Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2012, Publicación: 102ª reunión CIT (2013)

Convenio sobre la libertad sindical y la protección del derecho de sindicación, 1948 (núm. 87) - Egipto (Ratificación : 1957)

Otros comentarios sobre C087

Observación

Solicitud directa

Visualizar en: Francés - Español - ArabicVisualizar todo

Comments of workers’ and employers’ organizations. The Committee notes the comments made by the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) on the right to strike, in a communication dated 29 August 2012, which are dealt with in the General Report of the Committee. The Committee notes the very detailed Government’s observations on the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on 31 July and 31 August 2012. It notes in particular that, concerning the ITUC allegation that the state-controlled Egyptian Trade Union Federation (ETUF) continues to be the dominant trade union, the Government indicates that: (1) there are large numbers of trade union organizations in the country, some of which are under the ETUF, others are included in other federations, the most important of which is the Egyptian Federation of Independent Trade Unions; (2) the number of trade unions which were allowed to be established in all freedom exceeds 800 trade unions and federations; and (3) the Government does not control the ETUF and it is committed to handling trade union organizations and unions federations in full objectivity. Furthermore, with regard to the ITUC allegation that a court in the city of Helwan sentenced Kamal Abbas, the general coordinator of the Centre for Trade Union and Worker Services (CTUWS), to six months’ imprisonment on 26 February 2012 because he denounced Ismail Ibrahim Fahmy, Acting President of the ETUF, while delivering a speech to the International Labour Conference (ILC) in 2011, the Government indicates that: (1) Ismail Fahmy initiated a lawsuit against Kamal Abbas for being insulted during the ILC and the court sentenced Mr Abbas in absentia to six months’ imprisonment, according to the law; and (2) Mr Abbas appealed against the sentence, and appeared before the court, which automatically dropped the sentence. Recalling the importance of freedom of expression in the full exercise of freedom of association, as set out in the 1970 resolution concerning Trade Union Rights and Their Relation to Civil Liberties, the Committee welcomes the information that the court has cancelled Mr Abbas’ sentence. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it has not received any notifications on specific incidents of violence alleged by the ITUC and that it is committed to referring any violations or allegations with respect to the use of violence against strikes to a tripartite committee for its examination and the adoption of legal measures. The Committee once again requests the Government to submit the ITUC allegations to which it has replied to a tripartite committee for their examination and provide information in this respect.

Legislative issues. The Committee recalls that for several years it has been commenting on the discrepancies between the Convention and the national legislation, namely Trade Union Act No. 35 of 1976, as amended by Act No. 12 of 1995, and Labour Code No. 12 of 2003, with regard to the following points:

-the institutionalization of a single trade union system under Act No. 35 of 1976 (as amended by Act No. 12 of 1995), and in particular sections 7, 13, 14, 17 and 52;
-the control granted by law to higher level trade union organizations, and particularly the Confederation of Trade Unions, over the nomination and election procedures to the executive committees of trade unions, under the terms of sections 41, 42 and 43 of Act No. 35 (as amended by Act No. 12);
-the control exercised by the Confederation of Trade Unions over the financial management of trade unions, by virtue of sections 62 and 65 of Act No. 35 (as amended by Act No. 12);
-the removal from office of the executive committee of a trade union which has provoked work stoppages or absenteeism in a public service or community services (section 70(2)(b) of Act No. 35 of 1976);
-the requirement of the prior approval of the Confederation of Trade Unions for the organization of strike action, under section 14(i) of the same Act;
-restrictions on the right to strike and recourse to compulsory arbitration in services which are not essential in the strict sense of the term (sections 179, 187, 193 and 194 of the Labour Code); and
-penalties for breaches of section 194 of the Labour Code (section 69(9) of the Code).

The Committee notes that the Government indicates that it is paying attention to bringing the Trade Unions Act and the Labour Code into conformity with the provisions of the Convention and that all regulations are currently being prepared for their submission to the new Parliament. In particular, it indicates that in March 2011, it issued the “Freedom of Association Declaration” which reiterates the observance of all ratified international Conventions, including Convention No. 87, as well as the freedom of establishing trade union organizations. After the promulgation of this Declaration, a large number of new trade union organizations and several trade union federations, which group more than one general union, and/or trade union committee, were set up.

The Committee further notes the Government’s indications with respect to the draft freedom of association law that: (1) the previous Parliament was annulled by virtue of a judicial decision rendered by the Constitutional Court in June 2012, which hindered the completion of the discussion or the promulgation of the draft law which had been passed by the Egyptian Cabinet on 2 November 2011; (2) societal dialogue process aimed at promulgating the freedom of association law is still ongoing (to this end, a high-level meeting was held in September 2012, which included the Minister of Manpower and Migration, the Secretary of State for Legal Affairs in addition to the former Ministers of Manpower (Dr Ahmed El Bor’ai and Mr Refaat Hassan), and the Director of the ILO in Cairo); (3) the Government is examining several options with respect to the substance of the law and with respect to the procedural alternatives which are available for its promulgation in the absence of Parliament, and the fact that the President is the person who assumes the legislative power temporarily, until the election of a new Parliament; and (4) it is expected that the draft law will be submitted to the Council of Ministers for its adoption and its referral to the President who is currently acting in a legislative capacity. This will be followed by holding new workers’ elections based on the texts of the new law which will apply to trade union organizations in Egypt. Concerning the ITUC’s allegations on the draft law, the Government indicates that it refutes the allegations that it is not in conformity with the provisions of Convention No. 87 as this is considered to be in anticipation of events, and an interference in Egypt’s internal affairs. The Committee expects that the draft will have taken into account its previous comments, recalls that the Government may avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office in respect of all the matters raised above, and requests the Government to transmit the current draft so that it may consider its conformity with the Convention.

Recalling its previous comments concerning the Decree of Law No. 34 (2011) adopted on 12 April 2011 by the President of the Supreme Council of Armed Forces which provided for sanctions, including of imprisonment, against any person who “during the prevalence of the state of emergency, makes a stand or undertakes an activity that results in the prevention of, obstruction, or hindering a State’s institution or a public authority or a public or private working organization from performing its work” or who “incites, invites or promotes [such activity]”, the Committee notes with satisfaction the Government’s indication that as of 31 May 2012, the state of emergency has been lifted and that since this Decree stated clearly that it applied only during the prevalence of the state of emergency, it is no longer applicable.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.