Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 268, Novembre 1989

1. 410. The Committee examined this case at its February 1988 meeting, when it presented an interim report. (See 254th Report, paras. 505-523, approved by the Governing Body at its 239th Session.) The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) sent further allegations in communications of 19 February 1988 and 6 February 1989. The Government subsequently sent replies dated 27 September 1988, 31 January and 6 September 1989.
2. 411. Fiji has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87); it has ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 412. The original complaint related to: the temporary detention of two trade union officials in the aftermath of the military coup of 25 September 1987; the closing for several days of certain union premises; the curtailment of trade union activities; and the refusal to permit a senior union official to leave Fiji in order to join an international union delegation. The ICFTU also expressed its concern at comments attributed to the leader of the coup, Mr. Rabuka, to the effect that his Government would "restructure" the union movement in Fiji.
2. 413. The Government did not deny any of the incidents referred to in the original complaint, but sought to justify the detentions, office closures, etc., by reference to the difficult situation which obtained in the wake of the coup, and to the actions of certain union leaders in attempting to subvert the country's economy. It also pointed out that the officials in question were no longer in detention, and that all union premises were now functioning normally. It further claimed that following talks with the Fiji Trades Union Congress (FTUC), the Government had given comprehensive assurances as to the continued protection of trade union rights so long as the unions refrained from any subversive actions which might destabilise the economy.
3. 414. At its previous examination of the case, the Committee noted that, due to the recent transmission of new allegations contained in the ICFTU letter of 8 February 1988, the Government had not been able to comment on them. The letter in question alleged that both the Governor-General (now President) and Labour Minister had made a number of important statements purporting to guarantee the recognition of trade union rights in Fiji. However, the ICFTU drew attention to a number of issues which it claimed were of "grave concern" to certain of its affiliates. These included:
   • - continuing restrictions (such as a requirement of special permission from the Home Affairs Ministry) upon the freedom of certain union officials to leave and to re-enter Fiji; the ICFTU supplies an annex entitled "Photocopy of military list of persons prohibited from leaving Fiji" listing the names of 20 unionists including James Raman and Bob Kumar of the FTUC, mentioned in the previous examination of this case;
   • - the suspension of a number of union officials from their employment and attempts to bar some officials from carrying out their union duties;
   • - surveillance of union officials, employees and activists, and of union premises;
   • - maltreatment, intimidating questioning and humiliating harassment of union officials during detention, in particular the beating and kicking of Mr. Shiva Sankaran, an official of the Air Pacific Employees' Association, when in police detention on 29 October 1987 (two signed medical reports attesting to his broken nose, bruising, haemorrhaging and deterioration of previously diagnosed bronchial asthma are supplied by the complainant);
   • - a requirement that police permission be obtained prior to the holding of union meetings;
   • - attempts severely to curtail union activity within the public sector;
   • - the non-functioning of parts of the judicial system (particularly the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal), which made it difficult to secure redress in cases of interference with the established legal rights of employees; and
   • - restrictions upon freedom of movement and assembly under the Sunday Observance Decree, which allegedly also affects trade unions.
4. 415. At its 239th Session (February-March 1988), the Governing Body approved the following interim conclusions of the Committee:
   • (a) The Committee considers that the preventive detention of certain leaders of the Fiji Trades Union Congress, even for a limited period of time after the military coup of 25 September 1987, involved a serious interference with trade union rights.
   • (b) The Committee also would recall generally that the military Government's temporary closure of certain major trade union premises and its prevention of a trade union leader's travel with an international trade union congress delegation, run counter to the international principles concerning the protection of trade union premises and the freedom of contact with international trade union organisations.
   • (c) The Committee, while taking note of the agreements reached with the TUC and the assurances given by the Government, wishes to underline that the exercise of trade union rights should not be considered as unlawful because of lack of co-operation of the trade unions with a government and cannot be considered as repayment for, and as a result of, co-operation between the trade union movement and a government, but as an inalienable right of the working people.
   • (d) The Committee requests the Government to send its observations on the most recent communication from the ICFTU dated 8 February 1988.

B. Further allegations

1. 416. In a communication dated 19 February 1988, the ICFTU alleges that, despite pledges made by the Labour Minister to rectify the situation, the Ministry of Employment was rejecting most reports of trade disputes lodged by trade unions, thereby depriving them of their status as "disputes" for purposes of the Trade Disputes Act 1973. It also alleges that the Government had given no indication of progress in reactivating the Tripartite Forum, a body which plays an important role in wage fixation in Fiji. Lastly, it points out that, despite the assertion of the Home Affairs Ministry that citizens are free to leave and to re-enter Fiji, there are still restrictions on overseas travel for a number of trade unionists.
2. 417. In its communication of 6 February 1989, the ICFTU alleges that certain restrictions that it has already complained of continue, for example, the requirement to seek approval from the police prior to the holding of union meetings; the requirement for union officials to seek written permission for overseas travel connected with their union work; the need for industrial matters to be settled through proper legislative procedures under the Trade Disputes Act; the need to reconvene the Tripartite Forum (as well as the Labour Advisory Board and the wages councils). It alleges that, apart from the appointment of members to the Labour Advisory Board and the wages councils, there has been no significant move by the Government to restore trade union rights and normal labour relations.
3. 418. According to the ICFTU, a new Decree has given the Government sweeping discretionary powers over appointments, promotions, discipline, transfers and gradings in the public service. The appeals rights have been disposed of by the Decree and there is no independent authority to hear grievances in such matters. In a number of cases the exclusion and expulsion of capable Indians from senior posts in the civil service have been carried out on the pretext of implementing racial balance. Allegedly, the Government has recognised and, in some cases, encouraged the formation of rival and splinter trade unions along racial lines especially in the public sector.
4. 419. In addition, the ICFTU states that on 17 June 1988 the Government issued an Internal Security Decree giving the authorities widespread powers - especially in section 8 and the third schedule on essential services - of arrest, detention, search and seizure; powers to restrict freedom of speech and expression, including use of the media; and to restrict freedom of association, assembly, movement and the discretion to bypass the judicial system. The threat to the free exercise of trade union rights is obvious in the ICFTU's opinion. As a result of strong pressure from within and outside the country, this Decree has been suspended, but the ICFTU understands that it can be reimposed at any time at the Government's discretion.
5. 420. Lastly, the ICFTU affiliate (FTUC) has indicated that if the draft Constitution announced in September 1988 is promulgated in its present form, trade union rights will come even more under attack and the threat of victimisation of trade union leaders engaging in legitimate activities become greater.

C. The Government's reply

1. 421. In a letter dated 27 September 1988, the Government reiterates its earlier claim "that all trade union rights under existing laws have been fully restored". It also states that these rights have been further reinforced by the "Protection of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms of the Individual Decree" of 29 January 1988, a copy of which it encloses with its reply.
2. 422. In a letter of 31 January 1989, the Government claims that trade union activities cannot be said to be curtailed since 107 disputes were reported to the Ministry of Employment and Industrial Relations in 1987 as compared with 65 in 1986. In 1988, 68 disputes were reported, of which 57 were accepted and, of these, 16 resolved. This shows, states the Government, that trade union activities are very much alive and that disputes have been duly and speedily processed. It adds that a permanent arbitrator was appointed in mid-1988 confirming the impartiality of these processes.
3. 423. The Government goes on to criticise certain statements made by FTUC officials when they were attending union meetings in Spain in December 1988 and Australia in January 1989. It construes the "interruptive" activities of the FTUC and the use of the ICFTU's pressure on the Interim Government as outside interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state.
4. 424. The Government outlines some of the economic recovery measures it has undertaken. It repeats that the promulgation of the Decree (No. 12) on Protection of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms of the Individual on 29 January 1988 restored the right to exercise all trade union activities. It refers to tripartite consultation through the Tripartite Forum which had worked well when established in 1976; when the parties began to disagree in 1984 the Government of the day ceased to recognise the FTUC as representing the majority of unionised workers. According to the Government's reply, the relationship deteriorated due in part to the fact that the "FTUC was being politicised for the personal gain of some of its leaders". It adds that the future Tripartite Forum will not have the same composition as the old one; the body currently being discussed might take the form of a "National Summit" having wider geographical and organisational representation.
5. 425. According to the Government, appointments to the wages councils have now been completed and are about to be gazetted. Although the Tripartite Forum no longer exists, the essence of tripartism still does and functions through these councils. In addition, tripartite appointments to the Labour Advisory Board are being pursued and representation will be expanded to cover all sections of non-affiliated bodies.
6. 426. Lastly, the Government refers to the current revision of the Trade Disputes Act (about to be referred to the Labour Advisory Board before being officially tabled in Cabinet for discussion and decision) and the future revision of the Employment Act (which was to be looked at during 1988).
7. 427. In its letter of 6 September 1989, the Government, on the one hand, replies to the outstanding ICFTU allegations of 8 February 1988 and, on the other hand, gives certain further information.
8. 428. First, it states that the restriction on freedom to travel abroad and to re-enter Fiji was in force during the tenure of office of the Military Government (from September to December 1987) and more particularly after the discovery of the illegal shipment of arms in Fiji. The restriction was not only confined to trade unions but applied to others who were suspected of involvement in subversive activities. The restrictions have, however, been lifted and trade unionists and others are free to leave and enter the country. No special permission is required by trade unionists wishing to leave the country from the Ministry of Home Affairs.
9. 429. The Government refers to the comments made above as regards the suspension from their employment of some union officials. It adds, however, that trade union officials are now carrying out their normal trade union functions.
10. 430. As regards surveillance, the Government maintains that if any was carried out, it would have been done by the security forces during investigations into the illegal shipment of arms. The Ministry of Employment and Industrial Relations is not aware of surveillance of anyone at the moment.
11. 431. The Government states that harassment was not confined to trade unionists and, in any case, is not done any more.
12. 432. As regards the alleged requirement of police permission for union meetings, the Government states that the police are no longer required to be notified of meetings of unions, unless these take place in a public place. Such cases may require re-routing of traffic, extra police strength for crowd control, etc.
13. 433. In reply to the alleged curtailment of union activitiy in the public sector, the Government states that no trade union official in the public sector, and in particular the civil service, was ever or is at present suspended from employment. It is now a requirement in the civil service that all grades of positions should comprise at least 50 per cent indigenous Fijians. If there is discrimination in this move, the Government submits that this is positive discrimination, implemented to ensure parity in terms of numbers. This has not breached any collective agreement or contracts because, very simply, there are no agreements which refer to numbers in the civil service. Further, it has not breached the Trade Disputes Act because the Act makes no reference or provision to numbers in the civil service. The Government stresses that the provisions of all labour and trade union laws existing before 14 May 1987 are today intact, fully observed and respected.
14. 434. As for the alleged non-functioning of parts of the Fijian judicial system, it explains that the system is still in existence and is still fully operational.
15. 435. The Government attaches a copy of the Sunday Observance Decree, which is now part of the laws of Fiji. If the trade unionists' freedom of movement and assembly is seriously curtailed, then they are still free, like everyone else in Fiji, to meet and move about on days other than Sunday. It points out that the vast majority of indigenous Fijians, a large part of whom belong to trade unions, have demanded more severe restrictions regarding the Christian Sabbath. The present Decree has relaxed some of the restrictions demanded by Fijians and is considered to be fair and equitable to all sections of the Fiji community.
16. 436. In general, the Government points out that it has not been easy to answer the complaints from the ICFTU because the complainant has provided very few specific instances of breaches on the Government's part. The Government adds that it is now some 18 months since the ICFTU raised its further concerns and there have been a lot of developments in Fiji since that date. Another ICFTU mission will be in Fiji in October 1989 to have talks with the Fiji authorities. It will no doubt be seeking assurances on some of the matters it has raised. The Fiji authorities welcome the visit of the mission because it will afford the opportunity to show that trade union rights and privileges are intact.

D. The Committee's conclusions

1. 437. The Committee notes that despite assurances given by the authorities late in 1987 that all trade union rights under existing laws have been restored to the satisfaction of the FTUC (see 254th Report, para. 515), new allegations have been repeatedly presented by the ICFTU concerning continuing restrictions on the free functioning of trade unions in the country. These allegations cover: (1) restrictions on freedom to leave and re-enter Fiji; (2) suspension of a number of union officials and attempts to bar some officials from carrying out their functions; (3) surveillance of union officials and premises; (4) harassment of union officials in detention; (5) prior authorisation required for union meetings; (6) attempts to curtail severely union activity in the public sector; (7) difficulties in securing redress in cases of interference with workers' rights due to the non-functioning of certain courts or the rejection of disputes presented by unions for settlement under the Trade Disputes Act; (8) the effects on unionists of the restrictions on freedom of movement contained in the Sunday Observance Decree of 31 May 1989.
2. 438. In addition, recent allegations raise the problem of the continued non-existence of the Tripartite Forum (and certain other bodies) important in wage fixing in Fiji; the broad powers contained in the Internal Security Decree of 17 June 1988 which is suspended but could be reactivated; and the risk of victimisation of trade union leaders of certain provisions in the draft Constitution announced in September 1988.
3. 439. The Committee notes the Government's replies to these allegations, which consist of outright denials or explanations as to the general nature of the measures taken which did not just target trade unionists; it also notes that the Government makes no comment at all on the most recent allegations of the ICFTU concerning the threats to free unionism posed by the Internal Security Decree and the draft Constitution.
4. 440. Before examining the substance of these various issues, the Committee takes special note of the fact that a second ICFTU mission will be visiting Fiji in October 1989 to examine the situation of the free functioning of its affiliate there. Since the findings of this mission are of direct relevance to this case, the Committee requests the complainant - the ICFTU - to supply it with a copy of the report once it is available.
5. 441. As regards the question of the freedom of movement of trade union officials (allegedly restricted by prior authorisation requirements), the Committee cannot but note that certain trade union leaders have travelled abroad (for example, to Spain and Australia according to one of the Government's replies) and have been apparently free to re-enter Fiji after attending international trade union meetings. Since the complainant gives no specific recent examples of prior authorisation being required from the Home Affairs Ministry (it merely gives a typed list of names entitled "Photocopy of military list of persons prohibited from leaving Fiji" obtained in January 1987), and since the Government expressly denies this, the Committee would simply recall in general terms that the imposition of sanctions, such as banishment or control of overseas travel, for trade union reasons constitutes a violation of freedom of association.
6. 442. In addition, the Committee observes that freedom of movement and assembly are allegedly curtailed by the Sunday Observance Decree. The Committee notes that the Decree does, in effect, appear to ban union gatherings or marches on a Sunday. Section 4 states:
   • No person shall on any Sunday -
     • (a) engage for reward or profit in any trade, business, commercial activity, employment, occupation, profession or work;
     • (b) organise, participate in or attend any entertainment in any public place, any place of public entertainment or any sporting facility; or
     • (c) convene, organise or take part in any assembly or procession in any public place. (A "public place" is defined to include any building other than a dwelling house.)
   • It is worth noting that activities permitted on a Sunday (section 5), notwithstanding the provisions of section 4, include any business, commercial activity or work which is listed in the Schedule to the Decree (such as air and sea rescue, bakeries, radio stations), or which is essential to the performance of any such listed activity and the organisation of or attendance at any religious ceremony or work necessary for the livelihood of domestic animals, or for the preservation of life or property. A clarification is added explaining that certain non-profit activities are permitted, such as picnics and games. Section 6 also allows exceptions, at certain hours of the day on a Sunday, for the sale in restaurants of prepared meals and for activities by registered guests of hotels. Under section 7, any person wishing to carry out, on any Sunday, any banned activity may apply for a permit to the police, and under section 8 the Minister responsible for defence and security may, on receiving a request, exempt any person or group of persons from the ban contained in section 4. Sections 9 and 10 contain wide-ranging penalties for non-observance of the Decree, including arrest without warrant of any person who is committing or is suspected of defying the ban.
7. 443. While noting the Government's assurance that the Decree's requirement of a police permit or ministerial exemption for holding union meetings on a Sunday is only aimed at respect for the Christian Sabbath, the Committee must stress that the right of trade unions to hold meetings freely in their own premises for the discussion of trade union matters, without the need for previous authorisation and without interference by the public authorities, is a fundamental aspect of freedom of association. The Committee therefore considers that the trade unions should be able to meet in their own premises on Sundays.
8. 444. As for the general restrictions on gatherings in public places, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, police authorisation is required for logistical reasons (such as re-routing of traffic). In this respect, the Committee considers (Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, third edition, 1985, para. 158) that although the right to hold trade union meetings is an essential aspect of trade union rights, the organisations concerned must observe the general provisions relating to public meetings, which are applicable to all; this principle is contained in Article 8 of Convention No. 87, which provides that workers and their organisations, like other persons or organised collectivities, shall respect the law of the land. It has added, however, that permission to hold public meetings and demonstrations - which is such an important trade union right - should not be arbitrarily refused (Digest of decisions, para. 157). The Committee accordingly requests the Government to bring these principles to the attention of the authorities responsible for authorising public meetings.
9. 445. As regards the alleged suspension of a number of trade union officials and attempts to bar some officials from carrying out their functions, the Committee notes the Government's direct denial of any current interference in the normal functions of union officials although it appears to admit that some restrictions were in force in connection with illegal arms shipments during the months immediately after the 1987 military coup d'état. Given the lack of precise information on this allegation (such as the names of suspended officials, dates, any reasons given) the Committee is not in a position to conclude definitively whether there has been a violation of freedom of association. It accordingly considers that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
10. 446. Similarly, on the alleged surveillance of union officials and premises, the Committee is faced with a denial from the Government and a lack of detail from the complainant. In such circumstances, it considers that it does not have sufficient evidence to enable it to examine this aspect of the case.
11. 447. The question of maltreatment and harassment of unionists while in detention is a serious one since the Government acknowledges that this took place at some point in time and argues that "harassment was not confined to trade unionists and in any case is not done any more". The Committee notes in particular that the complainant supplies at least one specific and well-documented example (the brutal beating and intimidation of Mr. Shiva Sankaran, an official of the Air Pacific Employees' Association) and that the Government gives no information on this person's three-day long detention in October 1987, his current state of health and whereabouts. This is particularly regrettable since one of the medical reports supplied by the ICFTU contains the names of the police officers who were responsible for Mr. Sankaran's beating.
12. 448. The Committee accordingly expresses its concern that unionists (and other citizens) were not accorded the guarantees afforded by due process of law in accordance with the principles enunciated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Digest of decisions, para. 82). It asks the Government, as it has in past cases of this kind, to give precise instructions and apply effective sanctions where cases of ill-treatment are found so as to ensure that no detainee is subjected to such treatment or other forms of pressure. (Digest of decisions, para. 84, and the Report of the Fact-Finding and Conciliation Commission on Freedom of Association concerning Lesotho, GB.197/3/5, June 1975, para. 121.)
13. 449. As regards the alleged attempts to curtail trade union activity in the public sector (through such measures as reorganisation involving removal of capable civil servants on the pretext of implementing racial balance and government encouragement of rival unions split along racial lines), the Committee notes that a Public Service Decree (No. 8) was adopted on 13 January 1988. While the Government refers to the changes - made presumably in the exercise of the Public Service Commission's managerial role defined in this Decree - as "positive discrimination" in favour of indigenous Fijians, the Committee notes with concern that the Decree leaves wide discretion to the Public Service Commission in the reorganisation of government ministries and departments including responsibility for grading posts and implementing training schemes, without review by any independent authority.
14. 450. The Committee draws the Government's attention to the general principle that no person should be prejudiced in his or her employment by reason of his or her trade union membership or legitimate trade union activities (Digest of decisions, para. 538). It also recalls that legislation should lay down explicitly remedies and penalties against acts of anti-union discrimination - including dismissal, transfers, downgrading - by employers in order to ensure the effective application of this principle (Digest of decisions, paras. 543 and 544). The Committee also considers that any reorganisation of the public service should not infringe or limit the activities protected by ILO Conventions.
15. 451. The Committee is faced with contradictory versions once again when considering the alleged non-functioning of parts of the Fijian judicial system. It observes, however, from the Fiji Republic Gazette that there was considerable legislative activity throughout 1988 resulting in the promulgation of three important pieces of legislation specifying the functions and responsibilities of certain levels of the Fijian judiciary. These pieces of legislation are: the Magistrates' Courts (Civil Jurisdiction) Decree of 15 July 1988 (deemed to have entered into force on 1 January 1988); the High Court Rules of 31 March 1988; and the Supreme Court Appeal Rules (No. 2) of 20 October 1988 issued under the Judicature Decree of 1988. Moreover, behind this legislative activity the Committee recognises the importance placed by the Government on the promulgation, on 29 January 1988, of the Decree (No. 12) on Protection of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms of the Individual. The Committee observes from the copy of Decree No. 12 supplied by the Government that section 9(8) enshrines the independence and impartiality of the judiciary.
16. 452. Since the complainant's fears about the non-functioning of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal appear to be answered by the promulgation of rules detailing access to and functioning of the judiciary, the Committee considers that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
17. 453. Linked to the above issue is the question of alleged difficulties facing unions when administrative authorities reject their disputes presented for settlement under the Trade Disputes Act. The Committee notes the Government's observation that, on the contrary, trade union activities "are very much alive and (actions concerning them) have been duly and speedily processed". The statistics cited by the Government for 1986 and 1987, however, only show the number of disputes reported to the Ministry of Employment and Industrial Relations, whereas the statistics for 1988 specify that of 68 disputes reported, 57 were accepted and, of these, 16 settled. In addition, the Committee notes from the Government's report on Convention No. 84, sent to the ILO by virtue of article 22 of the ILO Constitution, that in 1987 three new trade unions were registered under the Trade Unions Act and these decisions to register have been appealed by other unions and were due to be heard before the Supreme Court in the course of 1988.
18. 454. Under the procedure set out in the Trade Disputes Act of 1973, upon receiving a report of any existing or apprehended trade dispute, the Permanent Secretary for Employment and Industrial Relations may take one or more of a series of steps (section 4 of the Act). He may, for example, accept or reject the report on the basis of the particulars set out in the report or the endeavours made by any of the parties to achieve its settlement; inform the parties that the matter is not a trade dispute under the Act; refer the matter back to the parties with proposals for its settlement; appoint a mediator/conciliator; refer the dispute through the Minister to an arbitration tribunal. The Permanent Secretary or mediator may make use of existing arrangements in collective agreements or otherwise for the settlement of trade disputes (section 5). The Committee observes from the Fiji Republic Gazette that certain disputes have been recently accepted and did follow this referral to arbitration: for example, Gazette No. 76 of 5 December 1988 contains the reference of the trade dispute between the Air Pacific Employees' Association and Air Pacific Limited to the Permanent Arbitrator, whose appointment is cited in one of the Government's replies as proof of the impartial functioning of the Fijian industrial relations system. In view of all of the above, the Committee is of the opinion that it has not been presented with sufficient evidence that there has been deliberate misuse by the authorities of the settlement procedures under the Trade Disputes Act. It accordingly cannot find that there has been an infringement of trade union rights on this point.
19. 455. As regards the alleged continued non-existence of several tripartite consultative bodies important in wage fixing in Fiji, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, a more representative new form of Tripartite Forum is under discussion and the tripartite wages councils for various sectors have been appointed and were to be gazetted in early 1989. The Committee accordingly decides to refer this aspect of the case to the Committee of Experts for continuing review in the context of Fiji's application of Convention No. 98.
20. 456. As regards the ICFTU's fears that the Internal Security Decree (No. 32) of 17 June 1988 threatens the free exercise of trade union rights, the Committee notes that the complainant itself acknowledges that the Decree has been suspended due to strong pressure from within and outside the country. The Committee notes from a reading of the Decree that, indeed, the Minister responsible for internal security is vested with exceptionally broad powers, inter alia, to detain suspects without trial, to impose curfews on individuals, to ban their freedom of speech, assembly and movement so as to prevent them "from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of Fiji or any part thereof or to the maintenance of public order or essential services therein". Without going into this suspended Decree in any further detail, the Committee can only express the firm hope that such legislation will not be reactivated. It recalls in this connection that a genuinely free and independent trade union movement can only develop where fundamental human rights are fully respected and guaranteed. (Digest of decisions, para. 68.)
21. 457. Lastly, the Committee is of the opinion that the Government should furnish it with further information on the September 1988 draft Constitution. At the present time, the Committee is presented only with an allegation that the draft threatens trade union rights and a vague reply (without a copy) that there have been many developments over recent months in Fiji, not the least of which will include talks with the forthcoming ICFTU mission. It accordingly requests the Government to give further details in this connection.