Rapport où le comité demande à être informé de l’évolution de la situation - Rapport No. 306, Mars 1997

1. 121. In communications dated 15, 21 and 29 May 1996, the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) submitted a complaint of violations of freedom of association against the Government of Belarus.
2. 122. In the absence of any reply from the Government, the Committee had to postpone its examination of this case involving allegations of a particularly serious nature on two occasions. At its meeting in November 1996 (see 305th Report, para. 9), the Committee made an urgent appeal to the Government stating that, in accordance with the procedural rules set out in paragraph 17 of its 127th Report, approved by the Governing Body, it could present a report on the substance of the case at its next meeting, even if information and observations requested from the Government had not been received in due time. The Government has not furnished any observations to date.
3. 123. Belarus 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. The complainant's allegations

1. 124. In its communication of 15 May 1996, the ICFTU alleges that the Government of Belarus has again taken action to prevent the independent trade unions of the country from enjoying normal, international trade union contacts.
2. 125. According to the ICFTU, a NSZZ Solidarnosc delegation led by Marian Krzaklewski, President, accompanied by Andrzej Adamczyk, International Secretary, and Eugeniusz Polmanski as well as their driver travelled to Minsk on 13 May for a fraternal visit to the Free Trade Union of Belarus (SPB).
3. 126. A number of meetings were organized by the SPB with workers in various enterprises. The delegation had received a permit to enter the Minsk Factory of Production Lines which they were to have visited on 14 May in the morning. This was subsequently withdrawn without any explanation. The delegation therefore met the workers in a school stadium outside the factory premises during their break. Thereafter, the delegation went to the union headquarters and had lunch in a nearby restaurant. Upon leaving the restaurant, they were stopped by eight officers of the Presidential Police and were taken to the police station of the Partisan district. The Polish Ambassador in Minsk intervened immediately and was allowed to meet the delegation. They were declared persona non grata and ordered to leave the country forthwith. The ICFTU indicated its understanding that there was a high risk of repressive measures being strengthened against the SPB.
4. 127. In its communication of 21 May 1996, the ICFTU adds that on 15 May, immediately after the deportation of the NSZZ Solidarnosc delegation, the police visited the headquarters of the SPB and served a court summons on Gennady Bykov, President, and P. Moyseyevich, Vice-President of the SPB and president of the Metal Workers' Union, on the grounds of their participation in an illegal gathering. The illegal gathering in question was the meeting held in a school stadium when the permit to visit the Minsk Factory of Production Lines was refused.
5. 128. The Deputy Minister of Industry wrote to the union on 14 May, referring to Presidential Decree No. 336 imposing a temporary ban on the activity of the SPB. In view of this Decree he advised that any meeting with the workers should take place outside their work premises. As the union had received a written permit for the visit to the factory from the director, they arrived at the factory in line with the agreed schedule. Upon their arrival, they were met by armed police and security officers with video cameras. The director was visibly upset and withdrew the permit. Bykov and Moyseyevich in effect remained in the factory discussing with the director and officers while the meeting in the school stadium was taking place. They therefore did not participate in the allegedly illegal gathering. Nevertheless, if they are to be tried and condemned, Bykov, who has already served a ten-day sentence, would be eligible for a minimum six-month imprisonment.
6. 129. The ICFTU further alleges that the SPB was informed by the Deputy Minister of Justice that the ministry had received instructions from the Presidency to implement Decree No. 336. In terms of the Decree, the ministry would need to close all SPB offices. Furthermore, the two unions associated with the SPB, namely the Belarus Independent Union (formerly NPG) and the Free Trade Union of Transport Workers, have been served with summons for the use of illegal insignia on the occasion of their first of May demonstrations. Both unions have union flags with their acronyms printed against the background of the former flag of free Belarus.
7. 130. In conclusion, the ICFTU emphasizes the continuing use by the Government of Presidential Decree No. 336, in clear contradiction with recommendations on this subject previously made by the Committee on Freedom of Association.

B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 131. The Committee regrets that despite the time elapsed since the presentation of the complaint and given the seriousness of the matters alleged, the Government has not responded to any of the allegations made by the complainant organization, though it has been invited to make comments and observations on this case on several occasions, including by means of an urgent appeal.
2. 132. Under these circumstances, and in accordance with the applicable rule of procedure (see the 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 in the absence of the information which it had hoped to receive from the Government.
3. 133. 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 fact. While these procedures protect governments against unreasonable accusations, they must recognize for their part the importance of formulating detailed replies to the allegations made against them for objective examination. (See First Report of the Committee, para. 31.)
4. 134. The Committee notes that the allegations in this case refer to the expulsion of non-national unionists, the serving of a court summons on trade union leaders for participation in a union gathering, and the continued threat of implementation of a ban on the activity of the Free Trade Union of Belarus (SPB) and its dissolution. In particular, the Committee notes with concern that many of these allegations concern violations of the principles of freedom of association which had recently been drawn to the Government's attention in the Committee's examination of another complaint submitted against the Government of Belarus (Case No. 1849, 302nd Report, paras. 161-222).
5. 135. The Committee first notes that members of a delegation of the NSZZ Solidarnosc, after having met with workers from the Minsk Factory of Production Lines and having visited the SPB headquarters, were stopped by eight officers of the Presidential Police and taken to the police station where the Polish Ambassador in Minsk was obliged to intervene. The NSZZ Solidarnosc officers were declared persona non grata and ordered to leave the country. The Committee further notes that, immediately after the deportation of the NSZZ Solidarnosc delegation, a summons was issued against Gennady Bykov and P. Moyseyevich, the President and Vice-President respectively of SPB, for having participated in an "illegal gathering" (i.e., the SPB meeting with the NSZZ Solidarnosc delegation held in a school stadium when the permit to visit the Minsk Factory of Production Lines, originally granted, was subsequently revoked without explanation).
6. 136. The Committee must first emphasize the importance of the principle, affirmed in 1970 by the International Labour Conference in its resolution concerning trade union rights and their relation to civil liberties, that the respect for civil liberties, such as the freedom of assembly, is essential for the normal exercise of trade union rights. On the basis of the information available, the Committee cannot but conclude that the serving of a court summons on Bykov and Moyseyevich for participation in a meeting of the SPB with the NSZZ Solidarnosc delegation is in violation of the union's right to free assembly and of freedom of association. Furthermore, given that the allegations indicate that Mr. Bykov, if tried, would be eligible for a minimum six-month prison term, the Committee wishes to emphasize, as it did in another case concerning Belarus (see 302nd Report, para. 213), that the imprisonment of trade union leaders for activities connected with the exercise of their trade union rights is contrary to the principles of freedom of association. The Committee therefore calls on the Government to immediately withdraw any charges made against Bykov and Moyseyevich for their participation in the SPB meeting of 14 May 1996 and to refrain from any further measures interfering with the right of free assembly of trade unions. It requests the Government to keep it informed concerning the withdrawal of charges against Mr. Bykov and Mr. Moyseyevich.
7. 137. The Committee also regrets that the members of the NSZZ Solidarnosc delegation were declared persona non grata and deported following, and apparently as a result of, their participation in the SPB meeting. It finds this fact all the more disturbing given that the delegation had already initially received a permit to enter the Minsk Factory and to visit the workers there which was subsequently revoked without explanation. In this respect, the Committee would draw the Government's attention to the principle that the formalities to which trade unionists and trade union leaders are subject in seeking entry to the territory of a State, or in attending to trade union business there, should be based on objective criteria and be free of anti-union discrimination. (See Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition, 1996, para. 639.) It requests the Government to ensure in the future that this principle is fully respected in practice.
8. 138. The Committee also notes from the allegations that the SPB has been informed by the Deputy Ministry of Justice that the ministry had received instructions from the Presidency to implement Decree No. 336. In its examination of Case No. 1849, the Committee noted with satisfaction that the Constitutional Court had declared certain articles of Presidential Decree No. 336 to be unconstitutional, in particular those concerning the suspension and termination of the activities of the Free Trade Union of Belarus, as well as the pursuit by the Procurator's office of its dissolution. (See 302nd Report, paras. 207, 209 and 210.) The Committee, however, expressed serious concern that it did not have any information on the follow-up given to the Court's decision and urgently requested the Government to ensure its full implementation. (See 302nd Report, para. 222(d).)
9. 139. In these circumstances, the Committee cannot but express its profound regret that the Government has not taken any measures to implement its above recommendation concerning Decree No. 336 and, to the contrary, would appear to be threatening new steps to implement the Decree despite the declaration by the Constitutional Court of its unconstitutionality and the conclusions of the Committee that its provisions were in violation of the principles of freedom of association. The Committee therefore urges the Government to take immediate steps to revoke the provisions of Presidential Decree No. 336 which interfere with the free exercise of trade union rights, namely articles 1, 2 and 3, and to keep it informed of the progress made in this regard.
10. 140. Finally, as concerns the summons served upon two unions associated with the SPB (the Belarus Independent Union and the Free Trade Union of Transport Workers) for the use of illegal insignia on the occasion of their demonstrations on the first of May, the Committee must recall that the full exercise of trade union rights calls for a free flow of information, opinions and ideas, and to this end workers, employers and their organizations should enjoy freedom of opinion and expression at their meetings, in their publications and in the course of other trade union activities. (See Digest, op. cit., para. 152.) The Committee is of the opinion that the choice of union insignia falls within the scope of freedom of expression, the respect of which is essential for the normal exercise of trade union rights, and therefore should, as a general principle, be left solely to the internal affairs of the trade union in question. The Committee trusts that, if charges are maintained against the unions in question concerning their use of this insignia, that they will be reviewed by an independent judicial body which will ensure that the freedom of expression of trade unionists is also respected when considering other interests which might eventually be invoked. The Government is requested to keep the Committee informed of any further developments concerning the summons served upon the Belarus Independent Union and the Free Trade Union of Transport Workers for the use of what the Government considers as illegal insignia.