Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 83, 1965

1. 305. The complaint of the British Guiana Trades Union Council (B.G.T.U.C.) was addressed directly to the I.L.O on 3 July 1964. On 29 July 1964 the Secretary-General of the United Nations transmitted to the I.L.O a copy of the complaint, which had been addressed to him, on 21 July 1964, by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions. Observations on the complaint were furnished by the Government of the United Kingdom by a communication dated 15 January 1965.
2. 306. The Government of the United Kingdom has ratified the Right of Association (Agriculture) Convention, 1921 (No. 1l), the Right of Association (Non-Metropolitan Territories) Convention, 1947 (No. 84), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), and has declared their provisions to be applicable, without modification, to British Guiana. The Government of the United Kingdom has also ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and has declared it applicable to British Guiana with modifications.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 307. The complaint relates to events alleged to have taken place in British Guiana prior to the election of the present Government in December 1964 and is directed against the former Government, in which the People's Progressive Party (P.P.P.) held power, the Progressive Youth Organisation (P.Y.O.) connected with that party, and what the complainant refers to as the " government and party sponsored and financed trade union, known as the Guiana Agricultural Workers' Union (G.A.W.U.) ". The G.A.W.U. President, Mr. Harry Lall, it is alleged, was a P.P.P member of the Legislative Assembly; he was detained by the Governor on 13 June 1964, since which date Mr. Macie Hamid, another P.P.P legislator but not a member of G.A.W.U, had acted as its President, while another non-union member, Mr. George Henry, who was removed from the Legislature by the courts, became its Vice-President.
2. 308. The complainant alleges that, since a stoppage of work began at Leonora estate on 17 February 1964, Ministers of the former Government, P.P.P legislators, Senators, P.P.P, P.Y.O, and G.A.W.U had waged a campaign of terror and intimidation against sugar workers belonging to the Man-Power Citizens' Association (M.P.C.A.) affiliated to the complaining organisation, in order to prevent them going to work. In the course of this campaign, says the complainant, 24 sugar workers were murdered, many injured and 134 houses burnt and 540 more destroyed or seriously damaged.
3. 309. The Governor assumed emergency powers on 13 June 1964 and since that time had detained 31 persons-P.P.P. Ministers and legislators and officials of P.Y.O and G.A.W.U.
4. 310. The complainant alleges that all these events flowed from the fact that in February 1964 G.A.W.U, with the backing of the former Government, started a series of strikes to force the Sugar Producers' Association to recognise G.A.W.U as bargaining agent. G.A.W.U had applied for recognition on 17 June 1963 and M.P.C.A, claiming 67 per cent of the workers as members, challenged the application and asked that the Department of Labour should survey the membership registers; this invitation was not accepted. In October 1963, it is alleged, G.A.W.U, actively backed by the then Minister of Home Affairs, Mrs. Janet Jagan, and the then Minister of Labour, Mr. Chandisingh, and most of the other P.P.P. Ministers, terrorised over 4,000 workers into leaving M.P.C.A, but within two months 3,000 had rejoined. In view of this the former Government is alleged to have embarked on a plan to destroy factories and sugar crops and to enforce work stoppages. United Kingdom troops had to be used to prevent the destruction of the Leonora factory. The complainant lists a series of alleged cases of arson on other estates.
5. 311. Members of M.P.C.A tried to remain at work, but in February 1964, it is alleged, cane-cutters were forcibly driven from the estates and their homes damaged; the homes of those who still remained at work were dynamited. A long series of cases of personal violence and damage are listed by the complainants, and M.P.C.A officers were threatened with death. M.P.C.A formed vigilance committees with the approval of the Commissioner of the Police.
6. 312. One of the methods used by G.A.W.U to prevent M.P.C.A members remaining at work, it is alleged, was the use of thousands of youths and women, the latter being members of the Women's Progressive Organisation under the presidency of the wife of the former Deputy Premier, to " squat " on the sugar estates. The complainant alleges that the squatters stoned the police, who had to defend themselves with tear-gas. On 6 March 1964, it is alleged, one of the squatters, a Mrs. Kawsillia, was killed by a tractor driven by an M.P.C.A member who lost control of it when he was attacked by the agitators. All the notables of the former Government attended her funeral.
7. 313. On 19 February 1964 the four unions having bargaining agreements with the Sugar Producers' Association, M.P.C.A among them, asked the Governor to use United Kingdom troops to assist the police, whose forces were inadequate to deal with the situation. On 26 February opposition members in the Assembly accused the P.P.P. Government of encouraging the terrorists. On 3 March the Trades Union Council asked the new Governor to use United Kingdom troops.
8. 314. On 24 March 1964 M.P.C.A asked the Commissioner of Labour to advise the former Minister of Labour to invite the I.L.O to send a commission to investigate the position. On 30 April the former Minister invited M.P.C.A to meet him together with representatives of G.A.W.U and the Sugar Producers' Association. M.P.C.A refused because it was not prepared to join in discussions attended by a union " responsible for terrorism, murder and other acts of violence against members of M.P.C.A.".
9. 315. On 16 May the former Minister of Labour announced that a commission of inquiry had been set up by the Governor, acting on the advice of the Council of Ministers. The complainants objected on the ground that all the members named were P.P.P sympathisers. The Chairman of the Commission resigned and a new one was appointed, whose personal impartiality the complainants did not question. The complainants then sought an injunction in the courts and the Commission adjourned sine die until the courts should have ruled on the matter.
10. 316. B.G.T.U.C, M.P.C.A and the Chamber of Commerce continued to press for emergency regulations and the use of United Kingdom troops to maintain law and order, but the former Minister of Home Affairs, Mrs. Jagan, refused to agree to the institution of emergency regulations, although the Commissioner of Police, who was present at one interview, is alleged to have agreed that the use of United Kingdom troops would be of assistance as his police resources were inadequate. The former Minister did not advise the Governor to declare a state of emergency until 22 May 1964, when the situation had further deteriorated and become more widespread.
11. 317. In a communication dated 15 January 1965 the Government of the United Kingdom states that a new Government was formed in British Guiana following elections in December 1964. As a result, the Ministers referred to in the allegations are no longer in office.
12. 318. The Government of the United Kingdom forwarded with its reply certain observations prepared by the present Government of British Guiana.
13. 319. The present Government of British Guiana considers that it was unfortunate that the previous Government did not submit a reply and says that it cannot itself offer satisfactory comments without a detailed investigation, which would not, in view of the lapse of time, produce conclusive evidence. The present Government wishes to assure the Committee that it accepts the provisions of Conventions Nos. 84 and 98, and also of Convention No. 87, which is applied subject to modifications, and will promote their implementation.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 320. In earlier cases' the Committee has taken the view, when it has had before it allegations relating to violations of trade union rights by an earlier government, that, although the government in power could obviously not be held responsible for events which took place under its predecessor, it is clearly responsible for any continuing consequences which they may have had since its accession to power.
2. 321. In the absence of any observations on the merits of the matters alleged it is not possible for the Committee to say whether such continuing consequences of the events alleged still exist: for example, it is still unaware of the relative positions and relationships of M.P.C.A and G.A.W.U and the Sugar Producers' Association, it does not know what may have ensued from the setting up of a commission of inquiry by the previous Government, and it does not know, in the event of the allegations being well founded, what steps, if any, the present Government may have taken or intends to take to indemnify the dependants of M.P.C.A members stated to have been murdered because they refused to join a strike encouraged by the previous Government itself or to indemnify workers whose homes were destroyed. In Case No. 260 relating to Iraq, where the observations of the Government concerned were insufficient for the Committee to be able to decide whether events occurring under a previous government continued to have consequences under a successor government, the Committee requested the Government concerned to furnish further observations before it formulated its conclusions to the Governing Body.
3. 322. The Committee also observes that, in its report under article 22 of the Constitution of the I.L.O, for the period 1962-64, on measures taken to give effect in British Guiana to the provisions of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Government of the United Kingdom states that two members of G.A.W.U have been charged with offences of sedition committed on 7 March and 2 April 1964. G.A.W.U is alleged to have taken an active part in the terrorist campaign against M.P.C.A members at that time, so that it appears to the Committee that the judgments of the courts inquiring into these incidents may afford information as to the general situation then existing which would be of assistance to the Committee in formulating its conclusions.