Interim Report - Report No 299, June 1995

428. The Committee already examined the substance of these cases at its meeting in June 1994 when it presented an interim report to the Governing Body (see 294th Report of the Committee, paras. 586-625).

1. 428. The Committee already examined the substance of these cases at its meeting in June 1994 when it presented an interim report to the Governing Body (see 294th Report of the Committee, paras. 586-625).
2. 429. In communications dated 27 and 29 July 1994, the UMT made additional allegations concerning Case No. 1691. The International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers (IUF) presented allegations concerning this case on 4 August 1994.
3. 430. Subsequently, in a communication dated 9 March 1995, the Government submitted new observations on these three complaints.
4. 431. Morocco has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No. 87); it has, however, ratified the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the cases

1. 432. At its meeting of June 1994, the Committee noted with concern that the allegations in the cases pertained to numerous infringements of freedom of association in four Moroccan private enterprises: acts of anti-union discrimination against trade union delegates and trade unionists; acts of interference by employers and public authorities against UMT trade union executives; and violence by the police and authorities during strikes.
2. 433. On that occasion the Committee had, in particular, requested the following information from the Government (see 294th Report of the Committee):
   • - the Committee regrets that the Government has not replied to the latest allegations by the complainant allegation concerning violations of trade union rights at the Plastima factory in Casablanca (violence by the police in dispersing strikers, arbitrary dismissals, replacement of strikers by strike breakers). It urgently requests the Government to submit its observations concerning these allegations without delay (294th Report, paras. 615 and 625(a));
   • - results of the legal appeals filed by the four trade union delegates and members at the SINET enterprise in Casablanca (Case No. 1687) and the seven workers at the FILARSY enterprise (Case No. 1691) contesting their dismissal (294th Report, paras. 620 and 625(a));
   • - information concerning the status of workers arrested at the Mansour Ed Dahbi hotel (Case No. 1712) - Mr. Aboul Hanane Abdeljalil, Mr. Abou Nouass Latifa, Mr. El Hasnaoui Ahmed, Mr. El Korssa Aberahmane, Mr. Boukentar Mohammed, Mr. Souhal Fatima, Mr. Boulal Zohra and Mr. Kati Mohammed - indicating whether they have been released and reinstated in their jobs (294th Report, paras. 622 and 625(d)).
3. 434. The Committee had also requested that inquiries be held to determine the actual reasons for the dismissals of Mr. Bouna Houcine, General Secretary of the UMT enterprise trade union and Mr. Mouzoune Hassan, Deputy General Secretary, as well as Mr. Attor Ahmed and Mr. Lachgar Brahim, trade union delegates at the SINET enterprise (Case No. 1687); of the seven members of the UMT trade union executive at the FILARSY enterprise (Case No. 1691); of every member of the UMT trade union executive at the Mansour Ed Dahbi hotel in Marrakesh, in addition to the suspension of 98 workers at the Mansour Ed Dahbi hotel. If it were proved that these people were dismissed or suspended owing to their trade union activities, they should be reinstated in their jobs. The Committee requested the Government to provide it with the results of these inquiries (294th Report, paras. 620 and 625(a)).
4. 435. As regards the police interventions during the sympathy strikes by workers at the FILARSY enterprise (Case No. 1691) and the Mansour Ed Dahbi hotel (Case No. 1712), the Committee had requested the Government to see that an independent, impartial and in-depth inquiry was carried out to determine the nature of the police actions referred to by the complainant organization, to assess responsibility, and to inform it of the results of this inquiry (294th Report, paras. 621 and 625(c)).
5. 436. Generally speaking, the Committee regretted that once again in these cases it had been presented with allegations concerning serious infringements of the trade union rights of Moroccan workers and the authorities' refusal to intervene in order to ensure respect for these rights in practice. The Committee appealed to the Government to take appropriate measures so that workers would be assured of the free exercise of trade union rights and urged the Government to take the necessary steps so that these rights would be recognized and respected in fact as well as in law (294th Report, paras. 624 and 625(e)).

B. New allegations of the complainant organizations

• Case No. 1691
  437. 437 In communications dated 27 and 29 July 1994, the UMT states that it wishes to bring to the attention of the Committee events related to the strike by 1,200 workers at the Tazi Jalil Bisma enterprise in Sidi Slimane (hereafter the BISMA enterprise). This strike, which began on 26 July 1994 for a period of 48 hours, had amongst its objectives the respect of trade union rights, the issuing of work cards, protest against anti-union manoeuvres by the management of the enterprise and its systematic refusal to negotiate and to reinstate 14 persons who had been arbitrarily dismissed after the establishment, on 17 July, of a trade union affiliated to the UMT.
  438. 438 The UMT states that on 26 July the police and the auxiliary forces took brutal action against the strikers and arrested 11 UMT activists, including three women. They also included the Deputy General Secretary of the UMT branch trade union in Sidi Slimane, Khallaf Saïd, the General Secretary of the UMT trade union in the BISMA enterprise, Moukhbir Mohammed, and his deputy Bouzidi Cherkhaoui.
  439. 439 The UMT adds that during his arrest, Moukhbir Mohammed was the victim of physical and verbal assault. It also alleges that the police unlawfully retained his national identity card before releasing him, after one day of detention. Following these extremely serious acts, the UMT sent a written protest on 28 July 1994 to the Prime Minister and the Ministers of Justice, Employment and Human Rights, requested the immediate opening of an inquiry and the taking of sanctions against the authors who perpetrated these acts.

C. New reply of the Government

• Case No. 1687
  440. 440 In its communication of 9 March 1995, the Government recalls that the dismissals of workers in the industrial cleaning enterprise of Casablanca (hereafter SINET enterprise) resulted from a dispute between the enterprise and its workers concerning the organization of the election of staff delegates and the non-payment by the employer of outstanding social contributions.
  441. 441 As regards the non-payment of outstanding social contributions, the Government states that the SINET enterprise stated that the delay in the payment of contributions was due to major financial difficulties. However, the employer had since then fully settled the matter with the national social security fund.
  442. 442 As regards the dismissal of the four workers from the SINET enterprise, the Government recalls that these workers have lodged an appeal with the competent court. The Government assures the Committee that it will be informed of the final decision handed down by this court.
• Case No. 1691
  443. 443 As regards the dismissal of the seven workers from the FILARSY enterprise, the Government recalls that the competent court is examining this matter and will be responsible for handing down the judgement.
  444. 444 As regards the intervention of the police during the sympathy strike held in this enterprise, the Government points out that the strike must be set within the framework of the legislative and statutory provisions concerning the maintenance of public order. The Government states that the public authorities will intervene to prohibit any assembly which is contrary to public order or freedom of work. This is particularly true in the case of labour disputes. Amongst other matters, the Government states that in this case the police intervention was justified by the absence of any prior authorization and by the need to guarantee the freedom of work of non-striking workers. The Government adds that a committee for the settlement of disputes, chaired by the prefect or Wali and made up of representatives of the parties concerned, has been set up in each prefecture to examine the labour disputes and to try to find an acceptable solution. The Government also states that the police intervene only if a written authorization has been given by the Wali or the prefect.
  445. 445 In its communication of 7 November 1994, the Government comments on the situation at the BISMA enterprise. It confirms initially that after a general assembly of workers had been held in full freedom and without any obstacle a trade union executive was set up in July 1994 within the enterprise.
  446. 446 As regards the dismissal of workers in this enterprise, the Government states that this was not related to any trade union activity of any kind, but that it was rather the result of the application of an agreement between the management of the enterprise and its workers whereby the employer had the right to fix the number of seasonal workers. The Government recalls that the activities of the BISMA enterprise are of a seasonal agricultural nature which necessarily imply variations in the labour needs of the enterprise. According to the Government, when the enterprise made reductions in its staff, the members of the trade union executive brought in workers to block access to the enterprise thus impeding the free movement of trucks belonging to the enterprise and seriously disrupting work. The Government states that the officials concerned tried in vain to convince the workers and the members of the trade union executive to leave the way free for both the trucks and those workers who wanted to resume their work.
  447. 447 As regards the respect of negotiation, the Government emphasizes that several meetings were organized to try and resolve the different labour disputes, and the Government appends copies of the minutes of these meetings to its observations. The Government alleges that the parties finally reached an agreement on the terms of a settlement to end the dispute.
• Case No. 1712
  448. 448 In its communication of 9 March 1995, the Government states that as regards the situation in the Mansour Ed Dahbi hotel in Marrakech, that the inquiries carried out by the labour inspectorate and the contacts which it established with a group of workers in this hotel show that two dismissed workers were reinstated in another enterprise within the same hotel chain. The other workers preferred to take their case to the court of the first instance, claiming damages for their alleged arbitrary dismissal rather than reinstatement in their workplaces.
  449. 449 As regards the intervention of the police in this hotel, the Government uses the same arguments it put forward in the case of the FILARSY enterprise whereby the matter must be set within the framework of the legislative and statutory provisions respecting the maintenance of public order.
  450. 450 The Government concludes by recalling that the exercise of the right to strike is guaranteed by the Constitution and that this right is exercised in practice in all spheres of economic activity. The protection of strikers is of course dependent on their respect of other fundamental rights, in particular the freedom of work. The Government adds that in addition to the right to strike, national legislation guarantees all trade union rights as well as the rights respecting their exercise, in particular the right to safety of persons, the right to assembly and the right to freedom of expression in all its forms.

D. The Committee's conclusions

1. 451. The Committee notes the information and observations provided by the Government on these three complaints. It notes in particular the reassurances given by the Government in respect of freedom of opinion and of expression as well as its guarantees concerning the right to strike and the right to the freedom to work.
2. 452. It profoundly regrets nevertheless that the Government did not reply in a more detailed manner to all the questions raised in its previous conclusions and that it did not respond to several serious allegations from complainant organizations concerning serious breaches of freedom of association, and, more disturbingly, that it made no comment on the arrest and physical assault allegedly suffered by a trade unionist.
3. 453. More specifically, the Committee once again regrets that the Government has not replied to allegations concerning violations of trade union rights at the Plastima factory in Casablanca (violence by the police in dispersing strikers, arbitrary dismissals, replacement of strikers by strike breakers). The Committee reminds the Government that the purpose of the whole procedure is to promote respect for trade union rights in law and in fact. Thus, if the procedure protects governments against unreasonable accusations, governments on their side should recognize the importance for their own reputation of formulating, so as to allow objective examination, detailed replies to the allegations brought against them. (See Digest of decisions and principles of the Committee on Freedom of Association, 1985, 3rd edition, para. 59.) The Committee urges the Government to provide its observations on these allegations without delay.
4. 454. With respect to the appeals lodged by the four trade union delegates and trade unionists from the SINET enterprise and the seven workers from the FILARSY company, the Committee notes that the Government will keep it informed of the legal decisions handed down in these cases. It expresses the firm expectation that if the court were to conclude that these workers had been dismissed as a result of their trade union activities, the Government would take the necessary measures to enable them to be reinstated in their jobs.
5. 455. With reference to the workers dismissed from the Mansour Ed Dahbi Hotel, the Committee notes that two of them have been reinstated in another enterprise within the same hotel chain and that the others, rather than wishing to be reinstated, preferred to take legal action to recover damages. The Committee urges the Government to keep it informed of decisions returned in these cases and also of any reinstatement measures taken, where appropriate. Like the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, the Committee recalls that it is necessary for legislation to make specific provision for appeals and penalties against acts of anti-trade union discrimination by employers against workers, and emphasizes the importance of ensuring by way of specific provisions, together with sufficiently dissuasive sanctions, the protection of workers against acts of anti-trade union discrimination.
6. 456. With respect to police action during sympathy strikes at the FILARSY enterprise and at the Mansour Ed Dahbi Hotel, the Government repeats that such action falls within the framework of legislative and statutory provisions with regard to the maintenance of law and order. In view of the circumstances and the blatant contradictions between the declarations made by the complainant organizations and the Government, the Committee is unable to conclude that this action was in no way intended to suppress legitimate trade union activities. The Committee underlines that in cases of strike action the authorities should resort to the use of force only in serious situations where law and order is seriously threatened. (See Digest op. cit., para. 431.) Furthermore the Committee recalls that taking part in picketing and firmly but peaceably inciting other workers to keep away from their workplace, cannot be considered unlawful. The case is different however when picketing is accompanied by violence or coercion of non-strikers in an attempt to interfere with their freedom to work; such acts constitute criminal offences in many countries. (See Digest, op. cit., para. 435.)
7. 457. As to the serious allegations concerning the arrest of strikers by the police during strikes at the Mansour Ed Dahbi Hotel (17 April 1993) and at the BISMA enterprise (26 July 1994), the Committee notes with regret that the Government has not sent any information on developments in the situation of these workers. The Committee notes with concern that some of these arrests occurred almost two years ago and once again emphasizes the principle that the right to strike is one of the essential means through which workers and their organizations may promote and defend their economic and social interests. (See Digest, op. cit., para. 363.) The Committee is also of the opinion that authorities should not have recourse to measures of imprisonment for the mere fact of organizing or participating in a peaceful strike. (See Digest, op. cit., para. 447.) In view of the importance of these principles and of the amount of time that has already passed, the Committee urges the Government to inform it immediately of the situation of these workers by indicating, inter alia, whether they have been released and reinstated in their jobs.
8. 458. Lastly, the Committee deplores the fact that the Government has not replied to the serious allegations of physical assault allegedly suffered by the General Secretary of the UMT trade union of the BISMA enterprise, Mr. Moukhbir Mohammed, during his arrest in July 1994. The Committee deplores and stresses the seriousness of these allegations and recalls that, in such cases, an independent judicial inquiry is a particularly appropriate method of fully ascertaining the facts, determining responsibilities and punishing those responsible. (See Digest, op. cit., para. 78.) Therefore, the Committee urges the Government to provide its observations in this connection. Moreover, it requests the Government to immediately undertake an independent inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the arrest of the General Secretary of the UMT trade union of the BISMA enterprise, Mr. Moukhbir Mohammed, in particular with regard to the physical assault he allegedly suffered, and requests the Government to keep it informed of the results of this inquiry.