicial inquiry into this case. The Committee further notes the Government's statement that while the inquiry team has made some progress in its investigation into this homicide, it needs more time to complete its work. The Committee regrets that over six years elapsed before a judicial inquiry was instituted into Mrs. Marsinah's homicide. Recalling that the killing, disappearance or serious injury of trade union leaders and trade unionists requires the institution of independent judicial inquiries in order to shed full light, at the earliest date, on the facts and the circumstances in which such actions occurred and in this way, to the extent possible, determine where responsibilities lie, punish the guilty parties and prevent the repetition of similar events (see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition, 1996, para. 51), the Committee trusts that this inquiry will elucidate the circumstances of Mrs. Marsinah's death and will allow to identify and punish the guilty parties. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the results of the judicial inquiry into the homicide of Mrs. Marsinah.
3. 230. During its previous examination of this case, the Committee had noted with deep regret that Ms. Dita Sari, a trade union leader of an independent labour organization, had been sentenced to four-and-a-half years' imprisonment on 22 April 1997 for having participated in strike action in the city of Surabaya on 8 July 1996. The Committee had emphasized that the detention of trade union leaders for reasons connected with their activities in defence of the interests of workers constituted a serious interference with civil liberties in general and with trade union rights in particular, and it had therefore insisted on the immediate and unconditional release of Ms. Dita Sari (316th Report, para. 609). The Committee now notes with interest the Government's statement that following the granting of a presidential amnesty, Ms. Dita Sari was unconditionally released from prison on 5 July 1999 and has been carrying out her trade union activities without any restrictions since then.