Informe provisional - Informe núm. 218, Noviembre 1982

1. 566. The Committee has already examined this case on two occasions, the most recent being at its meeting in May 1982, when it reached interim conclusions adopted by the Governing Body at its 219th session. Since then, the Government has sent additional information in a letter dated 8 September 1982 containing two communications, one from the Minister of Labour and the other from the International Relations Service of the Ministry of Labour, dated 19 August 1982.
2. 567. Colombia 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. Previous examination of the case

1. 568. In this case, the allegation still pending concerned the detention without trial since 13 May 1981 of the treasurer of the National Federation of Metalworkers (FENATRAMETAL), José Joaquin Romero, who was handed over to the military tribunal and imprisoned in "Bogotá model prison." after the two-hour general strike held on 13 May 1981. In its communication of 10 March 1982, the Government stated that the person in question had been lawfully detained on the order of the commander of the Military Institutes Brigade, that he had been charged with rebellion and that he was shortly to appear before a court martial. On 15 April the Government indicated further that Mr. Romero was being prosecuted for offences against the constitutional regime and against the internal security of the State, without, however, giving any details of any specific charges against him.
2. 569. At its meeting in May 1982, the Committee, recalling the rights of every detained person to a prompt trial, asked the Government to keep it informed of any development in the case.

B. The Government's reply

1. 570. In its communication of 8 September 1982, the Government sends the reply of the Minister of Labour, who states that he has made inquiries of the Bogotá police department, which confirmed that José Joaquin Romero had been released on 5 November 1981 on completion of his sentence, the Higher Military Tribunal having rejected the decision of the court martial. According to the International Relations Service, however, Mr. Romero, who had been interrogated by the military penal examining magistrate after his arrest on 13 May 1981, had been placed in preventive detention on 21 May 1981. The court martial had given its decision against Mr. Romero on 28 October 1981 but, the President of the court martial having opposed the decision, the case was brought for consultation before the Higher Military Tribunal, which declared the decision void and ordered that the case be referred to the police, which was done 11 June 1982, Mr. Romero remaining at the disposal of the police. The International Relations service recalls that martial law was lifted by Decree No. 1674, public order having been restored. The International Relations Service of the Ministry of Labour concludes by categorically rejecting the assertion that Mr. Romero had been arrested for taking part in a strike. On the contrary, according to the Service, he had been arrested for criminal conduct disrupting public order, in pursuance of section 4 of Decree No. 1923 of 1978, providing for 20 to 24 years imprisonment for any person who, in urban centres, causes or takes part in disruptions of public order or interferes with the peaceful conduct of social activities, or starts fires in this way causing loss of human life. However, as this Decree became inoperative when martial law was lifted, José Joaquin Romero will be tried by an ordinary penal court, in conformity with the common law.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 571. The Committee notes the Government's explanations, according to which José Joaquin Romero was released on 5 November 1981 and martial law lifted on 20 June 1982. It notes also that, according to the Government, Romero, who is free, will be tried by an ordinary penal court for criminal conduct by disrupting public order, and not for striking. The Committee considers that, in order to reach conclusions in full knowledge of the facts, it would be useful to have the text of the decision of the ordinary penal court. It therefore asks the Government to send this as soon as it has been handed down.