Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 1, 1952

A. A. The complainants' allegations

• Analysis of the Complaint
  79. 79 The complainant makes the following allegations:
      • (a) The Government dismissed several school teachers who had protested, in their capacity as members of the Executive Committee of the Pan-Cyprian Teachers' Organisation (P.T.O) against the intervention of the British authorities in connection with the introduction and utilisation of a textbook published by the Greek Ministry of Education.
      • (b) The Government impeded and practically suspended the operation of the P.T.O by reason of the above-mentioned dismissal of several members of the Executive Committee of that organisation who, having lost their positions as teachers, were no longer qualified to be members of the Committee.
      • (c) Four laws, dated 21 February 1951, were intended to strangle the democratic trade union movement and the free exercise of trade union rights.
      • (d) On the occasion of public demonstrations organised in protest against the aforesaid laws, several trade union leaders, as well as workers, were arrested and sentenced to prison terms or to pay fines exceeding in all a sum of £400.
  80. Analysis of the Reply
  80. 80 The Government gives the following reply:
      • (a) The school teachers, although members of the Pan-Cyprian Teachers' Organisation, were not dismissed in connection with their position as trade unionists but because of political activities prohibited by the Elementary Education Law.
      • (b) The Pan-Cyprian Teachers' Organisation did not cease to function but continued its activities after a new Committee had been elected at an extraordinary general meeting in August 1950.
      • (c) The four laws complained against were not intended to restrict the establishment or functioning of trade unions. In fact, the first of these, amending the legislation concerning the preservation of peace and order and the prevention of crime, gives power to Presidents of District Courts to require a bond for good conduct to be executed by persons whose utterances, publications or conduct are likely to disturb public tranquillity. The second, amending the Press Law among other things, authorises the Governor in Council to prohibit the importation of any foreign newspaper which appears to be contrary to morality or public order. The third, amending the Aliens and Immigration Laws, gives power of deportation of persons of Cypriot origin who have acquired foreign nationality. The last one, amending the Criminal Code, includes within the scope of seditious intention attempts to bring into hatred and contempt the Government of the United Kingdom.
      • (d) Meetings were held in February 1951 in several towns to protest against the aforesaid laws by the Communist Party with the participation of communist trade unions in the offices of the latter; following these meetings, public demonstrations were held without previous authorisation, for which reason 64 persons were charged, of whom 11 were sentenced to terms of imprisonment and others to fines totalling £439.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 81. The Government of the United Kingdom has ratified in respect of Cyprus the Right of Association (Non-Metropolitan Territories) Convention, 1947, which provides that the right of employers and employed alike to associate for all lawful purposes shall be guaranteed by appropriate measures.
2. 82. It is clear from the details given by the Government that the officials in question were dismissed in accordance with the provisions of the Elementary Education Law, which gives power to the Government to dismiss or suspend a teacher in the State service " in the case of conduct which appears prejudicial to the interests of education, religion, good government or social order ". In other words, by protesting against the intervention of the authorities with regard to the introduction and utilisation of a textbook, the teachers were subjected to certain disciplinary measures which would have been applied against any teacher whether he was or was not a member of the Pan-Cyprian Teachers' Organisation. It would therefore appear that the facts alleged could not be considered to be an infringement of freedom of association.
3. 83. If the opinion is held that this allegation should be rejected on this account, it would appear that a similar conclusion should be reached in respect of the second allegation, which is merely a corollary to the first. Indeed, the temporary paralysis of the Pan-Cyprian Teachers' Organisation was the result, in the words of the complainants themselves, of these dismissals brought about by the Government and was not the result of direct intervention by the Government. Moreover, the Government explained in its reply that this organisation, after electing a new Committee, resumed its activities.
4. 84. With regard to the third allegation, it is necessary to refer to the summary of the four laws complained against which the Government gave in its reply. It would appear to be clear that these texts do not directly refer to trade unions but to the maintenance of public order. No doubt the application of these enactments could have repercussions on the functioning of trade unions but to no greater extent than on the functioning of any other association which, either of itself or in the person of its members or officials, might suffer as the result of one of the measures contemplated in this legislation. It would, therefore, not appear that the political situation created by these enactments has any specifically social aspect which the I.L.O is called upon to examine.
5. 85. With regard to the fourth allegation, the organisation of public meetings is certainly an important element in the activities of workers' organisations. It would appear from the complaint itself, however, that these demonstrations were organised in protest against the four laws mentioned above. According to the complainants it was " the workers, supported by the people " who " demonstrated against these laws in all the towns and villages of Cyprus ". In its reply the Government declares that the campaign against the enactments was organised by a political party with the participation of trade unions. It would seem, therefore, that the public demonstrations which, according to the information given by the Government, took place without prior authorisation, cannot be considered as demonstrations for purely trade union objects. Consequently, the measures taken by the Government do not appear to have been directed against the trade union but against the participants in a political demonstration as such. Hence, if a number of trade unionists were the victims of repressive measures taken by the Government they were not subjected to those measures except in the same capacity as were all other participants in the demonstration.