Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 57, 1961

1. 125. The complaint of the Khit-lite Industrial Company Workers' Union is contained in a communication addressed directly to the I.L.O and received on 31 October 1960. The Government furnished its observations on the complaint by a communication dated 9 March 1961.
2. 126. Burma has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), but has not ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 127. It is alleged that, on 15 October 1960, the police arrested workers in the employ of the Khit-lite Industrial Company who had taken part in a peaceful strike, this action being contrary to the democratic right of freedom of association and to the Constitution of Burma; it is contended that the police acted in favour of the employer. On 17 October 1960, it is alleged, the employer locked out 13 workers as a reprisal against a peaceful strike, such lockout being contrary to the I.L.O. Constitution and Conventions and to the Constitution of Burma and being a violation of trade union freedom. The complainants demand that the dismissed workers be reinstated, their dismissal having been unlawful, and that the I.L.O and the Government of Burma take action against the employer.
2. 128. The Government states that, on 15 October 1960, 12 of the 47 persons employed by the company struck work and refused to leave the factory premises after working hours, their actions being contrary to section 448 of the Penal Code, for which reason the police prosecuted them in the competent court. The court case is still pending. On 17 October 1960 the employer dismissed the persons concerned in the proceedings. The management contends that this dismissal was not a lockout within the meaning of section 2 (e) of the Burma Trade Disputes Act and did not infringe the principle of freedom of association or the Constitution of Burma. The remaining employees continued to work during the strike and the association which they had formed prior to the strike has since been registered under the Trade Unions Act. The Government considers that the dismissal of employees who were being prosecuted was not an infringement of trade union rights.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 129. The versions of the facts given by the complainants and the Government differ in a number of respects and there is disagreement as to whether the dismissal of the strikers was lawful or not. According to the Government, a prosecution is still pending in the competent court. It appears probable to the Committee that some at least of the points at issue will be resolved by the court.
2. 130. In previous cases the Committee has followed the practice of not proceeding to examine matters which were the subject of pending judicial proceedings, provided that these proceedings were attended by proper guarantees of due process of law, where the pending judicial proceedings might make available information of assistance to the Committee in appreciating whether or not allegations were well-founded.
3. 131. In the present case, as the verdict of the competent court of law before which a prosecution of the strikers is now pending may afford information of assistance to the Committee in evaluating the allegations now before it, the Committee wishes, before it formulates its recommendations to the Governing Body, to request the Government to be good enough to inform the Committee as to the outcome of the proceedings in question and to forward a copy of the judgment handed down.