Suites données aux recommandations du comité et du Conseil d’administration - Rapport No. 316, Juin 1999

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 31. At its meeting in November 1998, the Committee examined allegations concerning the dismissal of the trade union leaders Mr. Sergio Antonio Cea Valenzuela, Mr. Sergio Silva Pérez and Mr. Jorge Muñoz Llanos of the security transport company Brink's of Chile S.A. The Government sent extensive documentation and details of the various court rulings rejecting these unionists' complaints and indicated that the ruling of the First Labour Tribunal of Valparaíso, rejecting the evidence regarding their status as workers and trade union leaders, was under appeal. The Committee requested the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the appeal proceedings (see 311th Report, paras. 32, 33 and 34).
2. 32. In a communication dated 2 March 1999, the Government stated that on 28 August 1998, the Valparaíso Court of Appeal rejected the application by Mr. Cea Valenzuela, Mr. Silva Pérez and Mr. Muñoz Llanos and upheld the lower court's ruling. On 4 September 1998, the lawyers acting on behalf of the union leaders applied to the Valparaíso Court of Appeal for clarification, expansion or correction of its ruling of 28 August 1998, with a view to obtaining clarification on certain questionable points and rectifying certain errors which in their view the ruling contained. On 29 September 1998, the Valparaíso Court of Appeal rejected this application. On 16 September 1998, the lawyers acting for the union leaders applied to the Supreme Court, through the Valparaíso Court of Appeal, for a ruling to set aside the ruling of 28 August on the grounds that it was contradictory. On 29 October 1998, the Supreme Court reviewed the application and ruled it to be inadmissible. On 20 November 1998, the Supreme Court issued an i
   • mplementation order in respect of the ruling handed down by the Court of Appeal, which thus became an enforceable judgement against which no further appeals could be made.
3. 33. The Committee takes note of this information and of the contents of the court rulings according to which the persons concerned did not have the status of trade union leaders at the time of their dismissals and consequently did not enjoy special protection.