Informe en el que el Comité pide que se le mantenga informado de la evolución de la situación - Informe núm. 251, Junio 1987

1. 323. The Committee has examined this case at its last four meetings, presenting interim reports to the Governing Body. (See 243rd, 244th, 246th and 248th Reports of the Committee, paras. 570-587, 357-383, 381-408 and 494-503 respectively, approved by the Governing Body at its 232nd, 233rd, 234th and 235th Sessions.)
2. 324. Subsequently, further observations dated 25 February, 18 March and 29 April 1987 were received from the Government.
3. 325. 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. 326. When the Committee examined the case at its February 1987 meeting, it reached the following conclusions and recommendations concerning the allegations then pending (see 248th Report, para. 503.): The Committee is particularly attentive to and concerned with the grave problems that exist for the exercise of trade union rights in the general climate described by the Government. In this respect, it takes note of the Government's general statements concerning the very delicate situation facing the country and its desire to safeguard the rights of the whole population, including trade union rights. The Committee requests the Government to continue to keep it informed of developments relating to the death, disappearance or injury of the trade unionists mentioned in the annex, and expresses the hope that the investigations undertaken will make it possible to determine who was responsible, punish those who are guilty and establish the whereabouts of those who have disappeared. (The annex listed the names of 25 dead trade unionists, 12 who had disappeared and two who had been injured.) The Committee again requests the complainants to furnish whatever information may be available to them in connection with the alleged deaths of agrarian trade unionists Leonor Marle, Omar Vergara, Solón Lopez and Serafín Herrera and of the physician and trade union leader Gabriel Anchique Gómez, and concerning the disappearance of José Jairo López Cadena, so as to enable the Government to reply with exactitude to those allegations. The Committee also requests the Government to send its observations concerning the pending allegations of interference in trade union activities (the use of tear gas by the Bogotá police against a group of workers of the Croydon undertaking who were on strike; placing of explosives by para-military groups in the headquarters of the Federation of Workers of Valle del Cauca (FEDETAV)). The Committee again asks the Government to indicate whether the three workers of the Vianini Entrecanales enterprise mentioned by the complainants (Messrs. Rafael Mauricio Mendoza Aguilar, Pedro Antonio Rodríguez Rojas and Pablo Emilio Leal Cruz) were in fact dismissed and, if so, the reasons therefor as well as the results of any judicial proceedings that may have been instituted with a view to their reinstatement.

B. The Government's reply

1. 327. With regard to the alleged police action at the Croydon undertaking against a group of workers who were on strike, the Government states that the persons detained on 20 January 1986 on the occasion of the disturbances which took place (on the public highway, not inside the factory) at the Croydon undertaking's plant were not workers of the undertaking but persons unconnected with it and that they remained in custody from 5 p.m. to 6.40 p.m. on that date, i.e. for one hour and 40 minutes only. There was no uncalled-for interference by the police with the meeting held by the workers of the undertaking in question. The authorities did not enter the factory precinct because the concentration formed in such a way as to obstruct traffic on the public highway, but they were nevertheless obliged to keep traffic moving and to prevent outsiders from using the meeting to cause a breach of law and order.
2. 328. With regard to the alleged attacks on the headquarters of FEDETAV at Cali, the Government states that no "bomb" attack on FEDETAV headquarters at Cali was recorded in 1985. On 6 and 20 February of that year, low-powered firecrackers made with black powder exploded in front of other trade union organisations' premises at Yumbo and Cali, injuring no one in either case and causing damage estimated at Colombian $5,000 (roughly US$22). Thus, no attack was made on FEDETAV and the two events that occurred in front of the premises of other trade union organisations do not constitute persecution directed at them, but acts committed by subversive groups to cause terrorism within the working class.
3. 329. With regard to the dismissal of three trade unionists from the firm of Vianini Entrecanales, the Government states that the contracts of employment of Mr. Pedro Antonio Rodríguez, Mr. Rafael Mauricio Mendoza Aguilar and Mr. Pablo Emilio Leal Cruz were considered terminated as a result of their participation in the "civil stoppage" of 20 June 1985, which the Government declared illegal by resolution No. 02205 of 16 July 1985. The Government adds that the three persons in question have instituted proceedings for trade union protection in the labour court but that the proceedings are still sub judice.
4. 330. Lastly, the Government again supplies information, which is reproduced below, on the progress of proceedings in connection with the death, disappearance or injury of trade unionists:
   • - Death of Rogelio Sánchez Angel: Inquiries were instituted by the Twelfth Circuit Court of Criminal Investigation, based on the municipality of Apartadó (Antioquia), when the events of 29 November 1985 took place in the locality of Chigorodó. Notwithstanding the investigative efforts made by the examining magistrate, it proved impossible to determine who were the perpetrators of the crime of homicide, and it was therefore necessary, pursuant to article 473 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to order the provisional filing of the dossier on 3 December 1986 (this measure does not mean that the investigative and punitive action of the State is at an end).
   • - Death of Hebert Lascarro González, Celso Paternina Rojas and Jesús Flórez: The Ninth Higher Judge of Barrancabermeja (Santander) reported that his office had instituted a criminal investigation against the trade unionists José Antonio Muñoz Poveda and Rogelio Muñoz Poveda for the crime of homicide in the light of events which had occurred in the district of Chucuré on 29 June 1985. On 13 August 1985 the Tenth Court of Criminal Investigation of Chucuré made an order initiating criminal proceedings and later transmitted this for reasons of jurisdiction to the Fifteenth Court of Criminal Investigation of Barrancabermeja, which made a great many inquiries in order to clarify the facts. The Ninth Higher Court of that town issued a warrant for the arrest of the Muñoz Poveda brothers as possible accomplices of those responsible for the death of Mr. Lascarro, Mr. Paternina and Mr. Flórez. However, there were not sufficient legal grounds on which to charge them as accessories to the crime because it had not been satisfactorily proved that they had accompanied the unknown persons who committed it, and proceedings against them were stayed. It has not been possible to this day to identify the actual perpetrators of the offence and the investigation has been closed for the second time but, subject to compliance with the legal requirements, the merits will be reviewed again. There is, however, no evidence in the dossier that Mr. Hebert Lascarro González, Mr. Celso Paternina Rojas and Mr. Jésus Flórez were workers of the Texas Petroleum Company or trade union activists, and it was determined that the first two were last employed as fishermen and the third in agriculture. The inaccuracy and lack of regard for the truth in the complaint are confirmed once again.
   • - Death of Jaime Berréo Cardona: The Seventh Higher Judge of Bucaramanga closed the investigation proceedings which were underway against Ernesto Tabera Rodríguez who had been charged in absentia.
   • - Death of Pedro Antonio Contreras Salcedo: The Fifth Higher Court of Cúcuta (Norte de Santander) reported that, despite the efforts made to find the perpetrator of the crime, since it had proved impossible to connect anyone with it by taking statements, the provisional filing of the dossier was ordered on 4 February 1987 pursuant to article 473 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (as already explained on previous occasions, this means that, if sufficient evidence subsequently comes to light, the case will be reopened immediately).
   • - Death of Francisco Javier Correa Muñoz: The Sixth Higher Judge of Medellín (Antioquia) reported that it had not been possible to identify the perpetrator of the crime and that, in view of the time which had elapsed since the start of the investigation, the provisional filing of the dossier had been ordered on 23 June 1986 pursuant to article 473 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
   • - Death of Jorge Leonel Roldán Posada: The Fourteenth Higher Judge of Medellín (Antioquia) reported that, although it had not been possible to identify the person responsible for Mr. Roldán's death despite the great efforts made, the proceedings were continuing normally and the investigative activity of the State was being vigorously pursued.
   • - Death of Héctor Perdomo Soto and José Diomedes Cedeño: The Second Higher Judge of Neiva reported that, despite the strenuous inquiries made by his office in collaboration with the investigative and police authorities under the continuous supervision of the Regional Office of the Government Attorney, it had not been possible to identify the perpetrators of the double crime. Nevertheless, the proceedings will continue normally until those responsible are found.
   • - Death of Jorge Luis Ospina Cogollo and Oscar Salazar Ospina: According to a report from the Sixteenth Higher Judge of Medellín (Antioquia), the proceedings in connection with the death of the first-named have followed their normal course and it has been impossible to identify anyone as responsible for the crime, although it has been established that four unknown persons were involved; that under cover of darkness they shot Mr. Ospina at about 9.15 p.m. on 3 July 1985 when he was resting; and that, according to statements by employees of "La Petra" ranch, the motive may have been personal revenge. According to the Judge, the victim had signed on as a worker at the ranch six months before his death; he belonged to SINTRABANANO and was not known to have any labour problems. At the time the trade union organisation already mentioned and SINTAGRO were in operation; they had signed satisfactory collective agreements and there was not friction whatsoever between them and the employers. With regard to the death of Oscar Salazar Ospina, the Sixteenth Higher Judge of Medellín reported that, there again, no success had been achieved in connecting anyone with the crime because the victim had been alone at his home when the crime was committed. It has been established that Mr. Salazar had signed on as a worker at "El Semillero" ranch ten months before his death, that he did not belong to SINTAGRO and that he had no labour problems. In this case nothing whatsoever is known or even suspected about the motives for the crime. Both investigations are nevertheless continuing.
   • - Death of Ruben Doréo Castaño Jurado: The Tenth Higher Judge of Manizoles (Caldas) stated that during the trial concerning the death of Mr. Jurado, a warrant had been issued for the arrest, on charges of international homicide, of Hernán Londoño Vergara, but this individual has not yet been captured.
   • - Death of Luis Jesús Leal Guerrero, Victor Manuel Leal and Carmelo Gelves Ortega: On 29 February l987 the Higher Military Court confirmed the acquittal of the accused and ordered that their temporary release become unconditional.
   • - Death of Faeriel Alonso Santana Portillo: The 20th Higher Judge of Ocaña (North Santander) stated that it has not been possible to find a new accused in the investigations and that at the moment the second notice of closure, handed down on 6 March, has been communicated to those concerned.
   • - Death of Jaime Bronstein Bonilla: The Tenth Higher Judge of Popayán (Cauca) stated that, for the third time, his office requested the National Association of Peasants (ANUC) to give the full name and address of the woman known as Gladys N., who was with Mr. Bronstein when he was killed, but that the Union has not supplied any information. In view of the provisions of section 473 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in the forthcoming days the case will be provisionally closed on the grounds that over one year has passed without any guilty party being found and brought to trial. It again emphasises the complete lack of co-operation of the ANUC authorities.
   • - Injuries suffered by Heriberto Ramírez Rengifo: On 26 August 1986 inquiries were begun for the purposes of investigating the punishable offence of attempted homicide. Evidence was collected by the Seventh Judge of the Court of Criminal Investigation at Cartago from 28 August 1986 onwards but, despite the efforts made, the searches carried out and the depositions taken, it has not been possible to charge anyone with the offence. The matter has been entrusted to the Seventh Court of Investigation for the collection of further evidence which may help to clarify the facts.
   • - Disappearance of workers of the Malaria Eradication Service (Juan José Buendéa Arias, Manuel Fonseca Garzón, Miguel Angel Mejéa, Carlos J. Mendoza and Gregorio Ernesto Torres): The relevant investigation was begun on 6 November 1984, on the basis of an information laid by a private citizen, in the Territorial Court of Saravena. The court conducted the preliminary inquiries, collecting statements and depositions from inhabitants of the area. On 8 May 1985 the case was referred to the First Circuit Court of Mixed Jurisdiction of Arauca, which extended the period of investigation for 90 days and instructed the Territorial Court of Saravena to collect evidence. This period was then extended for a further 60 days, all without result. On 1 August 1986, the investigation was extended for a further 90 days and the Twenty-first Court of Criminal Investigation of Saravena was instructed to collect additional evidence, but once again the efforts made to ascertain the whereabouts of those concerned met with no result. Inquiries for the purpose of identifying those responsible for the disappearance of the aforementioned persons are continuing.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 331. With regard to the pending allegations concerning the death, disappearance or assault on the physical integrity of trade unionists, the Committee notes that all the acts alleged have given rise to criminal proceedings and that the Government has regularly supplied information on the progress thereof, pointing out that some persons mentioned by the complainants were not trade unionists and that in certain cases the provisional filing of the dossier has been ordered because the guilty parties could not be identified. The Committee expresses the hope that it will be possible to conclude those proceedings in the near future and that they will make it possible to identify and punish those responsible for the crimes. The Committee wishes to refer to the general conclusions which it formulated in the present case on a previous occasion (see 246th Report, Case No. 1323, para. 408), and in which it stated that all appropriate measures should be taken to guarantee that trade union rights can be exercised in normal conditions, with respect for basic human rights and in a climate free of violence, pressure, fear and threats of any kind.
2. 332. Furthermore, the Committee notes that the proceedings for reinstatement of three trade union leaders of the firm of Vianini Entrecanales are not yet completed and that the Government denies that any bombing attacks were made on the headquarters of FEDETAV at Cali in 1985. The Committee likewise notes that, according to the Government, the police intervened on 20 January 1986, not against the workers of the Croydon undertaking who were on strike, but against persons unconnected with that undertaking who were obstructing traffic on the public highway.