Rapport où le comité demande à être informé de l’évolution de la situation - Rapport No. 277, Mars 1991

1. 131. The Committee has examined Case No. 1435, submitted by the International Union of Food and Allied Workers Associations (IUF) and the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT), on two occasions and presented interim reports (see 256th and 268th Reports, paras. 401-418 and 379-396, respectively, approved by the Governing Body at its 240th (May-June 1988) and 244th (November 1989) Sessions).
2. 132. As regards Case No. 1446, submitted by the World Confederation of Organisations of the Teaching Profession (WCOTP), the Committee examined this case at its November 1989 meeting and presented an interim report to the Governing Body (see 268th Report, paras. 397-409, approved by the Governing Body at its 244th Session (November 1989)). Subsequently the WCOTP submitted new allegations in communications of 28 June and 15 September 1990.
3. 133. The complaint in Case No. 1519 was presented in a communication from the International Federation of Plantation, Agricultural and Allied Workers (IFPAAW), dated 23 November 1989.
4. 134. At its meeting of November 1990, the Committee addressed an urgent appeal to the Government for its observations on Cases Nos. 1435, 1446 and 1519 (see 275th Report, para. 9). Specifically, the Committee noted that, despite the time which had elapsed since the presentation of the complaints and the seriousness of the allegations contained therein, the Government had not transmitted the observations or information which had been requested. The Committee drew the attention of the Government to the fact that, in accordance with the procedural rules set out in paragraph 17 of the Committee's 127th Report, approved by the Governing Body, it would present a report on the substance of these cases at its next meeting, even if the observations requested from the Government had not been received in due time. Consequently, the Committee urged the Government to transmit its observations as soon as possible.
5. 135. The Committee has not received the observations and information which it had requested from the Government concerning these three cases.
6. 136. Paraguay 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. Case No. 1435

1. 137. The allegations in this case concern the existence of two executive committees for the trade union of the Algodonera Paraguaya S.A. (Paraguay Cotton Company, CAPSA) (one of which, according to the complainant, was set up and is influenced and directed by the enterprise, and has been recognised by the Labour Directorate); the dismissal of several trade union leaders, including Pedro Salcedo; police interference in several meetings called by Mr. Salcedo and the declaration that a strike called by the executive committee headed by Mr. Salcedo was illegal. According to the Government, the Labour Directorate was awaiting a court decision regarding the legitimacy of one of the two executive committees, for the purpose of registering it. Nevertheless, the refusal to register the executive committee headed by Mr. Salcedo dated back to 1987 and, according to the complainant, it was in that year that the Labour Directorate recognised the other executive committee. The Conciliation and Arbitration Board of the Ministry of Labour ordered the negotiation of a new collective agreement and specified that the other executive committee was to represent workers in the negotiations. More specifically, as concerns the strike that began during the harvest on 30 August 1989 and was followed by 95 per cent of workers in the CAPSA enterprise, the complainant reports that the strike was suspended at the request of the enterprise on 4 September when the Conciliation and Arbitration Board declared the strike illegal.
2. 138. In its previous examination of this case, the Committee formulated the following recommendations (see 268th Report, para. 396):
   • (b) The Committee requests the Government rapidly to inform it of the outcome of the current legal proceedings concerning the recognition of the executive committee headed by Mr. Salcedo, the reinstatement of dismissed union leaders, the refund of trade union contributions retained by the employer since 1987 and the recognition of the other executive committee by the Labour Directorate. It recalls that justice delayed is justice denied.
   • (c) The Committee draws the Government's attention to the fact that it has stated on numerous occasions that the right to strike is one of the essential means through which workers and their organisations may promote and defend their occupational interests. Consequently, the Committee requests the Government to supply information and its observations on the application concerning the banning of the strike by workers in the CAPSA company, together with any information on developments in the labour dispute within this company.

B. Case No. 1446

1. 1. Previous examination of the case
2. 139. At its meeting of November 1989, the Committee formulated the following recommendations concerning outstanding allegations (see 268th Report, para. 409):
   • (c) As regards the transfer and reclassification of the General Secretary of the OTEP, Mr. Juan Gabriel Espínola, and the dismissal of teachers Antonia Jara Paredes and Canuta Ozuna de Ledesma owing to their trade union activities, the Committee urges the Government once more to send its observations on these allegations, and in particular to state whether administrative resolution No. 168 concerning Mr. Espínola has been revoked or reviewed in the light of the written objections presented by Mr. Espínola before the Ministry of Education and Culture. It also requests the Government to inform the Committee of the reasons which led to the dismissal of trade unionists Antonia Jara Paredes and Canuta Ozuna de Ledesma.
   • (d) The Committee deeply regrets the detention, psychological pressures and threats against trade unionist Cira Novara and her subsequent dismissal and requests the Government to inform it of the specific events and acts on which the charges are based, to state whether a judicial hearing has been instituted, and if so, to specify its outcome.
3. 2. Subsequent developments in the case
4. 140. Following the Committee's examination of this case in November 1989, the WCOTP sent a communication dated 28 June 1990 alleging that the "National Teachers' Co-ordinating Committee" (which brings together the Paraguyan teachers' organisations) called on teachers to strike throughout the nation on 2 July 1990 in support of wage demands, in a context in which teachers are denied freedom of association and the right to engage in collective bargaining and to strike. In response, the Ministry of Education and Culture threatened to dismiss and disqualify teachers participating in such a strike, in violation of Convention No. 87. The text of the communication by the Ministry of Education and Culture was as follows:
   • The Ministry of Education and Culture informs all teachers, heads of households and the population at large that, in response to the concerns expressed by the country's teachers, and in particular to their wish for an overall improvement in their conditions of life, as well as the progress of education in the country, it is working to reach such objectives through the appropriate legal channels.
   • However, at the same time, it reminds the petitioners of the provisions contained in article 55 of the national Constitution, which states that: "All Paraguyan citizens have the right to hold public office and employment with no conditions other than fitness for the position in question. Public officials and employees are prohibited from engaging in work stoppages and strikes, as well as from collectively leaving their posts." Furthermore, article 123 states that: "All residents are required to comply with and obey this Constitution and the laws, decrees, resolutions and other provisions which the public authorities may issue in accordance with their mandate."
   • Likewise, the Ministry recalls the provisions of Act No. 200 on the status of public officials, and in particular the following sections: "Section 36: Public officials may not adopt collective resolutions against provisions issued by the competent authorities." "Section 37: Public officials are prohibited from engaging in work stoppages and strikes. For the purposes of this Act, a work stoppage is considered as a collective suspension of services, and a strike as a collective absence from work. Strikes shall also include the collective refusal of public officials, or individual refusals which take place within an interval of ten days by more than five officials in the same unit." "Section 38: Public officials who infringe the provisions of the foregoing section will be disqualified from holding public employment for a period of two to five years. Public officials who are found guilty of threatening work stoppages or strikes will be subject to dismissal." "Section 39: Public officials are prohibited from using the premises or property of the administration for any purpose other than the performance of their specific tasks."
   • Thus, given the rule of law, the Ministry warns those concerned that the above-mentioned sanctions and legal provisions will be applied in the event of any transgressions of said provisions.
5. 141. In its communication of 15 September 1990 the WCOTP alleges that the Caaguazú regional branch of the Teachers' Organisation of Paraguay (OTEP) has been persecuted and harassed. The secretary of the Organisation, Hilda Montiel de Ríos, has been suspended from the Francisco Solano López School for having defended the OTEP before the school's students and teachers against accusations made by the school's director. In spite of the fact that these explanations were well received by the students and teachers, on 20 August 1990 the school's director relieved this teacher of her functions accusing her of insubordination and rebellion, and requested the Ministry of Education and Culture to fill the vacancy. According to the allegations, this dismissal is unacceptable, inasmuch as the school's director has neither the authority nor the competence to act in this manner, since such procedures fall to the competence of the Ministry. According to the complainant, this case must be viewed against the background of administrative corruption, warnings and the suspensions of certain members of the OTEP. On 23 August 1990 a delegation composed of teachers from the region, students, heads of households and the attorney for the Organisation's regional branch presented a formal complaint before the Ministry of Education. They were assured that a solution would be found to the problem of the teacher, Mrs. Hilda Montiel de Ríos.

C. Case No. 1519

1. 142. The International Federation of Plantation, Agricultural and Allied Workers (IFPAAW) alleges in its communication of 23 November 1989 that three members of the "ONONDIVEPA" National Peasants' Union, Messrs. Arcadio Flores, José Melgarejo and Aurelio Pereira had been detained without a warrant on 14 November 1989 by members of the armed forces in Colonia Torybeté, and that their current whereabouts are unknown.
2. 143. Moreover, IFPAAW alleges that on 7 November members of the third cavalry division in Curuguaty, Department of Canendiyú, brutally beat a group of 200 peasants. On 12 November some 150 members of the army fired on a group of 40 peasants in Tava-I and Almeida, Guauauvi district, Department of San Pedro, and imprisoned most of them in the Curuguaty post. These are armed assaults on groups of peasants who have peacefully occupied uncultivated land in order to draw the Government's attention to the growing problems of over 250,000 peasants who still have no land, in spite of the Government's creation of the Rural Development Co-ordinating Committee.

D. The Committee's conclusions

1. 144. The Committee deeply deplores the fact that the Government has not sent any of the information requested by the Committee and that, owing to the time elapsed, the Committee has been forced to examine the cases without the benefit of the Government's replies to the allegations in question. The Committee must recall the considerations presented in its First Report (para. 31, approved by the Governing Body in March 1952), which it has had to repeat on several occasions: the purpose of the whole procedure is to promote respect for trade union rights in law and in fact, and the Committee is confident that, as the procedure protects governments against unreasonable accusations, governments on their side should recognise the importance of formulating, so as to allow objective examination, detailed factual replies to such detailed factual charges as may be brought against them.
2. 145. Given the seriousness of the allegations in these cases which concern, inter alia, the detention of trade unionists, various acts of anti-union discrimination and serious legal restrictions on the trade union rights of public officials and employees, the Committee deplores the Government's absence of co-operation with the Committee's procedures. The Committee urges the Government in the future to send detailed replies to allegations without delay.
3. 146. As regards Case No. 1435, the Committee reiterates the conclusions which it formulated at its November 1989 meeting, namely, that the lengthy delay in concluding the proceedings concerning the recognition of the executive committee of the trade union of Algodonera Paraguaya S.A. and the reinstatement of the trade union leaders dismissed by that enterprise constitute a denial of justice and therefore a denial of the trade union rights of the persons concerned. Bearing in mind that the authorities' refusal to register the executive committee headed by Mr. Salcedo dates back to 1987, the Committee requests the Government to take measures with a view to ensuring that legislation will facilitate the expeditious disposition of proceedings involving labour-related matters. Moreover, since the Government has provided no information concerning the declaration of illegality of the strike which, according to the complainants, was followed by 95 per cent of the workers of the Algodonera Paraguaya S.A. enterprise, the Committee again emphasises that the right to strike constitutes an essential means for workers and their organisations to promote and defend their occupational interests, and that limitations on, or the prohibition of strikes may only apply in the case of essential services in the strict sense of the term (those where an interruption could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population). It considers that this definition does not cover this present case.
4. 147. As regards Case No. 1446, the Committee emphasises that the complainant organisation has alleged that teachers were dismissed or otherwise persecuted owing to their trade union activities. Consequently, given the Government's failure to reply, the Committee draws its attention to Article 1 of Convention No. 98, which states that "workers shall enjoy adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of their employment", and emphasises the importance of taking remedial action against acts of anti-union discrimination.
5. 148. In addition, the Committee deplores that the Ministry of Education and Culture reacted to the call for a national strike on 2 July 1990 by the National Teachers' Co-ordinating Body to obtain wage increases, by threatening dismissals and disqualifications. In general, on the question of restrictions which may be imposed by legislation on the trade union rights of teachers who are also public officials, the Committee emphasises that workers in the education sector should enjoy the right to establish trade union organisations, to bargain collectively and to resort to strikes (see 226th Report, Case No. 1166 (Honduras), paras. 343 and 344; see also the Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 3rd edition, 1985, paras. 394, 404 and 601). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the legislation guarantees these rights to workers in the education sector.
6. 149. Lastly, as regards Case No. 1519 concerning the detention and violent assaults by the armed forces on groups of peasants who, according to allegations, were peacefully occupying uncultivated lands, and concerning the detention, without warrant, of Messrs. Arcadio Flores, José Melgarejo and Aurelio Pereira, members of the National Peasants' Union, the Committee regrets this climate of violence. It requests the Government to confirm whether Messrs. Flores, Melgarejo and Pereira have been released and requests all parties involved to seek to resolve peacefully disputes arising from agrarian reform and rural development.