Interim Report - Report No 82, 1965

1. 65. The original complaint made by the National Federation of Schoolteachers (FENAMA) appears in a telegram dated 9 July 1963 to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (New York), which was forwarded to the I.L.O. When the complainants were informed of their right to send additional information in support of their complaint they furnished a note contained in a memorandum dated 20 August 1963.
2. 66. These communications were forwarded to the Government of the Dominican Republic, which replied in a note couched in general terms; this note was remitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations on 18 September 1963 by the Permanent Representative of the Dominican Republic to that organisation. The note was then forwarded to the I.L.O. At its 35th Session (November 1963) the Committee on Freedom of Association decided to adjourn its examination of the case to its next meeting, and requested the Government to be good enough to forward directly to the I.L.O its detailed observations on the specific allegations. In a communication dated 26 December 1963 the Government forwarded its reply concerning those allegations directly to the I.L.O, and the Committee proceeded to an initial examination of the case at its 36th Session (February 1964). On 20 January and 5 February 1965 the Government transmitted further communications.
3. 67. The Dominican Republic has ratified both 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. 68. In their memorandum the complainants assert that the Government had openly given support to a parallel trade union organisation, and had been present at the installation ceremony of the Executive Committee of that organisation, but had not granted FENAMA the interviews it had requested although FENAMA is a majority organisation with 102 affiliated organisations. FENAMA then appealed by letter to the President of the Republic and explained the situation in which the teaching profession found itself and also submitted a number of claims. The only reply the President gave was to appear on television making statements discreditable to FENAMA. According to the complainants the Government issued an order for the discharge of several teachers and the headmaster of a secondary school, contrary to the guarantees of security of employment granted to the teaching profession by the National Constitution, the Education Law and the Ordinance of the National Council of Education. The President's reply to FENAMA's claims was merely to accuse FENAMA of political activity without making any reference whatsoever to its complaints, in which it protested about political pressure exercised on teachers by provincial governments and the party authorities. The aim of the Government had been that of replacing the schoolmasters by persons loyal to the Dominican Revolutionary Party. Attached to the complaint of the complainants is a resolution adopted by a trade union requesting that this political interference in the teaching profession should cease, together with excerpts from the National Constitution, the Education Law and a circular issued by the Secretariat of State for Education, Fine Arts and Worship, which states that before a person is appointed as a teacher the responsible provincial government should be consulted. Finally the letter containing the memorandum states that as a measure of reprisal 51 FENAMA leaders were dismissed from their posts.
2. 69. The note from the Permanent Representative of the Dominican Republic to the United Nations merely points out that the Government was acting in accordance with Constitutional precepts when it carried out sanctions against 49 national schoolmasters for having organised an illegal strike largely for political reasons. In the Government's reply dated 26 December 1963, it is stated in general terms that a satisfactory solution has been found to the problems which gave rise to the complaints made by FENAMA, that both Dominican schools and teachers are given the proper attention which their merits call for, and that consequently there is no reason to continue the dispute.
3. 70. To sum up, the complainants assert that for political reasons the services of several members of the teaching profession were terminated in order to substitute for them adherents of a particular party, that the Government openly gave support to a rival trade union organisation and discredited the complaining organisation, and that furthermore reprisals were taken against 51 leaders of that union who were dismissed from their posts.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 71. The Committee considered at its 36th Session that the charges concerning dismissal of teaching staff for political reasons, and interference by the party authorities in the teaching world contrary to the security of employment of schoolteachers guaranteed by national legislation, constituted a problem which was not within its province. This was not the case, however, as regards the allegations concerning dismissal of FENAMA leaders as a measure of reprisal and the allegations according to which the Government has favoured a particular trade union organisation while discrediting the complaining organisation, whose petitions it neither answers nor heeds.
2. 72. Indeed, the Committee has always upheld the principle that workers should enjoy adequate protection against all acts of discrimination tending to impair trade union freedom in respect of their employment, as laid down in Article 1 of Convention No. 98. The reply of the Government in regard to the allegation that 51 leaders of FENAMA were dismissed from their posts is somewhat vague. The note from the Permanent Representative of the Dominican Republic to the United Nations refers to sanctions taken against 49 schoolteachers because of a political strike. The Government's note dated 26 December 1963 merely indicates in general terms that all problems relating to the teaching profession have been solved. The Committee considered consequently that the information forwarded by the Government was not sufficiently precise to enable it to reach a conclusion on this case, and requested certain additional information.
3. 73. As regards the alleged interference by the Government in the sense of favouring the other rival trade union organisation and discrediting FENAMA, and of not hearing its complaints, the Government had not forwarded any observations. In view of the importance the Committee attaches to the principle embodied in Article 3 of Convention No. 87, ratified by the Dominican Republic, a principle which states that " Workers' and employers' organisations shall have the right ... to organise their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes " and that " The public authorities shall refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof ", the Committee requested the Government to be good enough to furnish more detailed information on this aspect of the case.
4. 74. By a communication transmitted to the I.L.O on 20 January 1965 the Government referred to this matter, but confined itself to stating very tersely that in the opinion of the Secretariat of State for Education and Fine Arts there had been no violation of trade union rights as far as FENAMA was concerned. In its note dated 5 February 1965 the Government states that it " maintains normal relations with FENAMA and that nothing impedes or interferes with the carrying out of the programmes of that Federation ".