Informe provisional - Informe núm. 93, 1967

1. 169. The Committee examined this case at its 38th Session (November 1964), and on that occasion submitted an interim report which appears in paragraphs 101 to 108 of its 79th Report. This was approved by the Governing Body at its 161st Session (March 1965).
2. 170. Panama has ratified 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. 171. In their complaint of 26 June 1963 the complainants requested an investigation concerning, inter alia, the exercise of freedom of association in Panama, but gave no reasons for their request. The Committee observed, however, at its session in November 1964, that three newspaper cuttings attached to the complaint appeared to show quite clearly that the executive power had intervened in the affairs of the Confederation of Labour of the Republic of Panama by virtue of Decision No. 46 of 5 June 1963 dismissing the members of the Executive Board of the Confederation. The complainants had lodged an appeal against this decision with the Supreme Court.
2. 172. The Committee pointed out that the Government's reply had not been sent until 20 August 1964, one year after communication of the complaint. The Government stated briefly that the complainants' allegations were untrue, since all workers were entitled to form trade unions and organise themselves as they wished, subject only to the restrictions imposed by law. All constituted organisations were at all times entitled to exercise their trade union rights and to operate in complete freedom in accordance with the democratic principles of the Constitution.
3. 173. The Committee observed that, according to the information in the three newspapers referred to, it appeared that there had been an infringement of the provisions of Article 3 of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), ratified by Panama, under which workers' organisations have the right to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organise their administration, and the public authorities are to refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof.
4. 174. However, the Committee considered that it did not possess sufficient information to be able to judge the situation properly and submit any conclusions, among other reasons because the Government's reply was extremely imprecise and general in character and contained no information which could help the Committee in its examination of the case. Accordingly the Committee recommended the Governing Body to decide to ask the Government once more to forward its precise observations on the complaint regarding the Government's action in the case of the Confederation of Labour of the Republic of Panama with the least possible delay, and in the meantime to postpone its examination of the case.
5. 175. At its 40th, 41st, 42nd and 43rd Sessions (May 1965, November 1965, February 1966 and May 1966 respectively) the Committee was obliged to postpone successively the examination of the case, as it had not received the observations requested of the Government in paragraph 108 of the 79th Report of the Committee. Since the approval of the 79th Report by the Governing Body the Director-General has sent ten communications to the Government, informing it of the said postponements and repeating the request for the observations in question; these observations have not so far been received. The Government answered three of the communications made by the Director-General, stating that the matter had been referred to the competent authorities. In view of this considerable delay and in order to make it possible to formulate its conclusions in this case at its next session, the Committee considers it necessary that the Government should be requested once again to furnish the observations in question, as a matter of urgency. To the same end the Committee has decided to ask the complainants directly to be good enough to furnish further information on the present situation with regard to the questions raised concerning alleged interference with the Confederation of Labour of the Republic of Panama.