Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 299, Juin 1995

1. 54. The complaint dealt with in this case is contained in a communication from the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Burundi (CSB), dated 22 December 1993.
2. 55. At the Committee's November 1994 meeting, it observed that, despite the time which had elapsed since the complaints had been lodged, it had not received the Government's observations. The Committee drew the attention of the Government to the fact that, in accordance with the procedural rules set out in paragraph 17 of its 127th Report, approved by the Governing Body, it may present a report on the substance of the case, even if the observations or information requested from the Government have not been received in due time. The Committee accordingly requested the Government to transmit its observations or information as a matter of urgency. (See 295th Report, para. 13.)
3. 56. Since that time, the Government sent its observations in a communication dated 2 March 1995.
4. 57. Burundi has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No. 87); it has not ratified the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainant's allegations

1. 58. In its communication of 22 December 1993, the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Burundi (CSB) alleges that for some time it has observed blatant interference by the Minister of Labour, Public Service and Repatriation of Refugees in the nomination of workers' representatives on tripartite bodies and joint committees. The Minister whose responsibilities include labour, social security, the public service and the repatriation of refugees has deliberately taken to nominating workers' representatives without deigning to consult the CSB which is the most representative national trade union confederation of workers in Burundi, covering all sectors, and acting as the umbrella organization for 14 occupational trade unions. This holds particularly true for the recent nomination of members of the governing bodies of the National Institute of Social Security (INSS) and the Public Service Benefit Society which manages workers' health insurance in the public and semi-public sectors.
2. 59. The complainant organization adds that in defiance of the tripartite nature of the International Labour Organization and in violation of the principle whereby a mandate is rightfully granted to the most representative organization, the Minister of Labour, Public Service and Repatriation of Refugees changed the composition of the delegation of Burundi to the Eighth ILO African Regional Conference, by replacing the Workers' delegate nominated by the CSB with the representative of a small teachers' trade union with several dozen members which is not affiliated to the confederation, although the trade union of the same sector (teaching) which is affiliated to the CSB has thousands of members, including teachers and other persons working in national education.
3. 60. In its letter to the ILO, No. 570/948/CAB/93 dated 14 October 1993, the complainant organization adds that the Minister in question submitted the list of delegates of Burundi, including the Workers' delegate put forward by the CSB, Mr. Bernard Sebumba, who is a member of the executive board of the Confederal Committee of the CSB and the national first-secretary of the major Union of Workers in Agriculture, Breeding and Rural Development. Not until 29 November 1993 did the Minister, while filling out the form stating the delegations' credentials, strike Mr. Sebumba off the list and replace him with a Mr. Niyongabo Aloys.
4. 61. The CSB protests strongly at this increasingly widespread practice which is designed systematically to ignore trade union organizations which do not bow to the wishes of some political party leaders.
5. 62. Finally, the complainant organization alleges that the Economic and Social Council had very recently been appointed and set up by the President of the Republic but did not include a single trade unionist representing the socio-economic interests of the working class of Burundi.

B. The Government's reply

1. 63. In its communication of 2 March 1995, the Government states that the nomination of workers' representatives to the Governing Bodies (tripartite) of the National Institute of Social Security (INSS) and the Public Service Benefit Society - facts referred to by the complainant organization - occurred before the new Minister of Labour took up post in February 1994. Collaboration and tripartite dialogue began from this time onwards, as well as consultations for the revision of the Governing Body of the INSS in conformity with national and international standards.
2. 64. As regards the allegation concerning the nomination of the Worker's delegate to the Eighth ILO African Regional Conference (January 1994), the Government points out that the country was going through a serious social and political crisis at this time due to the assassination of the President of the Republic, after which consultation between the social partners became practically impossible. It was in this context that the change in the composition of the Burundi delegation to the above-mentioned Conference was made. At that time, there was no suspicion or bias towards one or another Worker member of the delegation.
3. 65. The Government concludes that, if tripartism had indeed not been respected, this was due to the financial difficulties faced by the country during the above-mentioned social and political crisis.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 66. The Committee is aware of the exceptional and difficult situation the country finds itself in; however, it has to proceed to the examination of the allegations presented in this case.
2. 67. The Committee notes that the allegations concern the lack of consultation on, and interference by the authorities in the nomination of workers' representatives to tripartite bodies and joint commissions, even to the Eighth ILO African Regional Conference, to the detriment of the complainant organization which claims to be the most representative organization of workers of Burundi.
3. 68. With regard to the nomination of the Workers' delegate to the Eighth African Regional Conference, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, the allegations refer to acts which took place in November 1993, a period during which the country went through a serious social and political crisis when consultations with the social partners became practically impossible; nevertheless, according to the Government, there was no biased treatment. In this respect, the Committee recalls that this is a matter for the Credentials Committee of the African Regional Conference and defers to the conclusions made by this Committee, in particular, the final paragraph:
   • The Committee considered that it resulted from these explanations that the procedure for the nomination of the Workers' delegate of Burundi as provided for in article 1, paragraph 4, of the Rules had not been followed and that the Workers' delegate belonged to an organization which was not affiliated to the organization which was considered until now as the most representative. As a result, the objection to the nomination of the Workers' delegate of Burundi was well founded and recommended that the Conference bring the matter to the attention of the Governing Body for action in accordance with article 10, paragraph 6, of the above-mentioned Rules.
   • (See GB.259/4/7, 259th Session, March 1994, Record of the Eighth African Regional Conference, 19-26 January 1994, p. 27.)
4. 69. With regard to the allegations of lack of consultation with the complainant organization over the nomination of workers' representatives to the National Institute of Social Security (INSS), the Committee notes that, since February 1994, collaboration and tripartite dialogue have been undertaken in the country, as well as consultations for the revision of the Governing Body (tripartite) of the INSS. The Committee notes that the Government has not referred to the allegations concerning the lack of consultation for the nomination of the workers' representatives to the Governing Body of the Public Service Benefit Society nor to the allegation that not a single trade unionist represents workers' socio-economic interests on the Economic and Social Council. In this regard, the Committee has, on several occasions, considered that "it was not called upon to express an opinion as to the right of a particular organization to be invited to take part in consultative or joint bodies unless its exclusion constituted a clear case of discrimination affecting the principle of freedom of association. This was a matter to be determined by the Committee in the light of the facts of each given case." (See Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 3rd edition, 1985, para. 646.) In these circumstances, since the complainant organization has, thus far, been seen as the most representative trade union organization of the country's workers, the Committee considers that it should sit on joint and inter-occupational tripartite bodies, including those of sectors it represents, and that it should be entitled freely to nominate representatives to these bodies. Therefore, the Committee urges the Government to take immediate measures to this end.