Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 358, Novembre 2010

1. 158. The complaint is contained in a communication from the Congress of Argentine Workers (CTA) and the Association of State Workers (ATE) of July 2008. The CTA sent additional information in communications dated May 2009 and February 2010.
2. 159. In communications dated 22 September and 7 October 2008, and 20 July 2009, the Government requested additional information from the complainant organizations to enable it to send its reply. The said information was sent to the Government on 11 March 2010. As the Government has not replied, the Committee has had to postpone the examination of the case on two occasions. At its meeting in May–June 2010 [see 357th Report, para. 5], the Committee issued an urgent appeal to the Government, stating that, in accordance with the procedural rules set out in paragraph 17 of its 127th Report (1972), approved by the Governing Body, it could present a report on the substance of the case at its next meeting even if the information or observations requested had not been received in due time. The Government has sent its observations in a communication dated August 2010.
3. 160. Argentina 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 complainants’ allegations

1. 161. In their communication of July 2008, the CTA and the ATE allege that, on 23 June 2008, at around 11.15 p.m., Mr Pablo Micheli, Deputy Secretary-General of the CTA and Secretary-General of the ATE, was abducted for an hour and a half. On the aforementioned day, while at the entrance to his home in Lanús, in the province of Buenos Aires, he was approached by four well-dressed men, around the age of 30, with short hair and armed with guns, who forced him to leave his vehicle and get into another one being used by the kidnappers. After covering his head with a black cloth, they forced him to get into the van with a group of them, while another group took the ATE’s car, which had been allocated to the Secretary-General.
2. 162. The complainant organizations add that Mr Micheli stated in the criminal complaint: “They made it clear that they knew the names of my wife and children. It was not an unplanned abduction; they clearly knew who I was and they warned me not to lodge a complaint.” It was a crime carried out by professionals because they were armed and knew what they were doing. They were not drugged or drunk; they were well dressed and were in a four-wheel drive van. Threats were made to stop Mr Micheli from talking or taking any further action. One indication to suggest that this was not an ordinary criminal act was that they took his credit cards and the pin code and then returned them to him with nothing missing. Finally, Mr Micheli was left in Villa Domínico, a district in the south of Greater Buenos Aires.
3. 163. The CTA and ATE indicate the most important passages of the complaint lodged with the Public Prosecutor of Investigation Unit No. 14 of the Judicial Department of Lomas de Zamora within whose area of jurisdiction Mr Pablo Micheli’s home is located and where the events occurred, which read:
4. At that moment, I was cut off by a four by four from which at least three people got out, as far as I can recall, who pointed high-calibre weapons at me; I think that they were nine millimetre guns. I told them to take the car and not to shoot me. They told me that they wanted to take me with them and that is what they did, making death threats while I got into the four by four. The attackers were young people, did not look older than 30, were very well dressed, well spoken and did not seem drugged or drunk. They said that they knew me, that they knew who I was, that I was a “trade unionist” and that I should “stop ...” or something along those lines; they continuously referred to my work as trade unionist. They made it perfectly clear that they not only knew my daily movements but also those of my whole family and that I should “stop being such a nuisance”, which I took to be a clear reference to my public work as a trade union representative. While this was going on, we were driving around in the van for about an hour and a half and this led me to fear what would happen to me as well as to my family. After about an hour and a half, they let me go in Villa Domínico, roughly 20 blocks from avenida Mitre.
5. I cannot understand the point of the attack as such because, although they took away my bank card and asked me for the pin code, it seems that they were not used and nothing was taken. That is why I think it was a crime of coercion to restrict my trade union activity, bearing in mind that my trade union independence – as the workers’ representative – is not considered to be aligned with the Government or the sectors that oppose it, especially given the recent conflict with the agricultural organizations.
6. To date, these are the only conclusions I have been able to draw and that is why, once I recovered from the shock that this incident naturally caused, I went straight to the Public Prosecutor to report what had happened, given that it might be relevant to the investigation into the crime, since in my opinion it was not simply a theft but an act of grave coercion linked to my trade union activity.
7. 164. The complainant organizations point out that, whatever the purpose ultimately put forward by the Government, the State must carry out the investigations and procedures sufficiently quickly in order to track down effectively those responsible for planning and perpetrating such acts; similarly, access to justice must be quick and effective in order to find the perpetrators. This is all the more important as it involves the Deputy Secretary-General of a workers’ federation and Secretary-General of one of the most important trade unions in the country.
8. 165. In its communication of May 2009, the CTA states that, although the case has been reported to the legal authorities and also the competent political authorities, who undertook to make available all the means and resources needed to resolve the case immediately, and despite the seriousness of the matter, no progress had been made in the case. Neither Mr Pablo Micheli nor the CTA have received any kind of communication from the Executive Branch that might suggest that something is being done to resolve the case or that the government authorities are fulfilling their legal obligations or honouring the undertaking referred to above.
9. 166. By means of a communication of February 2010, the CTA reports that the complaint lodged with the Prosecutor’s Office No. 14 of the Judicial Department of Lomas de Zamora, in respect of the abduction of Mr Pablo Micheli on 23 June 2008, is being processed under preliminary criminal investigation No. 862519 by Supervisory Court No. 18 of the aforementioned judicial department.
10. B. The Government’s reply
11. 167. In its communications of 22 September 2008, 7 October 2008 and 20 July 2009, the Government states that information regarding the number of the case and the investigation into the complaint is required so that the Prosecutor’s Office involved (which has already been consulted) can identify the act and submit the information it considers relevant. The Government adds that only if this information is provided will it be able to go ahead with the relevant consultations and provide a satisfactory reply concerning the complaint of the alleged infringement of trade union rights by the Argentine State. In its communication dated August 2010, the Government indicates that it has requested the Prosecutor’s Office to provide it information about the case. However, the Prosecutor’s Office responded that there was no individual file containing the information alleged by the trade union. The Government informed the CTA accordingly.

C. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 168. The Committee notes that in this case the complainant organizations allege the temporary abduction (for an hour and a half) with the aim of causing intimidation because of his trade union activity of the CTA’s Deputy Secretary-General and the ATE’s Secretary-General, Mr Pablo Micheli, on 23 June 2008. The complainant organizations point out that the abduction took place at the entrance of Mr Micheli’s home by an armed group, whose members said that they knew the names of his spouse and children, and that during the abduction they threatened him in order to stop him from talking or taking action.
2. 169. The Committee notes that, since the complaint was referred to the Government, the latter requested the case number of the criminal complaint to enable it to submit the relevant information. The complainant organization sent the information concerning the number of the case in February 2010. Nevertheless, in its recent communication, the Government indicates that there is no individual file containing the information provided by the trade union.
3. 170. Under these circumstances, taking into account the seriousness of the allegations, the Committee urges the complainant organization to provide precise information and further details about the complaint lodged with the Prosecutor’s Office, in order to enable the Government to communicate information about any progress in the investigation that is said to be under way regarding the abduction of the trade union leader, Mr Pablo Micheli. Moreover, the Committee further requests the Government to carry out an investigation concerning the allegations and expects that those responsible for planning and perpetrating the abduction will be severely punished. Moreover, should Mr Micheli request it, the Committee requests the Government to provide him with the protection deemed necessary to guarantee his personal safety.