Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 111, 1969

1. 40. The complaint by the General Confederation of Labour (CGT) of Nicaragua, the Peasants' and Agricultural Workers' Confederation of Nicaragua and the Federation of Workers of Managua is contained in a communication dated 15 July 1968. The complaint was forwarded to the Government, which made its observations thereon in a letter dated 3 December 1968.
2. 41. Nicaragua 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

1. 42. It is alleged in the complaint that on 7 July 1968 the police searched the headquarters of the complainant organisations and that twenty leaders and members of affiliated unions were arrested while holding meetings. The authorities responsible for these measures are stated to have claimed that they were necessary to forestall possible disturbances. The reason was that on the date in question, the President of the United States was due to call at the International Airport of Nicaragua and this had given rise to demonstrations by students and political organisations. The complainants add that the legal adviser to the CGT applied to the Court of Appeal for the release of the arrested trade unionists but that it took the Court ten days to name a judge to hear the case. A protest was also made to the President and to the Minister of Labour, but no reply was received from these authorities. After spending five days in custody, the detained persons were finally released, but without the intervention of any court.
2. 43. In its reply the Government states that in the Ministry of Labour there is a department which is responsible for dealing with all trade union affairs, including complaints concerning infringements of trade union rights. The department in question has received no complaint regarding the events alleged by the complainants. The Government adds that in connection with the visit of the President of the United States the authorities took a number of preventive measures, since it was known that serious acts were being planned in certain quarters to cause a breach of the peace. These measures had no connection with trade unionism nor was there any search of union premises. The authorities merely interrogated certain individuals (some of whom belonged to the unions mentioned in the complaint) concerning the plans that were being made. The Government denies that freedom of association was in any way infringed and states that it guarantees this freedom. It points out that in 1967 it 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), and is now examining a draft Bill to reform the regulations governing trade unions so as to implement fully these instruments. In addition, Parliament has now given its approval to the establishment of a Tripartite Committee on Freedom of Association and Labour Participation in National Development Planning. The Government concludes by saying that it can take appropriate preventive measures to maintain law and order and the fact that these may have been directed against persons connected with a trade union who are engaged in actions designed to disturb law and order in no way constitutes a breach of trade union rights.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 44. The Committee notes that the complainants and the Government are in agreement regarding the preventive detention of a number of trade unionists in connection with the visit of the President of the United States to Nicaragua. The Government denies, however, that trade union premises were searched or that the complainants lodged a protest with the Ministry of Labour. As regards the allegation in the complaint about the delay in the legal proceedings instituted to secure the release of the arrested men, the Government makes no comment in its letter.
2. 45. The Committee wishes to recall that in previous cases in which it was alleged that trade union leaders had been kept in preventive detention, it has considered that such measures may involve a serious interference with the exercise of trade union rights, which it would seem necessary to justify by the existence of a serious emergency and which would be open to criticism unless accompanied by adequate judicial safeguards applied within a reasonable period, and that it should be the policy of every government to ensure the observation of human rights and especially the right of all detained persons to receive a fair trial at the earliest possible moment.
3. 46. In the present case, according to the Government, precautionary measures were taken against certain persons, including a number of union leaders, in order to prevent public disturbances. However, the Committee notes that these leaders were not placed at the disposal of the judicial authorities but that the police itself released them after a few days without apparently having discovered any evidence which would justify bringing them to trial. The Committee considers that it is one of the fundamental rights of the individual that a detained person should be brought without delay before the appropriate judge, this right being recognised in such instruments as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man and the Political Constitution of Nicaragua itself. In the case of persons engaged in trade union activities, this is one of the civil liberties which should be ensured by the authorities in order to guarantee the full effectiveness of the exercise of trade union rights.
4. 47. The Committee also wished to recall that on other occasions it has pointed out that the detention by the authorities of trade unionists concerning whom no grounds for conviction are subsequently found is liable to involve restrictions of trade union rights, and in these cases it has recommended the Governing Body to request the Government to take steps to ensure that the authorities concerned have appropriate instructions to eliminate the danger of detention for trade union activities.
5. 48. As regards the alleged searching of trade union headquarters, which the Government denies in its reply, the Committee considers that trade unions cannot claim immunity from search provided that the judicial authorities have issued an appropriate warrant. The complainants have not supplied any more detailed information on this aspect of the case which would enable the Committee to formulate its conclusions thereon.