Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 116, 1970

1. 262. This case was examined by the Committee at its session in May 1969, when it submitted to the Governing Body an interim report contained in paragraphs 175-190 of its 112th Report, as adopted by the Governing Body at its 175th Session (Geneva, May 1969).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 263. It was alleged that seven national leaders of the National Union of Workers of Chad (UNATRAT) had been arrested in February 1968 on charges of conspiring against national security and taken into custody. The complainants further stated that, since they were arrested, these trade union leaders had remained without trial and that there was nothing to suggest that the Government was preparing to institute proper proceedings.
2. 264. In its observations the Government stated that the seven leaders of UNATRAT held in preventive detention had been arrested for engaging in subversive activities. The Government then stated that three of the persons had been released so that only four remained in detention. The Government stated that these persons, by posting notices and distributing leaflets, had incited the population to revolution and had sent letters to the senior officers of the Chad Army urging them to seize power; the Government added that " there exist authentic and irrefutable documents to substantiate this statement " and that the competent authorities were pursuing the inquiry with a view to elucidating the affair.
3. 265. At its session in May 1969 the Committee recalled that, in all cases involving the arrest, detention and sentencing of a trade union official, the Committee, taking the view that individuals have the right to be presumed innocent until found guilty, had considered that it was incumbent upon the Government to show that the measures it had taken were in no way occasioned by the trade union activities of the individual concerned. That is why, in all such cases, as the Committee went on to recall, if it has concluded that allegations relating to the arrest, detention and sentencing of trade unionists did not call for further examination, it has done so only after receiving observations from the government concerned indicating sufficiently precisely and with sufficient detail that the measures taken against the persons in question had no connection with the exercise of trade union rights but were occasioned by activities outside the trade union sphere which were either prejudicial to public order or of a political nature)
4. 266. In view of the above-mentioned principle the Committee therefore recommended the Governing Body to request the Government, as it had done in several previous cases, to indicate the precise reasons for the arrest of the persons in question, and in particular the specific acts which, in the Government's view, justified the action taken against the individuals concerned and to specify the nature of the documents which it mentions and which are referred to in paragraph 264 above.
5. 267. Having noted that the Government did not deny the fact that at least four of the trade union leaders mentioned in the complaint were still in preventive detention, and apparently had been since February 1968, the Committee recalled at its session in May 1969 that in numerous cases in the past in which trade union officers or members were alleged to have been preventively detained, it has always expressed the view that such measures might constitute a grave 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; the Committee further recalled its previous declarations to the effect that it should be the policy of every government to take care to ensure the observance of human rights and especially the right of all detained persons to be tried promptly by an impartial and independent judicial authority.
6. 268. Noting that the statements of the Government appeared to indicate that inquiries were still being carried out in connection with this affair, the Committee decided, in view of the principle mentioned in the preceding paragraph, to recommend the Governing Body to express the hope that the persons concerned would either be released or be brought before a court of law as soon as possible, and to request the Government to keep the Governing Body informed about the development of the situation.
7. 269. If the persons concerned were brought before a court, the Committee, in accordance with its constant practice, recommended the Governing Body to request the Government to communicate the decision in the case and the full text of the judgment."
8. 270. The Governing Body approved the Committee's recommendations, which were communicated to the Government by means of a letter dated 5 June 1969, to which the Government replied by means of a communication dated 20 December 1969.
9. 271. In its communication the Government repeats its statement that the trade unionists concerned were arrested not because they were performing their legitimate functions but because they were implicated in a plot imperilling the security of the State. The Government goes on to declare that " the compromising leaflets and documents seized during searches of their homes and offices are in the hands of the competent authorities, and no institution unconnected with the State can claim the right to examine their contents ". The Government concludes by stating: " You will understand that in these circumstances, bearing in mind our sovereignty, only Chad institutions are competent to give valid rulings as to the manner in which they should be dealt with."

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 272. In view of the Government's observations, the Committee considers that it should recall that, in all cases where governments appeared to maintain that a reply in general terms to the effect that detentions of trade unionists have been due to unlawful and subversive activity and not to trade union activities should be regarded as adequately substantiated, it has taken the view that the question whether the matter in respect of which sentences have been imposed or detentions ordered is to be regarded as a matter relating to a criminal or political offence or a matter relating to the exercise of trade union rights is not one which can be determined unilaterally by the government concerned in such a manner as to prevent the Governing Body from inquiring further into it.
2. 273. In these circumstances, in accordance with its constant practice and in order to have the opportunity to make its own assessment of the grounds for the action taken against the persons concerned in this affair, the Committee believes it should recommend the Governing Body to press the Government to inform it of the exact grounds for the arrest of those concerned, and in particular the specific acts which the Government sees as justifying their arrest, and to describe the documents which the Government itself regards as vital evidence and which are referred to in paragraph 264 above.
3. 274. The Committee notes that the Government's reply does not indicate the present situation of the trade unionists who were arrested and does not state whether they have been tried or not; it further notes that, according to the information available to it, the persons concerned appear to have been in preventive detention since February 1968. The Committee therefore believes it should recommend the Governing Body, firstly, to draw the Government's attention to the principle that it should be the policy of every government to take care to ensure the observance of human rights and especially the right of all detained persons to be tried promptly by an impartial and independent judicial authority and, secondly, to request the Government to state whether the persons concerned are being or have been tried and, if so, to provide the text of the decision and of the judgment.