Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 79, 1965

1. 109. The original complaint by the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions (I.F.C.T.U.) is contained in a communication addressed directly to the I.L.O and dated 16 April 1964. This complaint was transmitted to the Government for observations by a letter dated 27 April 1964, and a reply was received dated 16 July 1964. In two communications dated 17 August and 24 September 1964 I.F.C.T.U has put forward new allegations concerning violations of the exercise of trade union rights in Cameroon. The text of these communications was brought to the notice of the Government by two letters respectively dated 27 August and 1 October 1964. The Government has not yet furnished its observations on the supplementary information presented by the complainants.
2. 110. Cameroon has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

• Allegations concerning the Refusal to Issue Exit Visas to Trade Union Delegates
  111. 111 The complainants allege that the Pan-African and Malagasy Union of Believing Workers-an organisation affiliated to I.F.C.T.U.-organised a workers' education seminar at Brazzaville for the month of April 1964 and that the Director of the Criminal Investigation Department refused exit visas to militants of the Union of Believing Trade Unions of Cameroon who were to take part in this seminar.
  112. 112 The Government states in its reply first of all that it has always been extremely understanding as regards travel abroad by trade union militants. However, it considers that it should make such travel dependent on certain conditions suited both to the personality of the trade unionists concerned and to the intended countries of destination. It defined and stated its position in this regard in a letter dated 7 May 1963 addressed to the General Secretary of the Federation of Trade Unions of Cameroon and the National General Secretary of the Union of Believing Trade Unions of Cameroon. This letter, a photocopy of which the Government attaches to its reply, shows that a favourable decision to issue an exit visa from Cameroon for trade union purposes is taken only if- (a) it concerns workers whose organisations have ensured that they are capable of profiting to the full from the proposed journey, this fact being made clear by a statement of the offices they hold in the organisation; (b) the countries of destination have direct or indirect diplomatic relations with the Republic of Cameroon; (c) details are given of the character of the purpose of the journey and relevant information provided about the host organisation, the hospitality arranged, the length of time covered by the official programme and the purpose or agenda of the functions.
  113. 113 Turning to specific allegations made by the complainant organisation the Government states that out of the four visas requested for taking part in the meeting at Brazzaville one was granted. Later on, states the Government, three other exit visas were given to trade unionists affiliated to the Union of Believing Trade Unions of Cameroon.
  114. 114 The Government attaches to its reply a photocopy of the letter it sent to the General Secretary of the Pan-African and Malagasy Union of Believing Workers, under whose auspices the meeting at Brazzaville was held. This letter sets out the position of the Government as regards the granting of exit visas to Cameroon trade unionists and explains why there was a delay in the issue of three of the visas requested for the seminar at Brazzaville. The Government also attaches a photocopy of the reply from the General Secretary of the Pan-African and Malagasy Union of Believing Workers to the above-mentioned letter, in which he states that he is satisfied by the explanations given by the Government.
  115. 115 Since the precise questions raised by the complaint appear to have been settled to the satisfaction of the parties concerned, the Committee might consider that this aspect of the case called for no further examination.
  116. 116 However, a certain number of points arising out of the observations of the Government seem to call for comment by the Committee.
  117. 117 In the first place the Committee notes that the reason originally given to justify the refusal of exit visas to trade unionists who had asked for them in order to go to a workers' education seminar was that the fact that an I.L.O expert was to visit Cameroon to deal with problems of trade union training made the proposed journey unnecessary. On this point the Committee must observe that the despatch of an I.L.O expert to a country and the participation of trade unionists in a seminar are two separate things, even if the subjects concerned may have aspects in common; on the other hand, it does not consider that the one should automatically exclude the other.
  118. 118 The Committee further notes the statement by the Government that the authorities have tried to make travel abroad easy for trade union militants whenever the training, seminars or discussions that were the purpose of the journey seemed likely to benefit the participants.
  119. 119 This statement, like some of the criteria mentioned in paragraph 112 above, seems to indicate that the Government reserves to itself a rather wide power of evaluation in questions which normally, and apart from any considerations affecting the internal or external security of the State, would appear to be essentially matters for the decision of the workers themselves.
  120. 120 More generally, and having regard to the fact that Cameroon has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Committee feels that it should emphasise the essential nature of Article 5 of that instrument, which states that national trade union organisations should have the right to affiliate with international organisations of workers and employers; the Committee also recalls, as it has done in several former cases, that this right normally carries with it the right of national organisations to maintain contact with the international organisations of workers with which they are affiliated and to take part in the work of those organisations.
  121. 121 In view of the foregoing, and while considering that the particular case raised by the complainants does not call for further examination, the Committee feels that it should recommend the Governing Body to draw the attention of the Government to the importance which should be attached to the principles mentioned in paragraph 120 above.
• Allegations concerning Restrictions on the Movement of Trade Union Militants inside the Country
  122. 122 The complainants allege that the authorities have taken measures against the leaders and militants of the Union of Believing Trade Unions of Cameroon that limit their freedom to move about the country by the refusal of laissez passer within Cameroon.
  123. 123 As has been said above in paragraph 109, the Government has not yet replied concerning these allegations.
  124. 124 The Committee therefore recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to be good enough to furnish its observations thereon and meanwhile to adjourn the examination of this aspect of the case.