Informe provisional - Informe núm. 68, 1963

1. 81. This case, already considered by the Committee at its 24th, 25th, 26th, 27th, 28th, 29th and 30th Sessions (February 1960, May 1960, November 1960, February 1961, May 1961, November 1961 and February 1962, was further examined by the Committee at its 31st Session (May 1962), when it submitted a further interim report in paragraphs 120 to 125 of its 62nd Report, which was approved by the Governing Body on 1 June 1962, in the course of its 152nd Session.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 82. Paragraph 125 of the Committee's 62nd Report contains the recommendations of the Committee and reads as follows:
2. 125. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
   • (a) to draw the attention of the Government once again to the fact that the situation of the workers in Thailand, who, since the dissolution of all the trade unions in Thailand in October 1958, have been unable to form and join trade union organisations for the protection of their interests, is contrary to all the generally recognised principles relating to freedom of association;
   • (b) to deplore the fact that in its letter dated 23 April 1962 the Government has found it possible only to repeat the statements contained in its earlier letters dated 1 September 1961 and 15 January 1962 to the effect that there is no substantial progress to report;
   • (c) to request the Government once again, having regard to the fact that as long ago as 26 April 1961 the Government stated that the text of the new Labour Act had been finalised and would be submitted to the Legislative Assembly as soon as possible, to state whether the finalised text of the new Labour Act has now been submitted to the Legislative Assembly or, if not, to state what difficulties have prevented the implementation of the intention to legislate indicated in its letter of 26 April 1961;
   • (d) to reaffirm yet again the importance which the Governing Body has always attached to the principle of prompt and fair trial by an independent and impartial judiciary in all cases, including cases in which trade unionists are charged with political or criminal offences which the Government considers have no relation to their trade union functions;
   • (e) to draw the attention of the Government once again to its view that a situation in which proceedings have been completed in the cases of only four of the 19 trade unionists arrested as long ago as October 1958 is incompatible with the generally accepted principle enumerated in subparagraph (d) above, especially bearing in mind that the Government stated in its letter dated 26 April 1961 that judicial proceedings in these cases were continuing " with due attention and expedition ";
   • (f) to request the Government yet again to furnish as a matter of urgency, having regard to the principle set forth in subparagraph (d) above, information as to the legal and judicial proceedings taken in respect of each of the remaining 15 trade unionists or, if proceedings have not been taken, information as to the present situation in the 15 cases in question.
3. 83. This decision of the Governing Body was brought to the notice of the Government of Thailand by a letter dated 5 June 1962.
4. 84. Further information in support of its complaint was presented by the I.C.F.T.U in two communications dated 26 October and 29 November 1962, transmitted to the Government for its observations by two letters dated 15 November and 17 December 1962 respectively.
5. 85. At its 32nd Session (November 1962) the Committee adjourned its examination of the case, as the information previously requested from the Government had not been received.
6. 86. Further information on the case was forwarded by the Government in a communication dated 10 January 1963.
7. 87. In its communication dated 26 October 1962, the I.C.F.T.U reviews the history of the case, recalling that, as long ago as 26 April 1961, the Government affirmed that the text of the new Labour Act had been finalised and would be submitted to the Legislative Assembly, and that, by November 1961, proceedings had been completed in the cases of only four of the 19 trade unionists arrested in October 1958.
8. 88. In May 1962, declare the complainants, some 26 trade unionists were still in prison, most of them since 1958. In that month they appeared before the Criminal Court, which ruled that the authorities had the right to keep them in prison, a ruling upheld by the Court of Appeal. But, it is alleged, the Supreme Court then ordered a review of the cases and they were scheduled to be retried by the Court of Appeal on 18 May 1962. But then the cases were referred back to the Criminal Court and, the complainants allege, it was not until 3 July 1962 that the matter came before the Criminal Court; the police offered certain evidence and no date was set for a further hearing. To this communication the complainants annex a list of the names of 16 of the 26 persons alleged still to be in prison in May 1962.
9. 89. With their communication dated 29 November 1962 the complainants furnish a revised list, stated to consist of the names of 13 of 16 trade unionists held in Lad Yow Prison. The twelfth name on the list is that of Mr. Sang Pattanothai, former President and later General Secretary of the Thai National T.U.C. The complainants state that he was also the editor of a daily newspaper and author of several books and, more lately, devoted his full time to journalism and research on Buddhism; he knew personally the former Prime Minister, Mr. Phibulsonggram, and was once offered a portfolio in the Government, which he declined. The thirteenth name on the list is that of Mr. Prayoon Chuenswasdi, former Assistant General Secretary of the Thai National T.U.C, who went to the United States in 1957, under a grant from the State Department, for training in trade unionism. On his return he organised the United Thai Federation of Labour and was seeking to affiliate his organisation with the I.C.F.T.U. He was also editor of a daily newspaper, which belonged to the former Prime Minister, Mr. Phibulsonggram. These facts demonstrate, in the view of the complainants, that the activities and views of these two men could in no way be interpreted as Communist; they could never have had such relations with the former Government if they had had Communist views.
10. 90. In its communication dated 10 January 1963 the Government makes no reference to the situation with regard to the enactment of a new Labour Law. Of the 16 trade unionists named by the complainants, declares the Government, police records reveal only four as being under detention: Messrs. Prayoon Chuenswasdi, Kajorn Wajanadilok, Prakob Toluklum and Thongbai Thongpaod. Mr. Chuenswasdi has been cleared of the former criminal charge brought against him but " is being further detained on a charge of hooliganism ". The other three persons mentioned are still on trial.
11. 91. The Committee observes that, at different stages in the history of this case, the Government has furnished information as to the position of the 19 labour leaders and members of labour unions stated in its letter dated 20 October 1959 to have been arrested. In a letter dated 8 September 1960 the Government stated that " of the 19 arrested, one has been prosecuted according to the law of the land, three are under the proceedings of the Court, five are being submitted for prosecution order, seven are under investigation and three have been released". It was with this information before it that the Committee made to the Governing Body the recommendations contained in subparagraphs (d), (e) and (f) of paragraph 125 of its 62nd Report cited in paragraph 82 above.
12. 92. It is only recently that the complainants have submitted the names of the persons alleged to be detained and, in reply, the Government declares that only four of those named are revealed by police records to be under detention. In particular, these four do not appear to include Mr. Sang Pattanothai, referred to by the complainants as the former President and later General Secretary of the Thai National T.U.C. It would seem necessary, therefore, to request the Government to be good enough to clarify the position as regards the identity of the 19 trade unionists concerned.