Rapport où le comité demande à être informé de l’évolution de la situation - Rapport No. 292, Mars 1994

1. 488. In a communication dated 22 April 1993, the Democratic Confederation of Labour (CDT) presented a complaint against the Government of Morocco alleging violations of trade union rights. In a communication dated 31 May 1993, it lodged new allegations.
2. 489. At its meeting in November 1993 (see 291st Report, para. 12), the Committee observed that despite the time which had elapsed since the presentation of this complaint, it had still not received the Government's observations and information. The Committee drew the Government's attention to the fact that, in accordance with the procedural rules set out in paragraph 17 of its 127th Report, it could present a report on the substance of the case even if the information and observations requested from the Government had not been received in due time. Since that urgent appeal, the Committee has received no reply from the Government on this matter.
3. 490. Morocco has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No. 87); however, it has ratified the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainant organization's allegations

1. 491. In its communication of 22 April 1993, the Democratic Confederation of Labour (CDT) alleges violations of trade union rights within the company "Huileries de Meknès", a private company with its head office in Rabat.
2. 492. According to the CDT, this enterprise, which was established in 1960, is enjoying an economic boom and has considerably expanded the number and range of its industrial activities. It employs 1,500 workers.
3. 493. According to the CDT, the management manifests an avowed hatred for the workers' trade union. It is alleged that labour laws have not been applied, work-cards have not been provided, legal minimum wages and seniority bonuses have not been paid, declarations to the social security authorities have not been submitted, the standard work schedule has not been adhered to (8 hours per day, not 14), established status has not been granted to temporary workers, working conditions have not been respected, and that there have been all types of abuse, especially of female workers.
4. 494. It was against this background that the workers established the trade union office of the CDT on 22 October 1992. The management of the enterprise reacted by dismissing the 11 members of the trade union office as well as four other activists. A protest strike was called on 4 November 1992 as well as a "sit-in" in front of the factory from 4 to 12 November. The police then attacked the workers in front of the factory and injured several before making a number of arrests. The local union of the CDT interceded with the authorities, who undertook to resolve the problem on condition that the "sit-in" was moved to the local office of the CDT. This was done, but the authorities did not honour by their commitment. This prompted the workers to resume their sit-in in front of the factory on 22 November 1992. Once again, the police intervened violently and injured a number of workers.
5. 495. The complainant organization states that the management of the factory has done nothing but strain relations even further. For example, it is alleged that it sent strikers a formal notice pointing out that they had abandoned their posts when the strike began on 4 November and ordering them to resume work within 48 hours, failing which they would be deemed to have resigned.
6. 496. On 29 December 1992, also according to the complainant organization, the police again intervened, this time with the help of groups armed with cudgels, knives, iron bars, sticks, daggers, etc., who had been called in by the management. During the course of this operation, 163 workers were injured, including two members of the local union of the CDT, who were also arrested, and 57 workers. Three days later, after statements had been taken, the individuals concerned were released. The complainant organization has appended to its complaint a list of the injured persons and descriptions of their injuries.
7. 497. The CDT states that, at the date of the complaint, the strike had been broken by the management with the help of these armed bands and with the assistance of the local authorities; more than 500 workers were still expelled, the management was still refusing to reinstate these individuals or to engage in any dialogue, and the authorities have done nothing to enforce trade union rights and bring about the reinstatement of the workers expelled and the opening of a dialogue with the trade union representatives.
8. 498. In its communication of 31 May 1993, the CDT alleges that on 3 May 1993 the President of the Municipal Council of Mehdia-Kenitra arbitrarily dismissed Mr. Kouadi Mohammed, an agent in the training service, because of his membership of the CDT and his participation in the May Day celebrations organized by the CDT. The CDT has provided a copy of that decision.

B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 499. The Committee emphasizes that the absence of a reply from the Government in this case renders the examination of the allegations very difficult. The Committee indeed regrets that, despite the time which has elapsed since the presentation of this complaint, and despite being invited to do so on several occasions, including by means of an urgent appeal, the Government has not formulated its comments and observations on the allegations brought by the complainant organization.
2. 500. Under these circumstances, however, and in accordance with the applicable rule of procedure (see 127th Report of the Committee, para. 17, approved by the Governing Body at its 184th Session), the Committee feels obliged to submit a report on the substance of the case, even without the information which it had hoped to receive from the Government.
3. 501. The Committee first of all reminds the Government that the purpose of the procedures established by the International Labour Organization for examining allegations of violations of freedom of association is to ensure that this freedom is respected in law and in fact. While these procedures protect governments against unreasonable accusations, they must recognize for their part the importance for the protection of their own good name of formulating for objective examination detailed replies to such allegations made against them. (See First Report of the Committee, para. 31.)
4. 502. The Committee observes that the allegations which are the subject of the present case concern violations of freedom of association in the company "Huileries de Meknès". The complainant organization alleges in general terms that the management manifests an avowed hatred for the workers' union which is reflected among other things in its refusal to apply labour legislation.
5. 503. As regards the dismissal of 11 members of the trade union office of the CDT and four other trade unionists, it would appear that these measures were taken shortly after the establishment within the factory of the union office. The anti-trade union nature of these dismissals may therefore reasonably be assumed. For that reason, the Committee recalls the principles according to which all workers should be able to form and join organizations of their own choosing in full freedom and no person should be prejudiced in his employment by reason of his trade union membership or legitimate trade union activities (Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee of the Governing Body of the ILO, 3rd edition, 1985, paras. 222 and 538); it urges the Government to take measures to establish an impartial inquiry with a view to ascertaining the true reasons for these dismissals and, if it is proven that the individuals concerned were dismissed by reason of their trade union activities, to ensure that they are reinstated in their posts. It requests the Government to keep it informed of the findings of that inquiry.
6. 504. The Committee also observes that, according to the complainant organization, the police and armed individuals on three occasions in November and December 1992 intervened violently to break the protest strikes and "sit-in" organized by the workers. During these interventions, the police allegedly injured a large number of workers and made a number of arrests. The Committee notes that, according to the CDT, the two members of the local union and the 57 workers arrested on 29 December 1992 were released three days later after statements had been taken.
7. 505. The Committee stresses once again that a genuinely free and independent trade union movement can only develop where fundamental human rights are fully respected and guaranteed (see Digest, op. cit., para. 68), and recalls that the authorities should only have recourse to force during strikes when grave situations arise and public order is seriously threatened. The Committee deplores this violence and urges the Government to establish an independent, impartial and thorough inquiry into the relevant circumstances to determine the nature and justification of the police action and to identify those responsible for the violence, and to keep it informed of the findings of that inquiry.
8. 506. As regards the arrests (alleged by the complainant organization) of strikers by the police, the Committee reminds the Government that the right to strike is one of the essential means through which workers and their organizations may promote and defend their economic and social interests. (Digest, op. cit., para. 363.) Furthermore, in the view of the Committee the authorities should not have recourse to measures of imprisonment for the mere fact of organizing or participating in a peaceful strike. (Digest, op. cit., para. 447.) The Committee recalls that taking part in picketing, and firmly but peaceably inciting other workers to keep away from their workplace, cannot be considered unlawful. The case is different, however, when picketing is accompanied by violence or coercion of non-strikers in an attempt to interfere with their freedom to work; such acts constitute criminal offences in many countries. (Digest, op. cit., para. 435.) In the light of these principles to which it attaches great importance, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any developments in the situation of all the workers arrested and in particular to state whether they have been released, whether any charges are still pending against them and, if not, to make efforts to obtain their reinstatement in their posts.
9. 507. As regards the alleged expulsion of more than 500 workers on the grounds of their participation in the protest strikes, the Committee stresses that the use of extremely serious measures, such as the dismissal of workers for having participated in a strike, implies a serious risk of abuse and constitutes a violation of freedom of association. (Digest, op. cit., para. 444.) It calls on the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the individuals concerned are reinstated in their posts and to keep it informed of any developments in their situation.
10. 508. Finally, according to the decision of 3 May 1993 given by the President of the Municipal Council of Mehdia, a copy of which has been provided by the complainant organization, the Committee observes that Mr. Kouadi Mohammed was dismissed among other reasons because of his participation in the 1993 May Day march organized by the CDT of which he is a member. The Committee recalls that the right to organize public meetings and processions, particularly on the occasion of May Day, constitutes an important aspect of the CDT's trade union rights (Digest, op. cit., para. 155) and requests the Government to take the measures to ensure that Mr. Kouadi Mohammed is reinstated in his job. It requests the Government to keep it informed on this matter.
11. 509. More generally, the Committee must again draw the Government's attention to the fact that legislation must provide for specific sanctions to deter acts of anti-trade union discrimination and interference perpetrated by employers against workers and workers' organizations, in order to ensure that Articles 1 and 2 of Convention No. 98 are effectively implemented. The Committee also recalls in this context that the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations for a number of years has been calling on the Government to adopt specific provisions to ensure that workers are effectively protected against acts of anti-trade union discrimination and workers' organization against acts of interference. (Report III (Part 4A), 1992, p. 275.) The Committee therefore urges the Government to take legislative or other measures without delay to ensure that the Convention is implemented.