Informe definitivo - Informe núm. 211, Noviembre 1981

1. 54. The complaint is contained in a communication of the Social Security and Communications Employees' Union dated 20 April 1981. The Government sent its reply in a letter dated 11 June 1981.
2. 55. Colombia has ratified both the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 67), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98)

A. Allegations of the complainant

1. 56. The complainant alleges that the Government continues to adopt a repressive attitude towards trade union organisations and refers in this connection to instances of massive dismissals, arrests, torture, entry into and search of trade union headquarters, threats made against trade union officials, disappearances of workers and disregard of collective agreements (in this latter connection, the complainant mentions the names of certain undertakings and trade union organisations, such as the Trade Union of workers).

B. The Government's reply

1. 57. In its communication of 11 June 1981, the Government, while denying the general allegations, states that a new collective agreement has been signed between the Trade Union of Workers and the Colombian Petroleum Company. The Government also states that the case concerning the Eternit Company has been sent to the Court of Arbitration since the parties were unable to reach an agreement at the negotiation stage.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 58. The Committee takes note of the allegations made by the complainant organisation, as well as the observations sent by the Government. However, the Committee also notes that the allegations have been made in such general terms that it is practically impossible not only to identify any specific complaints, but also to decide whether they have been presented by an organisation directly involved in the matter. Given the lack of precise information on the motives and circumstances of the allegations in question, and since the complainant organisation has not availed itself of the procedural right currently in force to present additional information, although invited to do so, the Committee therefore concludes that the present case does not call for further examination.