Informe en el que el Comité pide que se le mantenga informado de la evolución de la situación - Informe núm. 350, Junio 2008

1. 437. The Committee last examined this case at its November 2006 meeting [see 343rd Report, paras 558–597] and presented a report to the Governing Body.
2. 438. The Government sent partial observations in a communication dated 19 April 2007.
3. 439. At its March 2008 meeting, the Committee observed that despite the time that had elapsed since the case was last examined, it had not received the information requested of the Government. The Committee drew the attention of the Government to the fact that, in accordance with the procedural rules set out in paragraph 17 of its 127th Report, approved by the Governing Body, it might present a report on the substance of this case at its following meeting even if the Government’s information and observations had not been received in due time, and urged the Government to transmit the information requested as a matter of urgency [see 349th Report, para. 10].
4. 440. Colombia has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151), and the Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 441. In its previous examination of the case in November 2006, the Committee made the following recommendations [see 343rd Report, para. 597]:
   • (a) With regard to the allegations concerning the dismissal of 54 members of the Trade Union of Public Employees of the Medellín Municipal Sports and Recreation Institute (ASINDER), while noting that the High Court of Medellín ordered the payment of full compensation to 49 claimants, the Committee requests the Government to inform it whether the other five trade union members who were dismissed were duly compensated.
   • (b) With regard to the alleged refusal to register the new executive committee of the Trade Union of Workers at the Cartagena Communications Company (SINTRATELECARTAGENA) owing to the fact that the enterprise is in liquidation, and the fact that the trade union does not have the minimum number of members to enable it to function, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that, until the judicial authority hands down a ruling on the substance with regard to the lack of the minimum number of members required for the trade union to function, the executive committee is duly registered.
   • (c) With regard to the dismissal of Mr Libardo Pearson Beleño, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the final decision taken by the relevant court.
   • (d) The Committee requests the Government to send its observations without delay regarding:
   • (i) the alleged mass dismissal of the workers of the Public Services Enterprise of Cartagena; and
   • (ii) the alleged creation of the state industrial and commercial enterprise, Productora Metalmecánica de Gaviones de Antioquia (PROMEGA), to which a number of workers of the department of Antioquia formerly belonging to the Trade Union of Workers and Employees in Public and Autonomous Services and Decentralized Institutions of Colombia (SINTRAEMSDES) were transferred and its liquidation, resulting in the dismissal of all the workers belonging to the trade union organization, due to its no longer functioning.

B. The Government’s reply

1. 442. In its communication dated 19 April 2007, the Government states that, in respect of the dismissal of Mr Libardo Pearson despite the fact that he was a trade union leader, the Superior Court of the Judicial District of Cartagena, in its ruling of 31 January 2007, confirmed the decision handed down by the Eighth Labour Court of the Cartagena Circuit that the Public Services Enterprise of Cartagena had duly paid him all the money he was owed.

C. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 443. The Committee deplores that fact that, despite the time that has elapsed since the last examination of the case, the Government has not provided the information requested, although it has been invited on several occasions, including by means of an urgent appeal, to present its comments and observations on the case.
2. 444. Under these circumstances, and in accordance with the applicable rules of procedure [see 127th Report, para. 17, approved by the Governing Body at its 184th Session], the Committee is bound to present a report on the substance of the case without the benefit of the information which it had hoped to receive from the Government.
3. 445. The Committee reminds the Government that the purpose of the whole procedure established by the International Labour Organization for the examination of allegations of violations of freedom of association is to promote respect for this freedom, in law and in practice. The Committee remains confident that, if the procedure protects governments from unreasonable accusations, governments, on their side, will recognize the importance of formulating, for objective examination, detailed replies concerning allegations made against them.
4. 446. The Committee recalls that in its previous examination of the case it examined the allegations relating to the dismissal of 54 members belonging to the Trade Union of Public Employees of the Medellín Municipal Sports and Recreation Institute (ASINDER) three days after the union was founded and noted that the High Court of Medellín ordered the payment of full compensation – given the impossibility of reinstatement owing to the abolition of posts – to 49 claimants. The Committee recalls that it had requested the Government to inform it whether the other five trade union members who were dismissed were duly compensated. It repeats its request.
5. 447. With respect to the allegations concerning the dismissal of Mr Libardo Pearson despite the fact that he was a member of the executive board of the Trade Union of Workers and Employees in Public and Autonomous Services and Decentralized Institutions of Colombia (SINTRAEMSDES), the Committee had asked the Government to keep it informed of the final outcome of the legal action instituted. The Committee observes that the Government attached to its observations a copy of a decision handed down by the High Court of Cartagena, but that said decision relates to another person. Under these conditions, the Committee once again requests the Government to keep it informed of the final outcome of the legal action instituted.
6. 448. As regards the allegations submitted by SINTRAEMSDES concerning the mass dismissal of the workers of the Public Services Enterprise of Cartagena and the creation of a state industrial and commercial enterprise, Productora Metalmecánica de Gaviones de Antioquia (PROMEGA), to which a number of workers of the department of Antioquia formerly belonging to SINTRAEMSDES were transferred and its liquidation, resulting in the dismissal of all the workers belonging to the trade union organization, due to its no longer functioning, the Committee recalls that it can examine allegations concerning economic rationalization programmes and restructuring processes, whether or not they imply redundancies or the transfer of enterprises or services from the public to the private sector, only in so far as they might have given rise to acts of discrimination or interference against trade unions [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth edition, 2006, para. 1079]. In view of the complainant organization’s allegations of the discriminatory impact of the restructuring and rationalization of these entities on its members, the Committee requests the Government to institute independent investigations without delay in order to determine whether or not the mass dismissal of the workers of the Public Services Enterprise of Cartagena and the creation of a state industrial and commercial enterprise (PROMEGA) and its subsequent liquidation resulting in the dismissal of all the workers belonging to the trade union organization SINTRAEMSDES occurred for anti-union reasons. The Committee requests the Government, if the allegations are confirmed, to take the necessary measures to ensure that the workers are fully compensated, to impose sufficiently dissuasive sanctions on those responsible, and to keep it informed in this respect.