Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 26, 1957

20. The Committee on Freedom of Association has before it the following complaints which, for the sake of clarity, are divided into two separate groups. The first group (Cases Nos. 134 and 141) includes : (1) a verbal protest made on behalf of the Workers' group of the Governing Body by its President at the 131st Session of the Governing Body (Geneva, March 1956) ; (2) complaint of 23 February 1956 by the World Federation of Trade Unions supplemented by additional information dated 22 March and 16 May 1956 ; (3) complaint of 2 March 1956 by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions supplemented by additional information of 3 May 1956 ; (4) complaint of 28 February 1956 by the National Bakers' Federation of Chile supplemented by additional information of 4 June 1956 ; (5) complaint of 8 March 1956 by the Confederation of Latin American Workers supplemented by additional information of 6 April 1956 ; (6) complaint of 10 March 1956 by the Maritime Confederation of Chile ; (7) complaint of 23 May 1956 by the National Bakers' Federation of Chile and 23 other national trade union federations of Chile, quoting article 24 of the Constitution of the I.L.O. ; (8) complaint of 23 February 1957 by the Sole Union of Chilean Workers ; (9) complaint of 3 November 1955 by the "Sekretariat D.P.P. Sebda " (the Pan-Indonesian Central Council of Trade Unions) ; (10) complaint of 3 November 1955 by the Posts and Communications Trade Union of the Free German Trade Unions (Berlin) ; (11) complaint of 6 March 1956 by the Inter-American Regional Organisation of Workers ; and (12) a telegram of 9 March 1956 from the People's Socialist Party of Chile. This group of complaints was communicated by the Director-General of the I.L.O to the Chilean Government by letters dated 24 January 1955, 20 and 26 March, 24 May, 7 June and 16 July 1956 and 14 March 1957, with the exception of the Inter-American Regional Organisation of Workers and the telegram of the People's Socialist Party which reproduce the allegations presented by the National Bakers' Federation of Chile. Since the whole of this group deals with related complaints they are examined together. The second group of complaints (Cases Nos. 153 and 154) consists of the following : (1) complaint of 1 October 1956 from the Association of Bank Employees of Uruguay ; (2) complaints of 29 October and 6 November 1956 from the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions ; (3) complaint of 25 October 1956 from the Miners' Trade Unions International (W.F.T.U) supplemented by additional information dated 26 November 1956 ; (4) complaint of 8 November 1956 from the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions of Salaried Employees, Technicians, Managerial Staff and Commercial Travellers ; and (5) complaint of 13 November 1956 from the Inter-, national Confederation of Free Trade Unions. This group of complaints was communicated by the Director-General of the I.L.O to the Chilean Government by letters dated 25 October, 2 November and 17 December 1956 ; they refer particularly to the strike of Chilean bank employees in September 1956 and the strike in the nitrate mines of Pedro de Valdivia, also in September 1956.

1. 20. The Committee on Freedom of Association has before it the following complaints which, for the sake of clarity, are divided into two separate groups. The first group (Cases Nos. 134 and 141) includes : (1) a verbal protest made on behalf of the Workers' group of the Governing Body by its President at the 131st Session of the Governing Body (Geneva, March 1956) ; (2) complaint of 23 February 1956 by the World Federation of Trade Unions supplemented by additional information dated 22 March and 16 May 1956 ; (3) complaint of 2 March 1956 by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions supplemented by additional information of 3 May 1956 ; (4) complaint of 28 February 1956 by the National Bakers' Federation of Chile supplemented by additional information of 4 June 1956 ; (5) complaint of 8 March 1956 by the Confederation of Latin American Workers supplemented by additional information of 6 April 1956 ; (6) complaint of 10 March 1956 by the Maritime Confederation of Chile ; (7) complaint of 23 May 1956 by the National Bakers' Federation of Chile and 23 other national trade union federations of Chile, quoting article 24 of the Constitution of the I.L.O. ; (8) complaint of 23 February 1957 by the Sole Union of Chilean Workers ; (9) complaint of 3 November 1955 by the "Sekretariat D.P.P. Sebda " (the Pan-Indonesian Central Council of Trade Unions) ; (10) complaint of 3 November 1955 by the Posts and Communications Trade Union of the Free German Trade Unions (Berlin) ; (11) complaint of 6 March 1956 by the Inter-American Regional Organisation of Workers ; and (12) a telegram of 9 March 1956 from the People's Socialist Party of Chile. This group of complaints was communicated by the Director-General of the I.L.O to the Chilean Government by letters dated 24 January 1955, 20 and 26 March, 24 May, 7 June and 16 July 1956 and 14 March 1957, with the exception of the Inter-American Regional Organisation of Workers and the telegram of the People's Socialist Party which reproduce the allegations presented by the National Bakers' Federation of Chile. Since the whole of this group deals with related complaints they are examined together. The second group of complaints (Cases Nos. 153 and 154) consists of the following : (1) complaint of 1 October 1956 from the Association of Bank Employees of Uruguay ; (2) complaints of 29 October and 6 November 1956 from the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions ; (3) complaint of 25 October 1956 from the Miners' Trade Unions International (W.F.T.U) supplemented by additional information dated 26 November 1956 ; (4) complaint of 8 November 1956 from the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions of Salaried Employees, Technicians, Managerial Staff and Commercial Travellers ; and (5) complaint of 13 November 1956 from the Inter-, national Confederation of Free Trade Unions. This group of complaints was communicated by the Director-General of the I.L.O to the Chilean Government by letters dated 25 October, 2 November and 17 December 1956 ; they refer particularly to the strike of Chilean bank employees in September 1956 and the strike in the nitrate mines of Pedro de Valdivia, also in September 1956.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

• First Group of Complaints (Cases Nos. 134 and 141)
• Allegations relating to the Arrest of Mr. Isidoro Godoy Bravo and Violation of His Immunities
  21. 21 According to the minutes of the seventh sitting of the 131st Session of the Governing Body (Geneva, March 1956) Sir Alfred Roberts, Chairman of the Workers' group, stated that Mr. Isidoro Godoy Bravo, substitute member of the Workers' group, had been invited to attend that session of the Governing Body and had been prevented from doing so because he had been imprisoned by the judicial authorities of Chile. The case, he said, was one which was " intimately connected with the question of freedom of association and infringement of trade union rights ... and would be dealt with in due course by the committee specially established to deal with such matters ". He called attention to article 40 of the Constitution of the I.L.O governing the privileges and immunities of the Governing Body. A serious situation had been created since " because of what he was alleged to have done in support of trade union activities " Mr. Isidoro Godoy Bravo had been prevented either by his Government or by the judicial authority from carrying out his functions as member of the Governing Body.
  22. 22 The World Federation of Trade Unions made a similar charge in its communication dated 23 February 1956, stating that Mr. Godoy Bravo, President of the National Bakers' Federation of Chile and member of the Sole Union of Chilean Workers (Central Unica de Trabajadores de Chile-C.U.T.) had been arrested " in the course of the present wave of repression against the workers of Chile and their trade union organisations ". " The action of the Chilean Government," continues the W.F.T.U, " violates the rights not only of the Chilean workers but now of the workers of all countries Members of the I.L.O since the representative of the workers elected Brother Godoy to represent them on the I.L.O. Governing Body." It adds, in its communication of 22 March 1956, that the imprisonment is a violation of the immunity enjoyed by representatives of the I.L.O.
  23. 23 The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions states in its complaint of 2 March 1956: " We cannot recognise the right of a government to detain a member of the I.L.O. Governing Body at a moment when he is called to do his duty in this capacity, if the charges on which he has been arrested result from such legitimate trade union action as the calling of a strike for social and economical reasons ... [the detention] is apt to obstruct the proper functioning of the governing organ of the International Labour Organisation ". Similar allegations were submitted also by the Maritime Confederation of Chile in its complaint dated 10 March 1956.
  24. 24 Finally, Isidoro Godoy Bravo himself, as President of the National Bakers' Federation of Chile, sent a complaint to the Director-General of the I.L.O from prison on 28 February 1956. He states that, owing to the Government's failure to respect the international obligations contracted, he was prevented from attending the session of the Governing Body. " By employing the old pretext of alleging violations of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy " the Government had brought proceedings against him in the courts, thus infringing the immunities prescribed in article 40 of the Constitution of the I.L.O. In a later communication dated 4 June 1956 the National Bakers' Federation added, after being acquainted with the content of the Government's reply of 7 May 1956 (summarised below) and the statements of the representative of the Chilean Government at the 131st Session of the Governing Body, that it was untrue that the Government of Chile had given Godoy Bravo facilities to attend the session of the Governing Body. The administrator (Intendente) of the province of Santiago, who comes under the Ministry of the Interior, gave a written order for imprisoning Godoy Bravo and placing him at the disposal of the courts for " alleged violation of the unconstitutional Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy ". The Government passes on responsibility for his being held for the courts, says the complainant, but omits to mention that the initiative for this action came from the Ministry of the Interior.
  25. 25 Later the I.C.F.T.U, in a communication dated 3 May 1956, and the National Bakers' Federation, in a communication dated 23 May 1956, reported that Godoy Bravo had been provisionally released after spending more than 100 days in prison.
• Allegations relating to the Persecution of Trade Unions and the Detention of Trade Unionists
  26. 26 In its communication dated 28 February 1956 the National Bakers' Federation of Chile alleges that " with the aim of still further accentuating the effect on the Chilean working class of the inflationary process which is diminishing wages and salaries, the Government has started an unprecedented persecution against trade unionism, mainly against the trade union leaders ". The majority of the officers of the Sole Union of Chilean Workers (C.U.T.) are in custody and under prosecution. The anti-trade union attitude of the Government, which is contrary to the principles of freedom of organisation maintained by the I.L.O, " is part of a whole policy aimed at destroying the clear democratic and freedom-loving tradition which Chile has outstandingly held among the American countries ". The excesses committed by the Government have reached a point where Eduardo Long and Miguel Prádenas, officers of the C.U.T, after being unconditionally released by the courts owing to lack of evidence against them, were re-arrested by the political police when leaving prison and have been banished from the capital. The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions in its communication dated 2 March 1956 adds that the officers of the C.U.T were detained because of the general strike on 9 January 1956 protesting against wage freezing during a period when the cost of living had risen considerably.
  27. 27 The Confederation of Latin American Workers alleges in its communication of 8 March 1956 that " as a result of the repression unleashed against the trade union movement " the following are being held in prison : Clotario Blest Riffo, President of the C.U.T. ; Juan Vargas Puebla, official of the same organisation ; Baudilio Casanova, General Secretary of the organisation ; Julio Alegria, officer of the Posts and Telegraph Union ; Luis Ortega, General Secretary of the Electricity and Gas Workers' Federation, and many others. The Public Prosecutor is said to have asked for a penalty of three years' imprisonment and a fine of 100,000 pesos against these workers ; the proceedings are said to involve all the officers of the National Executive Committee of the C.U.T. In its communication of 6 April 1956 the Confederation of Latin American Workers states that the arrested persons were refused bail. The Maritime Confederation of Chile in its communication of 10 March 1956 makes the general allegation that " trade union leaders are alleged to be enemies of law and order and to be active in parties attempting to destroy the democratic system of government and are being arrested, imprisoned and banished to desolate places ".
  28. 28 Lastly the World Federation of Trade Unions gives a more detailed account of the arrests of trade unionists in its communication dated 22 March 1956. It states that the Chilean Government has undertaken large-scale repression against those who participated in the strike organised on 9 January 1956 by the C.U.T. The strike is said to have been held in order to protest against restrictions on wage increases. The following members of the National Executive Committee of the C.U.T are stated to have been detained prior to 9 January Clotario Blest Riffo (President), Juan Vargas Puebla (Treasurer), Ernesto Mirando, Armando Aguirre, Gilberto Cea, José Diaz Iturrieta, Raúl Pinto and Luis Quiroga. About 45 provincial trade union officers, six of whom are mentioned in the complaint, are said to have been arrested. While some of those arrested, such as Blest Riffo and Puebla, were imprisoned in Santiago, a considerable number of union officials have been interned in concentration camps at Pisagua, Maullin and Melinka. At the end of February, 13 out of the 23 members of the National Executive Committee of the C.U.T were in prison ; a further 12 had been sentenced in default and may be arrested at any moment. On 16 February Miguel Prádenas, head of the office of the Inter-American Regional Organisation of Workers in Chile, was arrested. Nicomedes D. Alvarez, President of the Railways Workers' Federation, and Luis Ortega, Secretary of the Electricity and Gas Federation, are said to have been detained at the end of February. This communication from the W.F.T.U is accompanied by an " incomplete list of arrested trade unionists " giving their names, trade union membership, trade union office and place of detention. In its later communication of 16 May 1956 the W.F.T.U stated that Professor Carlos Matús, Director of High School No. 89 in Santiago and member of the National Committee of the Union of Teachers and of the National Executive of the C.U.T, had been arrested and tried on 29 March 1956 " merely because he belonged to the National Executive of the C.U.T. ".
  29. 29 According to the communication sent by the National Bakers' Federation of Chile and other Chilean trade unions on 23 May 1956, Clotario Blest Riffo, Manuel Collao, Baudilio Casanova, Isidoro Godoy Bravo, Juan Vargas, Julio Alegria, Carlos Matús, Héctor Durón, Ramón Dominguez, Luis Figueroa, Bernardo Araya and René Reyes, members of the National Executive Committee of the C.U.T, were provisionally released after spending more than 100 days in prison. The Central All-Indonesian Council of Trade Unions alleges in general terms that the Government of Chile has arbitrarily imprisoned trade union officials.
• Allegations relating to the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy
  30. 30 The National Bakers' Federation of Chile alleges that the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy under which the officers of the C.U.T were arrested and charged constitutes " a blot on the democratic system " since it abolishes the workers' rights and liberties of organisation " particularly for all those in state service" ; and that it also abolishes the right to strike by transforming illegal strikes into penal offences. This offence is considered to be aggravated if committed in emergency zones, as would be the case at present [the beginning of 1956] when a state of emergency has been proclaimed over the whole country. The law also gives the Executive " the most unusual means of repression " ; "trade union officials who are placed on trial ... have not even the right of appeal as laid down generally under other legislation " if they are refused provisional release. The W.F.T.U in its communication of 22 March 1956 declares that " the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy makes it possible to give a legal appearance to the most arbitrary measures against the unions ". The C.U.T, in its communication dated 23 February 1957, states that this Law " is strictly applied against all trade union leaders ... who honourably and loyally defend their fellow workers in order to free them from exploitation and to achieve better living conditions for them ". Thousands of trade union members are alleged to have been imprisoned, dismissed from their employment or removed with loss of pension rights from their offices, deprived of their civic rights or exiled to desolate areas on account of " offences " committed contrary to the Law in question. The Posts and Communications Trade Union of the Free German Trade Unions (Berlin) alleges, in its communication dated 3 November 1955, that during a strike of customs employees in Valparaiso officials of the Customs Employees' Union were detained.
• Allegations relating to the Yáñez-Koch Decree (Decree No. 4161 of 20 September 1955)
  31. 31 The National Bakers' Federation of Chile alleges that the so-called Yáñez-Koch Decree " hands over the approval of candidates for trade union office to the investigation services ", so that it is no longer the workers who freely and independently elect their officers. The screening is carried out by the Investigation Service through the political police, in the same way as for administrators and governors. Such government intervention is contrary to the provisions of International Labour Conventions, and even the Office of the Controller-General of the Republic has given an adverse opinion on the decree. Similar allegations are made by the Confederation of Latin American Workers and the Maritime Confederation of Chile ; the latter states that under the Yáñez-Koch Decree, " candidates for trade union office are liable to indiscriminate checking by political officials ". The C.U.T alleges that the application of Decree No. 4161 " has prevented over 3,000 workers, both wage earners and salaried employees, who had been democratically elected by their fellow members, from assuming the offices to which they had been elected. This system is transforming the trade unions and occupational associations in general into simply bureaucratic agencies working in the interests of employers, the Government and the police." It is contended that this Yáñez-Koch Decree, in conjunction with the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy, " totally distorts the function of trade unions and converts them into instruments of economic, social and moral persecution and exploitation directed against the workers themselves, on the pretext that they hold particular political views. This allegation is never backed up by trustworthy documentary evidence ; even if it were " -continues the complainant-" it is not an offence to hold Marxist political views, of whatever persuasion, since on such matters there are no infallible dogmas and nobody can claim to be the depository of absolute truth." In appreciation of the above legal texts persons appointed by the Government take it upon themselves to represent the Chilean workers without the latter having been consulted in the matter.
• Allegations relating to the Non-Recognition of the Sole Union of Chilean Workers (C.U.T.) and Other Trade Union Organisations
  32. 32 The National Bakers' Federation of Chile alleges that the Government, contrary to the provisions of International Labour Conventions, refuses to acknowledge the existence of the Sole Union of Chilean Workers (C.U.T.) and denies it legal personality for the representation of the workers. The same thing is stated to have occurred with the national industry federations, despite the fact that the unions are active in the defence of the members. In particular, the Government has refused to give the C.U.T authority to represent workers in relations with state bodies during collective disputes. The pretext alleged is that the C.U.T is a seditious organisation ; nevertheless, according to the complaint, the Government itself asked the C.U.T to participate in working parties, and even Ministers of State have attended meetings of the organisation to make statements on aspects of the Government's economic policy. The fact that the C.U.T and the national federations are not constituted in accordance with the Labour Code is due to the fact that the law prohibits the existence of national Confederations and only authorises federations of works unions and craft unions. Hence the organisations have had to be formed on a de facto basis.
  33. 33 According to the W.F.T.U the refusal to recognise the C.U.T is a very serious violation of trade union rights since it is the " true national trade union organisation in Chile...". It was set up in 1953 at a congress attended by 2,600 delegates sent directly from the unions. Its representative character is demonstrated by the fact that 36 national federations are affiliated to it ; it has a membership of between 750,000 and 800,000. Even if the C.U.T has no " juridical personality " it is lawful under article 10 (5) of the Constitution of Chile, which guarantees all citizens the right of association without prior authorisation. In July 1955 joint committees were formed with representatives of the Government and of the C.U.T to examine the workers' claims, and this proves that the Government itself recognises the organisation as the most representative national organisation.
• Allegations relating to the Right of Assembly
  34. 34 The Confederation of Latin American Workers, the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions and the Maritime Confederation of Chile allege offences against the right of assembly. It is said not to be possible to hold meetings in the northern part of the country, in which a continuous state of emergency has existed. No trade union meetings can be held without prior permission and without representatives of the political police being present. On 1 March 1956 armed police and investigation agents occupied the headquarters of the C.U.T, thus preventing exercise of the right of trade union assembly and forcing the organisation to give up its premises. Meetings by trade unions were prohibited after the strike on 9 January 1956.
• Allegations relating to Freedom of Expression
  35. 35 The Maritime Confederation of Chile in its communication dated 10 March 1956 states that " no one can express publicly any opposition to the repression carried out by the Government because he would be immediately arrested and imprisoned ".
• Allegations relating to Restrictions on the Formation and Functioning of Trade Unions
  36. 36 The Maritime Confederation of Chile alleges that Chilean workers are unable to form trade union organisations without the prior consent of the Government, which is contrary to the provisions of International Labour Conventions. The Confederation of Latin American Workers says that the coalminers have been the subject of attacks against trade union rights, ordered by the Administrator (Intendente) of the province of Concepción and by the authorities of the armed police ; and that the officers of the Schwager Works Union, who are named in the complaint, have been forbidden to act. These measures are stated to be contrary to a decision of the Appeal Court of the province of Concepción, which acquitted these workers in the proceedings ordered by the Government against them. Lastly, the National Bakers' Federation of Chile, in its communication of 4 June 1956, says that the fact that there are only about 350,000 organised workers out of a total of 2 million is due not only to legal difficulties but also " to the Government's interest in hindering the formation of unions and the election of their executives ". There are not only obstacles to the organisation of certain categories of workers but, in addition, formation of national Confederations uniting wage and salary earners in different trades is prohibited.
• Allegations relating to Restrictions on the Trade Union Liberty of Agricultural Workers and Civil Servants
  37. 37 The Maritime Confederation of Chile, in its communication of 10 March 1956, alleges that the Government disregards the right of organisation of the rural workers ; the Labour Code lays down provisions which make the exercise of that right illusory since it expressly prohibits strikes and gives union officials no protection against dismissal as it does in the industrial sector. It is also stated that public officials are denied the right to organise, and that these are given no hearing when they have complaints against arbitrary superiors or when they present salary claims. The Committee on Human Rights has already called the attention of the Government to this breach of the international Conventions.
  38. 38 The National Bakers' Federation of Chile and other Chilean trade union organisations point out, in their communication of 23 May 1956, that the Committee of Experts has repeatedly called the attention of the Government to its non-observance of the Right of Association (Agriculture) Convention, 1921 (No. 11). These repeated requests have been without effect and the agricultural workers are deprived of the most elementary rights of association and collective bargaining. In this way over 600,000 rural workers are cut off from all social progress.
• Allegations relating to the Law for the Stabilisation of Salaries, Wages and Prices
  39. 39 The Maritime Confederation of Chile alleges that Law No. 12006 of 23 January 1956 on the stabilisation of salaries, wages and prices has benefited speculators and prejudiced the workers. This Law is said to have kept down wages and salaries but enabled employers to meet their taxation liabilities and do without bank credit. The Law only permits wages and salaries to be adjusted by up to 50 per cent of the increase in the cost of living, as determined by the Office of the Director-General of Statistics ; in 1955, however, the index rose by 93 per cent while the increases granted were only 46.5 per cent and this fact caused discontent. According to the communication of the National Bakers' Federation on 23 May 1956 the unions protested strongly against this Law when it was under discussion. But the Government, instead of calling the unions to take part in studying the question, applied the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy to their responsible officials, as seen above.
• Second Group of Complaints (Cases Nos. 153 and 154)
• Allegations relating to the Violation of Trade Union Rights and Reprisals against Trade Unionists in Connection with a Strike of Bank Employees
  40. 40 The Association of Bank Employees of Uruguay, in its communication of 1 October 1956, and the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions, in its communication of 6 November 1956, both of which are endorsed by the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions of Salaried Employees, Technicians, Managerial Staff and Commercial Travellers and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, allege that on the occasion of a bank employees' strike which took place in September 1956 the Chilean Government committed a violation of trade union freedom. The facts can be summed up as follows : the employees' union of the Bank of London and South America asked the management to advance the end-of-year bonus due to them. The Bank refused and the staff decided to strike. Since the Federation of Bank Employees' Unions did not approve the strike, the trade union concerned instructed its legal adviser to seek a solution by means of conciliation. The strike was suspended, the Minister of Labour having agreed to act as mediator. Nevertheless, the Bank of London and South America made it a condition of the return of the staff that they should renounce their claim and, moreover, dismissed without justification the six employees who had spoken at the trade union meeting in favour of the strike. In view of these dismissals the Federation of Bank Employees' Unions, in accordance with a previous agreement, called a general strike of bank employees. This strike was observed by all bank employees throughout the territory of Chile, including the employees of the State Bank. In view of this situation the Government ordered the military to take control of all banks and proclaimed the strike illegal. These measures were based on the provisions of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy which prohibits strikes not only in the case of public officials but also of " workers and employees of private undertakings and institutions which are responsible for the services of public utility " (article 3 (4) ). The military summoned the employees to resume work under penalty of cancellation of their labour contracts. The Government, on the other hand, ordered the detention of all union officials of the bank employees' unions. The bankers, backed by the military and the police, took repressive measures in order to " behead the trade union movement among bank officials ". Police persecution is alleged to have been forceful the employees are reported to have been invited to choose between prison and resumption of work. Their homes are alleged to have been broken into. In view of this situation the arrested leaders of the bank employees' unions ordered from their prison that the strike should cease and work be resumed on 5 September 1956.
  41. 41 The dismissals which followed the strike are alleged to have been made upon the general instructions of the Bankers' Association. All the banks, with one exception, are alleged to have dismissed trade union officials. In the Banco Español-Chile, where the reprisals are alleged to have been particularly severe, even members of the previous trade union executive are alleged to have been dismissed. The Government is alleged to have refused to put an end to the reprisals of the bankers, declaring that since contracts of employment had been terminated in accordance with law the banks were entitled to dismiss staff. The complaints list the names of various persons affected by this wave of dismissals. The result of " the persecutions carried on by the Chilean Government against the trade union movement of that country", declares the Association of Bank Employees of Uruguay, " was to destroy entirely the trade unions and the Federation of Bank Employees, whose leaders and former leaders (totalling more than 1,000 officials) are left without employment and 90 per cent of them without a pension .... There are still over 350 bank employees detained in the Chilean prisons on account of their trade union activities."
  42. 42 Among the employees who were victims of this movement of reprisals is Mr. José Goldsack Donoso, President of the Latin American Confederation of Christian Trade Unions and member of the Steering Committee of Trade Union Action in Chile. When the strike broke out Mr. Goldsack Donoso, who was employed by the Banco Español-Chile, was in Havana as the delegate of the Chilean workers to the Sixth Conference of American States Members of the International Labour Organisation (September 1956). His appointment as delegate to that Conference was effected by a Decree of 22 August 1956 and it was the Ministry of Labour itself which obtained the necessary permission from the management of the Banco Español-Chile. During the absence of Goldsack, Donoso the Military Controller, Gustavo Vázquez Román, at the request of the management of the bank signed the cancellation of his contract of employment and the bank refused to accept him upon his return from Havana. Goldsack had played no part at all in the strike and the only reason for his arbitrary dismissal was the fact that he belonged to the trade union committee of his banking establishment. The International Federation of Christian Trade Unions considers it inadmissible that a State Member of the I.L.O should dismiss the Workers' delegate to an I.L.O. Conference " while he is carrying out his mandate ; measures of this kind impede the normal functioning of the I.L.O.".
  43. 43 According to the Association of Bank Employees of Uruguay, the American Confederation of Bank Employees has its headquarters in Santiago de Chile. Three members of its executive, Humberto Moreno, Ricardo Cruz Laso and Mario Bravo, in spite of being international trade union leaders and not being connected with the Chilean bank dispute, were imprisoned together with the Chilean trade union leaders. Cruz Laso and Mario Bravo, who had taken no part in the strike, were released but lost their posts and their right to a pension. Humberto Moreno, General Secretary of the American Confederation of Bank Employees, was still in prison at the date at which the complaint was made, after having spent seven days in close confinement. He, too, has lost his post.
  44. 44 To sum up, the plaintiff organisations accuse the Chilean Government of having detained three international trade union leaders who had nothing to do with the dispute in which the Union of Chilean Bank Employees was involved ; of not having respected Chilean legislation concerning conciliation, supporting employers in their decision in favour of mass dismissal of the workers ; and of resorting to violent reprisals and upholding persecution of the trade unions. They request that the leaders of the bank employees' unions now under arrest be set free and that the Government should recognise the right of bank employees to exercise their trade union rights with full freedom.
• Allegations relating to the Violation of Trade Union Rights on the Occasion of a Strike in the Nitrate Mines of Pedro de Valdivia
  45. 45 The Miners' Trade Union International (W.F.T.U) in communications dated 25 October and 26 November 1956 and the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions in its communications dated 29 October and 6 November 1956 alleged that since the beginning of 1956 the union of the nitrate undertaking of Pedro de Valdivia belonging to the Anglo-Lautaro Nitrate Co. had presented a list of claims of an economic and social nature. Since the beginning of negotiations the Government had supported the employers, raising obstacles to the solution of this dispute. The workers were thus forced to resort to strike in June 1956. This strike, which was quite lawful, affected some 8,500 workers or, taking into account their families, over 30,000 people. On 15 September 1956 the Government issued a decree ordering resumption of work, declaring the strike illegal and placing two nitrate undertakings under military control.
  46. 46 On 17 September 1956 the premises of the Pedro de Valdivia nitrate works union were attacked by pickets of carabineros with tear-gas bombs and firearms. According to the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions this attack took place on 14 September and the purpose of this armed action by the carabineros was to seize the union leaders during a trade union meeting. Shots were fired point-blank and four persons were killed and 20 others severely wounded. Several days later, on 20 September, the Government declared a state of siege in the provinces of Tarapacá and Antofagasta, suspending all Constitutional guarantees in the mining area where it is alleged there was " a reign of police terror" and where there began "an implacable hunt against trade union leaders and the strike committee ". The Chilean trade union organisations and the main political parties condemned the attitude of the Government in this matter and the Chamber of Deputies appointed an investigation committee which went to the spot in order to inquire into the event and " assess the responsibility for this cowardly massacre ". On 25 October the C.U.T held a public meeting of protest. Nevertheless the state of siege continues and trade union leaders are prevented from exercising their rights.
• ANALYSIS OF THE REPLIES
  47. 47 The Government submitted its observations in communications dated 7 May and 10 October 1956 and 12 January 1957, which are analysed below. The Government's observations relate merely to the first group of complaints analysed above. In the first of the two communications the Government points out, as regards the situation arising out of the detention of Isidoro Godoy Bravo, that, although the Convention of 21 November 1947 on privileges and immunities, which was ratified by Chile on 21 September 1951, gives that person " immunity from personal arrest or detention and from seizure of his personal baggage and, in respect of words spoken or written and of acts done by him in his official capacity, immunity from legal process of every kind ", it should be remembered that section 17 of the same Convention provides that such immunity shall not be " applicable in relation to the authorities of a State of which the person is a national or of which he is or has been a representative ". The Political Constitution of the Republic, continues the Government, lays down the total independence of the three powers of the State, it belonging exclusively to the judiciary under article 80 " to judge civil and criminal cases .... Neither the President of the Republic nor the Congress may in any circumstances perform judicial functions, deal with pending cases or reopen proceedings which have been terminated." The Administrator (Intendente) of the province of Santiago brought a charge in the First Appeals Court of the capital against the officers of the C.U.T because this organisation declared a national strike of indefinite duration on 9 January 1956. The aim was to exercise pressure on the Legislature to reject a Bill on the stabilisation of prices, wages and salaries. The pressure which the organisation attempted to bring on the Legislature by means of the strike involved the offence of sedition ; article 3 of the Constitution lays down in this connection that "no person or meeting of persons may claim to be or to represent the people or to arrogate its rights or to make petitions in its name. Infringement of this article is sedition." Moreover, the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy reads in paragraph (10) of article 2 as follows:
• Article 2. It shall be an offence against the internal security of the State, punishable by the maximum degree for a minor sentence of penal servitude, imprisonment, banishment to a specified area or deportation and a fine of from 5,000 to 50,000 pesos for any person ... (10) to hold, organise or facilitate a meeting for the purpose of overthrowing the lawfully established Government, to conspire against or in any way attack the legal or Constitutional system and the internal peace of the State, to plan sabotage, destruction, a stoppage, a slow-down or any other act for the purpose of wilfully disturbing the normal functioning of the country's production, with a view to harming the national economy or to interrupting any public utility service.
• Paragraph (4) of article 3 states as follows:
• Article 3. It shall be an offence against public order, punishable by the maximum degree for a minor sentence of penal servitude, imprisonment, banishment to a specified area or deportation and a fine of from 3,000 to 20,000 pesos for any person to ... (4) organise, maintain or encourage any stoppage or strike in violation of the law governing these, thereby causing or threatening to cause any disturbance of public order or of public utility services or services which are legally compelled to operate or any damage to an essential industry.
• On this legal basis proceedings were instituted (bearing the number 1/56) by the Public Prosecutor of the First Appeals Court of Santiago, Mr. Marco Aurelio Velázquez, who took out a warrant of arrest against the officers of the C.U.T, among whom was Mr. Isidoro Godoy Bravo. Once this person had come before the ordinary courts and was duly charged, the Executive could not intervene in his favour in view of the Constitutional separation of powers. Godoy Bravo requested provisional release on bail, but this was rejected by the investigating magistrate ; an appeal against this decision was rejected unanimously by the second division of the First Appeals Court of Santiago. A further application for bail was accepted on 2 May 1956. The Government states that Godoy Bravo was given facilities to attend the 131st Session of the Governing Body.
  48. 48 At the seventh sitting of the 131st Session of the Governing Body (Geneva, March 1956), Mr. Donoso Silva, Chilean Government representative, stated that the Government had given Godoy Bravo an official passport to attend the Governing Body but that the intervention of the judicial authorities made it impossible for the Executive to act. It was true that diplomatic immunity should be fully respected, he went on, but " it also implied a certain responsibility on the part of those who enjoyed it to avoid becoming involved in offences for which they could be prosecuted by the judiciary under the ordinary law ". The detention of Godoy Bravo and other officers of the C.U.T had been carried out lawfully, as stated by the investigating judge who rejected the habeas corpus plea made on behalf of those detained. Moreover, the judge who ordered the detention of Godoy Bravo and the other officers on 19 February 1956 had carried out a thorough examination of the criminal liability incurred by those persons, as shown by the length of time between the date of the strike (9 January 1956) giving rise to the Government's prosecution and the date of the detention order.
  49. 49 The Government continues, in its communication of 7 May 1956, by pointing out that Godoy Bravo was not the only official of the C.U.T to be prosecuted and detained for sedition and violation of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy. Some of these were released, such as Messrs. Eduardo Long Alessandri and Wenceslao Moreno, without the Government having to interfere with the traditional independence of the courts of the Republic. Clotario Blest Riffo, Juan Vargas, Baudilio Casanova, Julio Alegria and Manuel Collao were released on bail on 2 May 1956.
  50. 50 As regards the alleged violations of trade union rights, the Government states that trade union organisations are governed by the provisions of Book III of the Labour Code (articles 365 et seq.). Chile was the first American country to enact a special law, in 1924, for trade unions. The fact that some courts have tried citizens for seditious activities of a purely political character involves no violations of the trade union rights recognised by the Chilean legislation. During 1956 the formation of 30 new unions was authorised and the number of unions had risen in 1955 by 142. There are at present 2,340 unions with 339,151 members.
  51. 51 The Sole Union of Chilean Workers (C.U.T.) has no legal existence in Chile ; it has no legal personality and it violates the provisions laid down in the Labour Code for Confederations of trade unions. The same applies to the Maritime Confederation of Chile. This fact is due to the intrusion of political elements, as already pointed out by the Chilean Workers' delegate at the 30th Session of the International Labour Conference. This political factor, continues the Government, explains the lack of stability of the different bodies which have claimed, through the years, to represent the Chilean workers, and also the fact that the proportion of organised workers is small in comparison with the total mass of workers. Freedom of association is fully guaranteed in Chile by article 10 of the Constitution : " The Constitution guarantees to all inhabitants of the Republic ... (5) the right of association without previous authorisation subject to compliance with the law ". This Constitutional guarantee is thus conditional on the right being exercised " in conformity with the law ", and this is the reason why the argument of the W.F.T.U regarding the alleged Constitutional legality of the C.U.T is unacceptable. The Government briefly sketches the history of the central Chilean trade union organisations from 1909 up to the present as proof of the transitory character and "lack of legal capacity " of the different organisations. Owing to its having been set up outside the law and to the influence of political elements inside it " the Government of Chile ... cannot, without violating the rules of law and the democratic system of the Republic, recognise the C.U.T as a body representing the workers ".
  52. 52 By Decree No. 4255 of 26 September 1955 the Government proclaimed a state of emergency for six months in the provinces of Tarapacá, Antofagasta, Atacama, O'Higgins and Concepción. This proclamation was made in virtue of the powers of the President of the Republic under item 17 of article 72 of the Constitution. The proclamation of a state of emergency only authorises the President " to move persons from one department to another and to confine them in their own homes or in any place other than a prison or a place intended for the detention or imprisonment of common criminals ". The reason for the decree was the existence of seditious activities with a Communist tendency, notably strikes. Later, by Decree No. 123 of 6 January 1956, a state of emergency, also for six months, was proclaimed in the rest of the country excepting the Antarctic territory. Its preamble alludes " to the subversive action of international communism " and the strike ordered by the C.U.T, " a body formed outside the law which is aiming to become a sovereign power by ordering a nation-wide strike to bring pressure upon the constituted authorities in order to force them to take decisions in favour of demands which are contrary to the highest interests of the nation ". The state of emergency was terminated by Decree No. 935 of 29 February 1956. The Government states that the action of the President of the Republic in respect of certain citizens, under his powers during a state of emergency, cannot be described as arbitrary, nor can it be claimed that a " state of dictatorship " is reigning in Chile.
  53. 53 Mr. Eduardo Long Alessandri, official of the C.U.T, impeached the Minister of the Interior in the Senate under item 2 of article 42 of the Constitution for the injury which he had suffered as a result of the proclaiming of a state of emergency. Acting in a judicial capacity, the Senate rejected the accusation at its meeting on 24 April 1956 by 2 votes to 23, with 4 abstentions. This decision of the Senate confirms that the Government had acted in a lawful manner and that its action deserved the approval of the higher legislative organ of the country.
  54. 54 Finally, the Government rejects other allegations as being " fanciful and unfounded " : there had been no censorship or closing down of newspapers or other publicity media. The exercise of civil liberties had been respected at all times, as also the rights of the " genuine legitimate workers' organisations ", which received the fullest support of the Government. In its communication of 10 October 1956 the Government says that the observations submitted on 7 May 1956 (concerning the complaints transmitted by the Director-General on 20 and 26 March 1956) " also cover the charges made subsequently (complaints transmitted by the Director-General on 24 April, 24 May, 5 June and 16 July), and the Government therefore considers that there is no need to add anything further to what has been said already but, if this becomes necessary, it will do so through its delegate to the Organisation ".
  55. 55 In its communication dated 12 January 1957 the Government states, as regards the allegations on the detention of customs employees, that these officials declared a strike on 26 August 1955 Article 133 of the Civil Service Regulations prohibits strikes for public officials covered by the regulations. Any breach of this prohibition may be punished by removal of the official, apart from any criminal penalties and civil liability involved. In any case officials who have participated in a strike forfeit their remuneration for the period during which they were not working. Law No. 8987 for the Permanent Defence of Democracy, dated 3 September 1948, also provides that strikes in public utility services shall be an offence punishable with imprisonment, penal servitude, banishment or fine. It severely prohibits strikes in any case for " officials, salaried or wage-earning employees of the State, of the municipalities, of state agencies, of public autonomous undertakings or of semi-public institutions ". Strikes are also prohibited among " salaried or wage-earning employees of private undertakings or institutions which provide services of public utility ". In virtue of these provisions, continues the Government, the Intendente of Valparaiso, in exercise of the powers which he possesses under the Criminal Procedure Code, ordered the arrest of the customs officials on strike, for the purpose of bringing them before the courts. The courts tried the arrested persons, who were subsequently released on bail, so that at the date of the complaint, 3 November 1955, none of these persons was in prison. Later they were amnestied by Law No. 12004 of 5 January 1956, article 2 of which specifically defines the situation of officials who have committed breaches of the Civil Service Regulations. Moreover, the Government continues, the complainant organisation is wrong to refer to " officials of the Customs Employees' Union ", since the Labour Code and the Civil Service Regulations do not permit the formation of unions by public employees. Nor is the expression " repressive measures " appropriate, since the arrests in question were a procedural measure adopted by reason of an offence defined in a law passed prior to the perpetration of the offence. The proceedings took place in the ordinary courts, and none of the public employees in question suffered any penalty.

Cases Nos. 131 and 141:

1. Preliminary Question concerning the Complaint by the People's Socialist Party of Chile
2. 56. The Committee considers the complaint by the People's Socialist Party of Chile to be unreceivable on the ground that a political party is not entitled to submit a complaint for examination by the Committee.
3. Allegations relating to the Arrest of Mr. Isidoro Godoy Bravo and Violation of His Immunities
4. 57. According to the complainants, Mr. Isidoro Godoy Bravo, substitute Workers' member of the Governing Body, was arrested by the Chilean authorities in February 1956 in violation of the immunities under article 40 of the Constitution of the I.L.O. He was thus prevented, it is stated, from attending the 131st Session of the Governing Body in March 1956. The arrest is alleged to have occurred during a " wave of repression " against the trade union movement and involved not merely violation of the rights of Chilean workers but also of workers of all countries belonging to the I.L.O. A government cannot, in the complainant's view, be allowed the right to arrest a member of the Governing Body at a time when he has been called upon to carry out his functions ; this would involve an obstruction of the proper functioning of a body of the I.L.O. Mr. Godoy Bravo himself states that he was arrested for alleged breach of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy, and that it is not true that the Government gave him facilities to attend the meeting. It is alleged that the official who ordered the arrest was the Intendente of the province of Santiago, an official under the Ministry of the Interior, who has since been brought before the courts. Mr. Godoy Bravo was provisionally released on bail in May 1956.
5. 58. The Government, in the oral statements made by its representative on the Governing Body and in its communication of 7 May 1956, states that there has been no violation of the Convention of 21 November 1947 on privileges and immunities since this Convention provides that the immunities cannot be invoked against the authorities of the State of which the person in question is a national. Moreover, Godoy Bravo was tried by the ordinary courts whose independence of the Executive is laid down in the Chilean Constitution. When the C.U.T organised a general strike on 9 January 1956 to bring pressure on the Legislature to reject a Bill on the stabilisation of prices, wages and salaries, the Intendente of the province of Santiago brought proceedings in the first Appeals Court of the Capital against the officials of this organisation (including Isidoro Godoy Bravo) for sedition under article 3 of the Political Constitution, and for endangering the security of the State under articles 2 (10) and 3 (4) of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy. The Court, once the trial of the arrested persons had been ordered, rejected an application for release from prison on bail, and this rejection was confirmed by the Appellate Court. This fact, taken in conjunction with the inability of the Executive to intervene in judicial matters, prevented Godoy Bravo from attending the 131st Session of the Governing Body. The arrest and trial of Godoy Bravo was carried out in legal form, since the examining magistrate, before ordering trial, carried out a full examination of the criminal liability of the arrested persons.
6. 59. Article 40 of the Constitution of the I.L.O reads as follows:
7. 1. The International Labour Organisation shall enjoy in the territory of each of its Members such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the fulfilment of its purposes.
8. 2. Delegates to the Conference, members of the Governing Body and the Director-General and officials of the Office shall likewise enjoy such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the independent exercise of their functions in connection with the Organisation.
9. 3. Such privileges and immunities shall be defined in a separate agreement to be prepared by the Organisation with a view to its acceptance by the States Members.
10. 60. The agreement mentioned in paragraph 3 of article 40 is the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the Specialised Agencies, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 21 November 1947 and accepted on 10 July 1948 by the International Labour Conference. Chile adhered to this Convention on 21 September 1951. Section 13 of article V of this Convention states:
11. Representatives of members at meetings convened by a specialised agency shall, while exercising their functions and during their journeys to and from the place of meeting, enjoy the following privileges and immunities:
12. (a) immunity from personal arrest or detention and from seizure of their personal baggage, and in respect of words spoken or written and all acts done by them in their official capacity, immunity from legal process of every kind ;
13. ......................................................................................................................................................
14. According to the Annex to the Convention relating to the International Labour Organisation these immunities are applicable to members of the Governing Body, as follows:
15. In their application to the International Labour Organisation the standard clauses shall operate subject to the following provisions:
16. 1. Article V (other than paragraph (c) of section 13) and section 25, paragraphs 1 and 2 (I) of article VII shall extend to the Employers' and Workers' members and deputy members of the Governing Body of the International Labour Office and their substitutes ; except that any waiver of the immunity of any such person member under section 16 shall be by the Governing Body.
17. ......................................................................................................................................................
18. Section 17 of article V states:
19. The provisions of sections 13, 14 and 15 are not applicable in relation to the authorities of a State of which the person is a national or of which he is or has been a representative.
20. 61. The Government of Chile is clearly correct in considering that section 17 of the Convention on Privileges and Immunities is applicable in view of Mr. Godoy Bravo being a Chilean national. There remains, however, the question whether the action taken was consistent with article 40 of the Constitution which binds all States Members of the Organisation whether they have adhered to the Convention on Privileges and Immunities or not, and which provides that members of the Governing Body shall also enjoy such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the independent exercise of their functions in connection with the Organisation. It is clear that any action the purpose of which was to prevent a member of the Governing Body from discharging his duties as such would be inconsistent with this provision.
21. 62. On a previous occasion (prior to the adoption of article 40 of the Constitution) the Governing Body, when it learnt at its 64th Session (Geneva, October 1933) that a Workers' representative had been arrested by the authorities of his country, unanimously adopted on 24 October 1933 a declaration that no member of the Governing Body, elected by the Employers' and Workers' delegates to the Conference, should be interfered with in any way by reason of action taken in his capacity as a member of the Governing Body. The Committee considers it equally important that no such member should be interfered with in any way to prevent his acting in his capacity as a member of the Governing Body.
22. 63. In the case of Isidoro Godoy Bravo the Government states that he was given an official passport to attend the Governing Body but that the intervention of the judicial authorities, with which the Executive could not interfere in view of the Constitutional separation of powers, made it impossible for the Government to take any further action to facilitate his attendance. One of the complainants contends, however, that the judicial proceedings were initiated on the order of the Ministry of the Interior and the Government states that they were instituted by the Intendente of the province of Santiago following the declaration of a national strike. It is admitted that Mr. Godoy Bravo was provisionally released on 23 May 1956. In these circumstances the Committee considers that, while the charges for which Mr. Godoy Bravo was arrested related to events in Chile, it is most unfortunate that an event arising directly from a strike relating to legislation concerning wages should have had the effect of preventing a Workers' member from attending a session of the Governing Body and that the independence of the judiciary, once proceedings have been initiated, cannot be invoked by the Government in extenuation of action which it admits was initiated by itself. It therefore recommends the Governing Body to draw the attention of the Chilean Government to the importance which the Governing Body attaches to the principle set forth in article 40 of the Constitution that members of the Governing Body shall enjoy such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the independent exercise of their functions. Subject to this, the Committee considers that, as Mr. Godoy Bravo has now been provisionally released, it would be unprofitable to pursue the matter further.
23. Allegations relating to the Persecution of Trade Unions and the Detention of Trade Unionists.
24. 64. The various complainants allege that the Government launched a campaign of persecution against trade union organisations and leaders, the majority of the officers of the C.U.T being arrested and tried. The reason for this campaign and the arrests, it is contended, was to combat a strike declared on 9 January 1956 by the C.U.T to protest against the blocking of salary and wage increases. The Government is stated to have had recourse to armed force to put down the strike. Among the names mentioned by the complainants occur those of the members of the National Council of the C.U.T, against whom the Public Prosecutor had applied for three years' imprisonment in addition to a fine of 100,000 pesos. It is alleged that the release on bail of the prisoners was refused, and that the representative of the Inter-American Regional Organisation of Workers was detained. The complaint by the W.F.T.U is accompanied by a long list of arrested trade unionists, giving names, trade union membership, trade union functions and place of arrest. A large number of officials are said to have been interned in concentration camps. As regards the detention of Godoy Bravo, a member of the National Council of the C.U.T, the prosecution is said to have been initiated by the Intendente of the province of Santiago, an official under the Ministry of the Interior, for alleged breach of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy ; when brought before the courts Godoy Bravo was refused release on bail until May 1956. At this time the other members of the National Council of the C.U.T were also provisionally released.
25. 65. The Government, for its part, states in its communication dated 7 May 1956 that the procedure followed in the case of Godoy Bravo was the same as that followed in relation to the other leaders of the C.U.T. Since this organisation had declared a seditious strike, they were brought before the courts for breaches of various articles of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy and tried. Some of those arrested, such as Eduardo Long and Wenceslao Moreno, were later released, while others, such as Clotario Blest Riffo, Juan Vargas, Baudilio Casanova, Julio Alegria and Manuel Collao, were subsequently released on bail without the Government having to intervene in the traditional independence of the courts. The fact that some courts had tried citizens for seditious activities of a political character does not mean, according to the Government, any violation of trade union rights. From September 1955 until February 1956 the whole or part of the country was under martial law. In such a situation the President of the Republic has power to remove persons to the interior of the country and to imprison them in places different from those allotted to ordinary offenders. Martial law was decreed on 6 January 1956 specifically to deal with the strike ordered by the C.U.T. The exercise of the Constitutional powers of the President of the Republic cannot, in the Government's view, be termed arbitrary and it is not possible to maintain, as some of the complainants have done, that the country is under a dictatorship. The Senate, acting as a jury, recognised the legality of the acts of the Executive.
26. 66. In earlier cases in which the Committee has had to examine allegations relating to the prosecution of trade union officials and active trade unionists, it considered that the only question to be answered was the real reason for the arrests or trials. Only if these were ordered by reason of the trade union activities of the arrested persons had a violation of freedom of association occurred. In the present case it appears that the arrest and trial of members of the National Council of the C.U.T were ordered on the ground of violation of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy, a law which the Committee has already had occasion to examine in part. Other arrests, however, were ordered by the President of the Republic in the exercise of the powers which the Political Constitution give him during a state of emergency. In Case No. 56 (Uruguay), when the Committee examined the allegations relating to the limitation of trade union rights and human rights during the currency of emergency regulations, it expressed the hope " that governments ... will have re course, when dealing with situations resulting from strikes and lockouts, to measures provided for under common law rather than to emergency measures, which, even though taken in accordance with the national Constitution and applied subject to parliamentary control, involve a danger, by reason of their very nature, of certain restrictions being placed on fundamental rights ".
27. 67. As regards the detention of members of the National Council of the C.U.T, including Isidoro Godoy Bravo, it appears that they were prosecuted in the ordinary courts for alleged violation of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy. In such circumstances it does not seem possible for the Committee to give a decision on these allegations and any violation of trade union rights involved until the judicial authorities of Chile have determined the case in a final manner. In view, however, of the fact that the detention for several months of these trade union leaders has prevented them from carrying out their trade union activities, the Committee considers that, in accordance with its practice in earlier cases, it should call the attention of the Chilean Government to the importance of giving every trade unionist arrested a possibility of enjoying the guarantees of due legal process and request to inform the Committee of the decisions of the courts against the members of the National Committee of the C.U.T.
28. 68. As regards the other persons mentioned in the complaint, especially in the list annexed to the communication dated 22 March 1956 from the World Federation of Trade Unions-a list which contains the names of more than 100 persons, indicating their trade union functions and the places in which they exercise them-the Government merely refers specifically to two of them, namely Eduardo Long and Wenceslao Moreno. As regards the remainder the Government simply indicates that the measures taken against " certain citizens " in the exercise of the Constitutional powers of the Executive during an emergency involve no arbitrariness or violation of law. In these circumstances the Committee, recalling its earlier remarks to the effect that, in case of precise allegations on the arrest of trade unionists, even during a state of emergency, the information from the Government must be sufficiently detailed to enable it to judge whether the detentions were for reasons of trade union activities by the persons detained and whether these have all the guarantees of due legal process, considers it necessary to request the Government of Chile for further information on the situation of all these detained persons mentioned in the complaints made on 22 March and 16 May 1956 by the World Federation of Trade Unions, on 6 April 1956 by the Confederation of Latin American Workers, on 3 May 1956 by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, and on 23 May 1956 by the National Bakers' Federation of Chile and other Chilean trade unions.
29. Allegations relating to the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy
30. 69. The National Bakers' Federation of Chile, the World Federation of Trade Unions and the Sole Union of Chilean Workers allege that the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy suppresses the workers' rights and freedom of organisation and limits the right to strike by making illegal strikes an offence. The complainant considers that, during an emergency situation such as the state of martial law in Chile at the beginning of 1956, the offence is even more serious. It is alleged that the trade union leaders detained under this Law had no means of appeal because they were refused conditional release and that the law permits "the most arbitrary anti-trade union measures", thousands of trade unionists having been detained under the Law. On the subject of these allegations the Government merely indicates that the prosecution of Isidoro Godoy Bravo and other leaders of the C.U.T was ordered for violation of articles 2 (10) and 3 (4) of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy (Law No. 8987 of 3 September 1948, consolidated by Decree No. 5839 of 30 September 1948).
31. 70. In Case No. 10 (Chile) and Case No. 43 (Chile), the Committee has had occasion to consider various provisions of this Law, namely articles 29, 32 and 37. The Committee found that these provisions relate respectively to a certain form of control by the public authorities on moneys payable to the works unions by way of profit sharing (article 32) ; prohibition of trade union membership for persons on trial or convicted for violation of this Law (article 29) ; and the auditing of accounts and supervision of management and investments of trade unions by the General Inland Revenue Directorate (article 37). The Committee felt that it was strange that a person who was merely on trial but had not been convicted should be deprived of his right to belong to a trade union and that the financial controls described by the Law might give rise to abuses, and recommended the Governing Body in both cases to suggest to the Government of Chile that " it should re-examine certain articles of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy, especially articles 29 and 37, with a view to seeing whether it would not be desirable to introduce certain modifications in the light of the Conventions on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise and on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining ".
32. 71. Up to the present these articles of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy had not been amended in any way. This Law, as consolidated by Decree No. 5839 of 30 September 1948, is a text of general scope which contains not merely various penal provisions relating to offences against the internal security of the State and public order but also rules relating to the procedure of courts, to the exercise of the freedom of the press, to trade union matters and other labour organisations, to the electoral system, etc. In view of the fact that the main rules relating to freedom of association are those articles which the Committee has already had occasion to examine and that the allegation is of a general character, the Committee considers it unnecessary to re-examine these articles and therefore recommends the Governing Body to draw the attention of the Government to the recommendation which it has already made in Cases Nos. 10 and 43, and to repeat them.
33. 72. As regards the exercise of the right to strike, article 3 (4) of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy (one of the articles in virtue of which the leaders of the C.U.T were prosecuted, as indicated by the Government) states as follows:
34. Article 3. It shall be an offence against public order, punishable by the maximum degree for a minor sentence of penal servitude, imprisonment, banishment to the specific area or deportation and a fine of from 3,000 to 20,000 pesos for any person to ... (4) organise, maintain or encourage any stoppage or strike in violation of the Law governing these, thereby causing or threatening to cause any disturbance of public order or of public utility services or services which are legally compelled to operate or any damage to any essential industry. Officials or employees of the Government, of municipalities, government agencies, or autonomous public undertakings, or of semi-public institutions, shall in no case be entitled to declare a strike or suspend work. This also applies to wage and salary earners employed by private undertakings or institutions responsible for public utility services. Any person who incites, provokes or supports such strike or suspension of work shall be liable to the penalty laid down in this article, and his post or function may be immediately declared vacant and his contract of employment terminated. Collective disputes arising in private undertakings or institutions covered by this provision shall be submitted ... in first instance to compulsory arbitration by a tribunal of three members having the character of an umpire of arbitrators and composed of one representative of employers, one representative of workers and one representative of the institutions or undertakings affected and by one person appointed in each case by the President of the Republic.
35. According to this text strikes declared, " in violation of the statutory provisions " are offences against public order.
36. 73. In this connection it is alleged that trade union leaders of the customs employees were the subject of reprisals in connection with a strike, and that 16 workers were arrested, eight of whom were trade union officials. The Government explains that, since strikes by public employees are prohibited and punished both by administrative and criminal law, a certain number of officials of the Valparaiso customs were arrested by the Intendente of that city in August 1955 and brought before the ordinary courts. The courts ordered them to be tried ; the arrested persons were released on bail and subsequently were amnestied by a special law. No employees consequently suffered any penalty. Moreover, the Government adds, it is untrue to say that there were trade union officials among those arrested, since specific statutory provisions prohibit employees of the State from forming trade unions or belonging to trade unions.
37. 74. Article 3 (4) of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy (reproduced above) prohibits strikes in the public sector. That provision is repeated in article 133 of the Civil Service Regulations, which reads as follows:
38. Employees covered by these Regulations are prohibited from the following : strikes, total or partial suspension or stoppage of work, " go-slow " action, " sit-down " strikes or any other unlawful act disturbing the regular functioning of governmental services or corporations or public services generally. Any branch of this prohibition is punishable with a maximum penalty of dismissal of the official who initiated or participated in the act, apart from criminal liability and any civil liability for damage or loss caused by the act to the State or third parties. In every case the officials participating in acts of this kind shall be deprived of all remuneration for the time not worked.
39. 75. The Government states that, in pursuance of these provisions punishing strikes by public officials and employees, the Intendente of Valparaiso issued orders for the arrest of the customs employees who had inaugurated a strike on 28 August 1955. The Intendente was acting in virtue of the powers which he possesses under article 258 of the Criminal Procedure Code which states:
40. The chief officers (gobernadores) of the departments may issue detention orders, where they have reason to believe that there is real danger of evasion of justice through delay in obtaining it from the judicial authority, for the apprehension of persons guilty of the following offences : (1) crimes or misdemeanours against the external security and sovereignty of the State or against internal security ...
41. Nevertheless, the criminal proceedings initiated were interrupted (and consequently none of the arrested persons was convicted) through the application of the Amnesty Law No. 12004 of 5 January 1956 which states:
42. Article 1. An amnesty is granted to all persons responsible for any misdemeanour or minor offence punishable under Law No. 8987 of 3 September 1948 for the Permanent Defence of Democracy, committed before 18 October 1955, and to all persons at present on trial for misdemeanours punished by the said Law and committed before the said date.
43. Provided that the amnesty under the preceding paragraph shall not apply to persons who have been convicted or to persons who at the date of promulgation of the present Law are on trial for inciting or participating in the perpetration of the offences of homicide, grave injuries, robbery with violence or arson, or of any of the crimes or misdemeanours mentioned in article 480 of the Criminal Code.
44. Article 2. Neither the penalties laid down in the service regulations for the personnel of the public services, semi-public services, semi-public autonomous services, autonomous bodies, municipal bodies and the State Public Transport Corporation, nor those indicated in the Labour Code, shall apply to wage or salary earners who have committed any of the offences indicated in those laws, in respect of offences covered by the first paragraph of the preceding article.
45. 76. As the Committee has stated on numerous occasions, the right of workers and workers' organisations to strike as a legitimate means of defence for their professional interests is generally recognised. This general principle is nevertheless subject to restrictions, as the Committee has frequently found, in the case of services which are considered to be essential and as regards the Civil Service. In those cases the Committee stressed the importance of providing some procedure which will ensure peaceful settlement of such disputes so that workers who are deprived of an essential means of occupational defence such as a legal strike may have appropriate guarantees. In the present case, nevertheless, apart from the question that certain trade union leaders of the customs employees were prosecuted for violations of the provisions of the Law, the general allegations that the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy imposes limitations on the right to strike in general which are incompatible with freedom of association is not supported by adequate proof. The Law only imposes penalties for " illegal strikes ". In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to decide that this general allegation concerning the right to strike does not call for further examination.
46. 77. With respect to the prohibition of strikes in the public sector, the Committee, in Case No. 60 relating to Japan, stated that " civil servants enjoying statutory terms and conditions are, in the majority of countries, denied the right to strike as a normal condition in the legislation governing their employment, and that there is no reason to give further consideration to this aspect of the question ". It is true that, in the present case, Chilean legislation does not merely prohibit strikes for public officials and make strikers liable to administrative penalties but makes strikes a criminal offence with severe penalties involving imprisonment, under article 3 (4) of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy. Moreover, public officials are deprived by the same Law of the right to form trade union organisations. The penalties for strikes by public officials are applied, according to the provisions of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy, by the ordinary courts. In the present case strike of customs employees-however, the criminal proceedings were interrupted by the Amnesty Law of 5 January 1956.
47. 78. In these circumstances, since the matter is one of a strike of public officials covered by special service regulations, the Committee reaffirms its earlier decisions. Nevertheless, since the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy makes what would be a mere disciplinary offence under the Civil Service Regulations punishable by administrative penalties into a criminal offence punishable with severe penalties, the Committee draws the attention of the Government of Chile to this point, in order that it may consider the desirability of amending article 3 (4) of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy. However, in view of the fact that in this particular case the criminal proceedings were interrupted by an amnesty law, the Committee considers that there is no purpose in continuing the examination of these particular allegations.
48. 79. Finally, the complainants allege that the trade union leaders detained for violations of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy could not appeal because they were refused provisional liberty. Article 18 (k) of the Law - relating to procedure-states that " in these proceedings an appeal shall only lie in respect of a final judgment, of an order which puts a permanent or temporary end to the proceedings, or an order conceding provisional liberty ". It thus seems that an order denying provisional liberty cannot be appealed against. Nevertheless it appears from an examination of earlier allegations that the officials of the C.U.T, for example, in fact brought an appeal when they were refused provisional release, and successfully repeated this procedure. In these circumstances the Committee considers that there is no purpose in continuing the examination of this point.
49. Allegations relating to the Yáñez-Koch Decree (Decree No. 4161 of 20 September 1955)
50. 80. Some of the complainants allege that the so-called Yáñez-Koch Decree prevents the workers from electing their leaders in full freedom since candidates must have previously obtained the approval of the investigation department of the political police. The Attorney-General of the Republic is said to have issued a decision opposed to the application of the Decree. According to the Sole Union of Chilean Workers, more than 3,000 workers were prevented by this Decree from assuming the trade union offices to which they had been democratically elected by their comrades. The Government submits no observations regarding these allegations.
51. 81. Even though the Government has made no observations on this matter the Committee has been able to examine the substance of the allegation since it relates to a law published in the Chilean Official Gazette. Decree No. 4161 of 20 September 1955 amends articles 30 and 36 of the Decree (Regulations) No. 1030 of 26 December 1949 in the light of the provisions of articles 29 and 36 of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy. Article 36 of that Law provides as follows:
52. Article 36. Persons who have been sentenced for or charged with a crime or misdemeanour or who have had their names removed from electoral or borough rolls or belong to one of the associations, bodies, parties, factions or movements to which articles 1 and 2 of title I of this law relate may not be officers of a union, members of a conciliation board or a special agricultural conciliation and arbitration board, arbitrators or members of an arbitration court dealing with an industrial dispute, members of a joint minimum wage board, members of a labour court, or workers' delegates or members of delegations representing the wage earners or salaried employees involved in an industrial dispute, or take any office as representatives of employers, salaried employees or wage earners on official government or semi-governmental bodies.
53. Decree No. 4161, to which the allegations relate, issues regulations to apply this provision and provides that the list of the names of candidates for trade union office, drawn up at an appropriate general meeting, must be communicated by the officers of the union to the appropriate office of the Labour Inspection Service as follows:
54. Article 1. Within not more than five days the Labour Inspection Office shall forward to the office of the governor of the department a copy of the communication ... together with all the background information that is already available to it or that it can collect, in order that it may be determined whether the candidates elected are or are not affected by one of the grounds of disqualification laid down in article 36 of the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy. The governor of the department shall decide, on receipt of reports from the investigation department, the armed police and the Department of Labour, whether the disqualifications mentioned in the final part of article 36 of the Law shall apply, and, shall communicate his conclusions to the Labour Inspection Office concerned in order that that Office, in turn, may so inform the appropriate union, so that the person or persons affected may be excluded from election to trade union office. The date of election of the officer or officers shall be fixed once the appropriate office of the Labour Inspection Service has granted its visa for the lists naming the candidate or candidates to whom, by decision of the governor of the department, there are no objections. If a disqualified person is elected to a trade union office notwithstanding the communication to which the third paragraph of this article refers, the governor shall demand the cancellation of the incorporation of the union and the ministry responsible shall so decree unless acceptable evidence is forthcoming that the appointment has not been proceeded with.
55. 82. A mere perusal of the provisions reproduced in the preceding paragraph shows that there is incompatibility with the generally accepted principle that workers' and employers' organisations must have the right to elect their representatives in full freedom and that the public authorities must refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof. The incompatibility referred to would seem to be all the more serious because the decree to which the complaint relates provides that in the event of non-compliance the union may be dissolved by administrative action, which is contrary to the principle generally recognised, notably by international Conventions, that workers' and employers' organisations must not be liable to be dissolved or suspended by administrative authority. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to draw the attention of the Government of Chile to the incompatibility of Decree No. 4161 of 20 September 1955 with the principle of freedom of association, in order that it may give consideration to the possibility of repealing it, so that Chilean labour legislation may be brought into conformity with the above-mentioned principles.
56. Allegations relating to the Non-Recognition of the Sole Union of Chilean Workers and Other Workers' Organisations
57. 83. The complainants allege that the Government does not recognise the existence of the Sole Union of Chilean Workers (C.U.T.) and refuses to grant it legal capacity to represent the workers. The Pan-Indonesian Central Council of Trade Unions accuses the Government of intending to destroy the " Chilean Federation of Trade Unions ". The Government is said to have taken up the same attitude with regard to national federations of trade unions. In particular, it is alleged that the Government does not allow the C.U.T to intervene as a representative of the workers in proceedings before state bodies during industrial disputes. The pretext is said to be that this organisation is " seditious ". This, however, is said not to have prevented the Government from calling on the C.U.T to nominate members for joint committees at various times, and it is said that Ministers of State have even attended C.U.T meetings to give information on the Government's economic policy. The fact that the C.U.T is a purely de facto association is due to the statutory prohibition on the existence of national Confederations of workers' organisations that are composed of federations of " works " and " trade " unions. It is stated that in fact the C.U.T is the largest of the existing organisations, and that 36 national federations, with between 750,000 and 800,000 members, are affiliated to it. Its right to exist is derived from the recognition of freedom of association in the Constitution.
58. 84. The Government states for its part that the C.U.T is legally nonexistent : it does not have legal personality and has been established in violation of the provisions of the Labour Code regarding Confederations. It is said that there has been a serious intrusion of political elements in the C.U.T and that this is the main reason for the instability of the various central organisations that have attempted to represent the Chilean workers over the years, and also for the small proportion of workers who joined these organisations. The right of association, which is recognised by article 10 (5) of the Constitution, should be exercised, as stated in the Constitution itself, " in conformity with the law ", and the Government is prevented from granting the C.U.T. " the status of a body representing the workers " because it does not fulfil this condition. The organisation mentioned by the Indonesian organisation is unknown.
59. 85. In Chile the Constitution of employers' and workers' organisations is governed by the Labour Code (articles 365 et seq.) and as regards regulations by Decree No. 1030 of 26 December 1949. Articles 382 and 383 of the Labour Code provide respectively:
60. Article 382. Works unions and trade unions shall be deemed to be lawfully constituted when they have been granted incorporation by the President of the Republic. For this purpose they shall submit an application to the General Labour Inspectorate in conformity with the rules laid down in the regulations. The application and the documents attached thereto shall be exempt from all taxes and fees.
61. Article 383. Every union, after having been incorporated, shall cause itself to be entered in a national register kept by the General Labour Inspectorate. Works unions and trade unions shall be subject to supervision by the General Labour Inspectorate and shall supply the information which they are requested to supply, in conformity with the provisions of the regulations.
62. The procedure of incorporation is specifically governed by articles 10 to 22 of Decree No. 1030. For a union to be validly constituted it is necessary that a labour inspector should be present to ensure that the laws and regulations are complied with (article 11) ; after the Labour Inspection Office has been notified of the formation of a union and a general meeting has adopted the rules and appointed a person to deal on behalf of the union with the matter of incorporation and " any previous amendments of the rules which may be required by the competent authority ", the provisional committee shall send to the President of the Republic an application " asking for approval of the rules and the granting of incorporation " (article 15) ; after studying the documents, the Office of the Director-General of Labour shall indicate any modifications which must be made in the rules and any omissions in the file which must be supplied (article 19). When the foregoing has been completed, the Office of the Director-General of Labour shall submit the application to the Ministry of Labour so that the latter may forward it to the Ministry of Justice " for approval of the rules and granting of incorporation by the President of the Republic " (article 21). Article 9 reads as follows:
63. Unions shall be deemed to be lawfully constituted as soon as they have obtained incorporation. Only then shall they have power to exercise rights and contract obligations, enter into collective contracts, request deductions from remuneration, present demands, receive shares of profits, join federations, etc.
64. As regards the formation of Confederations and federations of unions it is necessary in the first place, as provided for in article 9 of Decree No. 1030 (reproduced above) for the unions that wish to form the federation or Confederation to be incorporated. Moreover, the Labour Code makes different arrangements for the exercise of this right according to whether the unions are " works " or " trade " unions. " The formation of federations or Confederations of works unions shall not be permitted for purposes other than education, relief, provident institutions and the establishment of canteens and co-operative societies " (article 386). On the other hand, " trade unions formed for the same occupation or trade may form federations or Confederations for the study, promotion and legitimate defence of their common interests. Such federations or Confederations shall be incorporated in the manner and under the conditions laid down for the trade unions which constitute them, and shall have the same rights as the latter ; nevertheless, they shall not be entitled to represent the affiliated unions until they have obtained incorporation " (article 414). Finally, article 58 of the regulations provides that unions may form federations or Confederations only for the purpose given in articles 386 and 414 of the Code, and adds : "No union shall belong to any federation or Confederation not formed in accordance with the Labour Code and these regulations".
65. 86. In view of these factors, and in order to make a correct assessment of the contents of the allegations made and the observations submitted, it is necessary to go into the matter in the light of the above-mentioned statutory provisions. The Government admits that the C.U.T is not recognised as being an organisation representative of the workers because it has not been incorporated and has been formed in violation of existing legal provisions. The complainants, on the other hand, maintain that this organisation has been unable to fulfil the requirement of incorporation because the Labour Code does not allow the Confederation of trade and works unions in a single central organisation.
66. 87. In this connection it should be remembered how much importance the International Labour Organisation has always attached to the question of the free Constitution of federations and Confederations of unions. At the first Labour Conference of the American States Members of the International Labour Organisation, held in Santiago de Chile in 1936, a resolution (No. 16) was adopted concerning the creation of employers' and workers' federations, as follows:
67. The Labour Conference of the American States which are Members of the International Labour Organisation, held at Santiago de Chile ;
68. ......................................................................................................................................................
69. Considering ... that it is of great importance for the successful participation of the States Members in the work of the International Labour Organisation that there should exist in the various countries national federations of employers and of workers, to facilitate the task of the governments in fulfilling the obligation to appoint non-government delegates and advisers to the annual International Labour Conference in accordance with article 3 of the said Constitution, which lays down that the nomination of such delegates is to be carried out in agreement with the organisations which are most representative of employers or workpeople ;
70. Considering, however, that in various countries of the American Continent no such central bodies of workers or employers exist;
71. Requests the Governing Body of the International Labour Office to appeal to the governments of those countries where there are, as yet, no such bodies not to hamper any efforts which may be made to create such bodies by the existence of which the participation of the workers' and employers' movements in the activities of the International Labour Organisation may be furthered and facilitated, seeing that article 412 of the Constitution of the International Labour Organisation recognises the right of association for all lawful purposes by the employed as well as by the employers.
72. A resolution confirming that just cited was adopted at the Second Labour Conference of American States, held in Havana in 1939 ; and the Third Conference, in 1946, laid down in one of its resolutions (No. 6), concerning freedom of association, that " organisations should have the right to constitute federations and Confederations of trade organisations ; the formation, operation and dissolution of federations and Confederations should not be subject to formalities other than those prescribed for employers' and workers' organisations. Finally, these principles were endorsed by an International Labour Convention-the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87)-which lays down in Article 5 that " workers' and employers' organisations shall have the right to establish and join federations and Confederations ". Article 7 of the same Convention lays down that when a workers' or employers' organisation has to obtain legal personality in order to be established " the acquisition of legal personality by workers' and employers' organisations, federations and Confederations shall not be made subject to conditions of such a character as to restrict the application of the provisions of Articles 2, 3 and 4 hereof ", that is to say of the rights to establish and to join organisations of their own choosing without previous authorisation, to draw up their Constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom, to organise their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes, etc., without any interference on the part of the public authorities.
73. 88. In these circumstances the Committee considers that the failure to recognise the Sole Union of Chilean Workers, which is admitted by the Government, is due to the fact that Chilean legislation makes the grant of legal personality, without which neither unions nor federations and Confederations have any legal existence in Chile, subject to conditions that are incompatible with the generally accepted principles mentioned in paragraph 87 above. The Committee therefore recommends the Governing Body to draw the attention of the Government of Chile to the desirability of taking the necessary steps to ensure that a freely constituted central organisation can function freely and, with this end in view, of examining the possibility of bringing Chilean labour legislation into conformity with the principles stated above.
74. Allegations relating to the Right of Assembly
75. 89. The complainants allege that since the northern part of the country has been under a state of siege it has not been possible to exercise the right of meeting. It has not been possible to hold trade union meetings without prior authorisation or otherwise than in the presence of representatives of the political police. Trade union meetings in general are said to have been prohibited since the strike of 9 January 1956. The seat of the C.U.T, is said to have been occupied by armed forces on 1 March 1956. The Government confines itself to observing with regard to these allegations that the rights of the citizen, as well as the rights of "genuine and legitimate workers' organisations", have been respected at all times.
76. 90. At various times the Committee has had occasion to refer to the importance of freedom of trade union meeting. In Case No. 56 (Uruguay), for example, following established precedent, the Committee stated that " freedom of trade union meetings constitutes one of the fundamental elements of trade union rights ". In a more recent case, No. 133 (Netherlands-Netherlands Antilles), the Committee emphasised the same principle. It reaffirms this principle in the present case.
77. Allegations relating to Freedom of Expression
78. 91. The Maritime Confederation of Chile alleges that freedom of expression is curtailed and that persons opposed to the Government are subject to punishment. The Government, for its part, states that this allegation is " fanciful " since no papers have been forced to cease publication or have been censored.
79. 92. In these circumstances the Committee, in view of the general character of the allegation, which has no specific connection with a violation of trade union rights, recommends the Governing Body to decide that the allegation does not call for further examination.
80. Allegations relating to Restrictions on the Formation and Functioning of Trade Unions
81. 93. Some of the complainants allege that, in violation of principles recognised by International Labour Conventions, the Government places obstacles in the way of the Constitution of trade unions, which require the " prior consent " of the Government. The Confederation of Workers of Latin America, for its part, states that the trade union rights of the coalworkers in the province of Concepción have been attacked and that the leaders of the works union at Schwager have been disqualified from holding office, in spite of a contrary decision by the courts. As regards the first allegation the Government states that Chile was the first American country to legislate on freedom of association for trade unions, as far back as 1924. At present the matter is governed by Book III of the Labour Code of 1931. As evidence that it is possible to form trade unions in full freedom the Government states that 30 new organisations were formed during 1956. At the date of the Government's reply there were 2,340 unions with some 350,000 members.
82. 94. In these circumstances the Committee considers that, having examined the question of the obstacles put in the way of the Constitution of trade unions in connection with the allegations relating to the non-recognition of the C.U.T, and the question of the disqualification of trade union leaders in connection with the allegations relating to the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy and the Yáñez-Koch Decree, it is unnecessary for it to add anything in respect of this allegation to the conclusions stated in paragraphs 82 and 88.
83. Allegations relating to Restrictions on the Freedom of Association of Agricultural Workers
84. 95. The Maritime Confederation of Chile alleges that the Government does not respect the agricultural workers' right to organise, that they are prohibited from exercising the right to strike and that their leaders have no protection against dismissal. The Bakers' Confederation of Chile and other Chilean unions, in a communication in which they invoke article 24 of the Constitution of the I.L.O, point out that the Committee of Experts concerned has repeatedly drawn the attention of the Government to the non-application of the Right of Association (Agriculture) Convention, 1921. These reminders are said to have had no effect whatever, since agricultural workers continue to be deprived of the right to organise and to bargain collectively. The Government submits no observations with regard to these allegations.
85. 96. Agricultural unions are subject in Chile to the special rules laid down in articles 418 et seq. of the Labour Code. According to article 419 agricultural unions shall be " institutions for mutual collaboration between capital and labour ; and any organisations whose methods of action are detrimental to discipline and order in employment shall consequently be deemed to be contrary to the spirit and rules of the law. It is hereby laid down that it shall be a primary concern of these unions to work for the improvement of housing in country districts." Article 425 lays down that " the agricultural unions shall be forbidden to pursue any objects other than those indicated ". Each agricultural union shall be formed within an estate (article 426) and shall be subject to the control of the General Directorate of Labour (article 430). Article 431 provides that " the amalgamation or federation of agricultural unions shall in no circumstances be permitted ". The labour courts shall order the dissolution of agricultural unions where the work of a union is paralysed owing to deliberate non-attendance by more than 55 per cent of the workers in the union or by violation of the rules governing conciliation and arbitration in agriculture (article 463, paragraph 2, and article 489).
86. 97. The Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, summarising the conclusions it had arrived at in previous years, made the following observations in 1956 regarding the application of the Right of Association (Agriculture) Convention, 1921, which was ratified by Chile on 15 September 1925:
87. The Committee feels obliged to point out that, under the terms of Article 1 of the Convention, the Government has undertaken " to secure to all those engaged in agriculture the same rights of association and combination as to industrial workers, and to repeal any statutory or other provisions restricting such rights in the case of those engaged in agriculture ", but that since 1947 the legislation in Chile has restricted the rights of association and combination of agricultural workers as regards the following points:
88. (1) By virtue of the provisions of section 426 of the Labour Code agricultural workers can set up trade unions only within an estate, whereas according to section 366 of the Code trade unions of industrial workers may set up two types of unions : works unions (sindicatos industriales) or occupational trade unions (sindicatos profesionales).
89. As a result of the difference established by the legislation in this respect, agricultural workers are not allowed to set up "occupational trade unions" and are deprived of:
90. (a) the right to set up trade unions extending beyond an agricultural undertaking;
91. (b) the right to set up federations and Confederations.
92. (2) As the Committee pointed out in 1954, the provisions of section 433 of the Labour Code result in fact in prohibiting seasonal or occasional workers from setting up trade unions. In fact, by virtue of the terms of this section of the Code, workers who wish to form a union must have more than one year's continuous service on the same estate and must represent at least 40 per cent of the workers on that estate.
93. A provision of this nature is even likely to result, in fact, in prohibiting all possibility of setting up a union, in particular on estates which employ a large proportion of seasonal or occasional workers.
94. Finally, the Committee is obliged to refer to the detailed observations which it has made since 1953 and can only express the hope that the Government-which on a number of occasions during past years has assured the Conference Committee that it would make the necessary amendments to the national legislation-will be able to indicate at the forthcoming session of the Conference what steps it intends to take to comply with its obligations.
95. At the 39th Session of the Conference (1956) the representative of the Government of Chile made a statement to the Committee on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations to the effect that " the discrepancies pointed out by the Committee of Experts were due to the implementing regulations and did not show any discrimination whatever between agricultural workers and industrial workers with regard to the right to organise ". His Government considered that Article 1 of the Convention was fully applied in Chile, and it did not agree with the interpretation of the national legislation given by the Committee of Experts. Nevertheless the Conference Committee, through its Chairman, " stressed the fact that the point of view expressed by the Committee of Experts was fully shared by all members of the Conference Committee. There could be no doubt that the Convention was not applied in Chile. The Committee therefore expressed the hope that its views would be transmitted to the Government and that everything possible would be done to ensure the full application of the Convention." The report was subsequently adopted by the Conference itself. In 1957 the Committee of Experts, when examining the relevant report by the Government, made the following observations:
96. The Committee notes that the Government no longer fin 1957 contests the validity of the observations the Committee has made for many years and is now undertaking a preliminary examination with a view to making all necessary amendments to Chilean legislation in order to bring it into harmony with the provisions of the Convention .... The Committee can only express once again the hope that the adoption of the new legislative measures now being examined will put an end to a clear violation of the Convention by provisions which, for nearly ten years, have considerably restricted the right of association and combination of agricultural workers ....
97. 98. Taking into account the above conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations of the International Labour Conference and of the Committee of Experts, the Committee considers that, as the question at issue is the application of a Convention ratified by Chile, it should endorse those conclusions. In this connection it recommends the Governing Body to draw the urgent attention of the Government of Chile to these conclusions and to emphasise the importance of its taking steps without further delay to bring its national legislation into harmony with the obligations solemnly undertaken by the ratification of the Convention.
98. Allegations relating to the Prohibition on the Organisation of Public Servants and Workers in the " Public Sector "
99. 99. As regards the allegations relating to the prohibition on the organisation of public servants, the Government admits that article 368 of the Labour Code (introduced by the Law for the Permanent Defence of Democracy) provides that " Wage-earning and salaried employees in the service of the State or municipal authorities or belonging to state undertakings shall not have the right to form a union or to belong to any union ". This prohibition, states the Government, is contained also in the Civil Service Regulations.
100. 100. In these circumstances the Committee, in view of the fact that the Chilean Labour Code expressly prohibits workers in the employment of the State from exercising the right to organise, considers it necessary, in the light of the principle laid down in Case No. 5 (India) regarding the importance of "the right of state and local government employees to constitute and register trade unions ", to point out that the prohibition laid down in article 368 of the Labour Code is incompatible with the generally accepted principle that the workers, without any distinction, should have the right to form organisations of their own choosing without prior authorisation. In view of this the Committee recommends the Governing Body to draw the attention of the Government of Chile to the incompatibility of its existing legislation with this principle.
101. Allegations relating to the Law for the Stabilisation of Salaries, Wages and Prices
102. 101. The complainants allege that Law No. 12006 of 23 January 1956, for the stabilisation of salaries, wages and prices, is detrimental to the interests of the workers and favourable to those of businessmen. The Law is said to authorise only a wage or salary increase that is inferior to the real rise in the cost of living. The protest lodged by the trade unions against this Law when it was still in draft is said to have led to sanctions against trade union leaders. The Government replies, in connection with the allegations examined above, that the pressure exercised on the Legislature by various organisations to prevail on it to reject the Bill entails the offence of sedition.
103. 102. In previous cases the Committee decided that it was not appropriate for it to examine questions connected with the economic policy of a government if they had no direct bearing on the exercise of freedom of association. In view of this principle and considering that in previous paragraphs the Committee has already examined the question of the breaking of the strike of 9 January 1956, it considers that Law No. 12006 of 23 January 1956 for the stabilisation of salaries, wages and prices is not a law directly relating to the exercise of trade union rights, and therefore recommends the Governing Body to decide that these allegations do not tail for further examination.