Interim Report - REPORT_NO56, 1961

1. 183. The complaint of the C.G.C.L is contained in a communication addressed directly to the I.L.O on 26 July 1960. The text of this communication was forwarded to the Government on 5 August 1960 and the latter transmitted its observations thereon in a communication dated 27 October 1960. The case having been submitted to it at its 26th Session (November 1960), the Committee drew certain conclusions with regard to some of the allegations concerning general developments in Cameroun and the allegations concerning the economic situation. Consequently these allegations will not again be considered in the present document. As regards the other allegations made in this case, which will be dealt with below, they were the subject of an interim report by the Committee, which considered that further information was necessary before it could formulate its final recommendations to the Governing Body. The Government was asked by letter dated 22 November 1960 to supply the information in question, and it forwarded its reply in a communication dated 14 April 1961.
2. 184. On becoming a Member of the International Labour Organisation on 7 June 1960 the Government of Cameroun announced that it recognises that Cameroun remains bound by the obligations of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the provisions of which had formerly been declared applicable by France to Cameroun and that it undertakes to apply the provisions of the Right of Association (Non-Metropolitan Territories) Convention, 1947 (No. 84), until it has been able to ratify the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

• Allegations relating to Arrests and Maltreatment of Workers and Trade Union Leaders
  185. 185 The complainants allege that many workers, as well as a number of trade union leaders, have been arrested. Some of these have been tortured and condemned to imprisonment or exile. It is contended that when arrested they are proclaimed " rebels " or " out laws " and subjected to bestial torture-electric current passed through the body, immersion in salt water with the head wrapped in cloths soaked with water containing cement, deprivation of food and water. The complainants go on to make reference to specific cases.
  186. 186 The complainants also make the following allegations: that Mr. Mayao Beck, General Secretary of the C.G.C.L, has been provisionally liberated on 800,000 francs bail; that Mr. Etame Dimouamoua Ebenezer and Mr. Ngosso Martin, secretaries of the C.G.C.L, are in prison in Douala, for reasons unknown; that Mr. Ndooh Isaac, member of the executive of the Building Workers' Union, and Mr. Mouangue David, foreman carpenter, were terribly tortured and then imprisoned, because of their trade union and patriotic activities, and have now become political refugees, leaving their wives and children in Cameroun; that Mr. Ekwalla Robert, another secretary of the C.G.C.L, is a fugitive, having narrowly escaped arrest on 28 June 1959 by the " Franco-Cameroun police ".
  187. 187 In its reply of 27 October 1960 the Government confines itself to the specific cases cited. It declares that Mr. Mayao Beck was in fact arrested not in the Republic of Cameroun but in the British Territory of Cameroun, where he was found in possession of subversive documents and sentenced finally to six months' imprisonment. The Government, therefore, disclaims all responsibility in this case.
  188. 188 Messrs. Etame Ebenezer and Ngosso Martin, declared the Government, were arrested by police officers, following searches made pursuant to section 4 of Ordinance No. 60-52 of 7 May 1960, and charged with endangering the internal security of the State, the searches having produced evidence of their complicity in the rebellion in the western part of the country. In its communication of 27 October 1960 the Government stated that they were in custody and awaiting trial by the criminal court on charges in respect of which, if convicted, they would be liable to imprisonment for from one to five years, followed by a five to ten year term of prohibition of residence (interdiction de séjour), as provided by article 91 of the Penal Code, as amended by Law No. 59-34 of 27 May 1959.
  189. 189 The Government stated that Mr. Ndooh Isaac was a foreman in the port of Douala and was dismissed for occupational incapacity. He was a member of the Cameroun People's Party (U.P.C.) both before and after the dissolution of that political party. Regarded as one of the organisers of the disturbances in Douala on 27 June 1959, which marked the outbreak of terrorism in Cameroun, he was arrested on 1 August 1959 and then liberated under the Amnesty Law of 8 May 1960. The Government declared that he was in Accra between 8 and 10 July 1960, as a representative of the Central Committee of the U.P.C. On 11 May 1956, he was sentenced to two months' imprisonment by the Douala Criminal Court for theft, assault and resisting the police; on 5 April 1957 he was sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment for reorganising a dissolved association, the term being increased by one year by the Court of Appeal. On 26 July 1958, he was sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment, again for reconstituting a dissolved association. Nothing in the foregoing history, declares the Government, had the slightest relation to any trade union activity.
  190. 190 The Government knew of no trade union affiliations of Mr. Mouangue. He was an active member of the U.P.C, sentenced to one year's imprisonment for reconstituting a dissolved association, but amnestied in March 1959. The Government declared him to be a terrorist. He was again arrested in February 1960 and was being tried on charges of endangering the internal safety of the State, murder and attempted murder.
  191. 191 In its reply of 27 October 1960 the Government stated that Mr. Ekwalla Robert, while being Secretary of the Commercial and Banking Employees' Federation, was also a very active militant of the U.P.C. In 1955 he was imprisoned for organising armed bands, released on bail on 31 January 1956, following which the prosecution against him was non-suited on 24 August 1956. On 26 June 1958, after being arrested for carrying arms, he was sentenced to three years' imprisonment for endangering the internal security of the State, being later amnestied pursuant to a Law of 11 and 12 March 1959. The Government stated that he resumed his subversive activities and took to the maquis on 16 June 1960.
  192. 192 The Government therefore contended that all the persons named in the complaint had been proceeded against because of their subversive political or criminal activities having no connection with the trade union activities of any of those concerned.
  193. 193 At its meeting in November 1960 the Committee recalled that it had always emphasised the importance which it attaches to the principle of a prompt and fair trial by an impartial and independent judicial authority in all cases, including those in which trade unionists are accused of political or criminal offences which the Government considers to be outside the scope of their trade union activities. The Committee also recalled that in the past where allegations concerning the arrest of trade union leaders or workers have been met by governments with statements that the arrests were made for subversive activities, for reasons of internal security or for common law crimes, it has followed the rule that the governments concerned should be requested to submit further information of as precise a nature as possible concerning the arrests and particularly as to the legal or judicial proceedings instituted as a result thereof and the result of such proceedings. Further, in a number of previous cases z, the Committee has followed the practice of not proceeding to examine matters which were the subject of pending judicial proceedings, provided that these proceedings were attended by proper guarantees of due process of law, where the pending judicial proceedings might make available information of assistance to the Committee in appreciating whether or not allegations were well founded.
  194. 194 In the present case the Committee noted that while the Government had given information as to the outcome of legal proceedings taken in the cases of Mr. Ndooh Isaac and Mr. Ekwalla Robert and information showing that the events relating to Mr. Mayao Beck took place outside the national territory, it declared that criminal proceedings were pending in the cases of Messrs. Etame Ebenezer, Ngosso Martin and Mouangue. In these circumstances the Committee requested the Government to be good enough to furnish information as to the results of the proceedings pending, including copies of the judgments given.
  195. 195 In its communication of 14 April 1961 the Government indicates in the first place that the persons in question were sentenced by military tribunals and it points out that military tribunals have been organised in Cameroun in pursuance of Ordinance No. 59/91 of 31 December 1959, which prescribes their powers and regulates their working. Section 9 of this ordinance provides that " in the case of infractions falling within the competence of permanent or temporary military tribunals, the inquiries by the judicial police and the preliminary investigations are carried out in accordance with the rules governing ordinary law, subject to the supervision and control of the Attorney-General, through the officers of the judicial police and the magistrates carrying out preliminary investigations for the tribunal of first instance of the military court, these being competent for all matters lying within the province of the court ". Consequently, the Government declares, these are not exceptional courts, but are courts having a specific competence which in times of peace covers the following cases: crimes against the external security of the State (articles 75 to 86 of the Penal Code); and infringements provided for in the Decree of 20 March 1939 respecting military information and by that of 21 April 1939 for the repression of foreign propaganda, of special military crimes and offences dealt with under sections 193 to 248 of the Act of 9 March 1928 respecting the code of military justice for the land forces.
  196. 196 As regards the case of the persons specifically mentioned, the Government supplies the following information: Mr. Etane Ebenezer was sentenced by the Military Court of Douala, at the sitting held on 16 January 1961, to 18 years' imprisonment and 15 years of prohibition of residence (interdiction de séjour) for crimes against the security of the State and for associating with criminals. Mr. Ngosso Martin was sentenced by the same court at the same sitting, to 13 years forced labour and a 15-year term of prohibition of residence. The case of Mr. Mouangue David, convicted of having participated in a reunion organised by a terrorist chief with a view to continuing armed resistance and who pleaded guilty to this, was referred to the Public Prosecutor. Mr. David is at present in custody in New Bell.
  197. 197 Finally, the Government indicated that copies of the judgments concerning the above-mentioned persons had been requested and would be communicated to the Office.
  198. 198 In these circumstances the Committee considers that the text of the said judgments may contain information useful to it and has decided to wait until it has examined them before making its final recommendations on this aspect of the case to the Governing Body.
  199. 199 As regards this first series of allegations, the Committee had also requested the Government, at its session of November 1960, to supply its observations on the alleged torture of prisoners, with particular reference to Messrs. Ndooh Isaac and Mouangue.
  200. 200 In its reply of 14 April 1961 the Government indicates that it has not been possible, on the basis of the investigations carried out in this connection, to obtain the clear information on the maltreatment to which detained persons were allegedly subjected. " Certainly " declares the Government " the interrogations to which persons suspected of having organised terrorist raids are subjected cannot be compared to a social gathering but this is probably the case in most countries of the world, including the more highly developed countries, and even in those which are most frequently heard in the assembly of nations, even if they are United." It will be noted, however, that, unlike the situation in several of these countries, the victims of these alleged tortures still find it possible, after having been subjected thereto, to complain to international organisations, and that this would no longer be possible if, as in the countries in question, the summary " liquidation " of detained persons, and even of mere suspects, had become one of the principal instruments of government.
  201. 201 In the past, on several occasions', the Committee expressed the general view that each government should ensure the respect of human rights. In a case relating to Spain, the Committee had made the following recommendation to the Governing Body: " With respect to the allegations relating to the ill-treatment of, and other punitive measures against, workers who took part in the strikes of 1958, and with respect also to the legal procedure referred to by the Government in its observations, to draw attention once again to the importance that it has always attached to the right of trade unionists, like all other persons, to enjoy the guarantees afforded by due process of law in accordance with the principles enunciated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights."
  202. 202 The Committee considers it appropriate to recommend the Governing Body to emphasise the importance to be attached to the fundamental principles enunciated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as violation of these principles may affect the free exercise of trade union rights.
  203. 203 In the particular case the reasons which may have led to the measures allegedly taken against these persons appear to have been political in character and not to have had any effect on the trade union activities of the persons subjected thereto.
  204. 204 In these circumstances the Committee considers that the complainants have not supplied proof that in this particular case the alleged maltreatment was in any way connected with the trade union activities of the persons alleged to have been subjected thereto and accordingly, subject to the observation made in paragraph 202 above, recommends the Governing Body to decide that this particular aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
• Allegations relating to Emergency Legislation
  205. 205 The complainants allege that exceptional legislation (Laws Nos. 121, 122, 123 and 124) adopted on 16 May 1959 infringes trade union rights in a number of ways. It is alleged that this legislation, the texts of which have not been communicated by the complainants, prohibits all meetings and publications, and banishes former convicted persons (repris de justice) and persons not normally there resident from districts subject to a " state of alert "; moreover, in virtue of this legislation, the authorities may banish persons deemed dangerous to public security from a district subject to a " state of alert " in which they normally reside or may assign them a forced residence. The complainants contend that these laws are aimed at trade union leaders, many of whom were formerly " revolutionary patriots " and political detainees, and make it impossible to carry out trade union activities, including the organisation of strikes.
  206. 206 In its first reply the Government referred to Ordinance No. 60/52 of 7 May 1960 which " constitutes an organic law respecting a state of emergency " and to Decree No. 60/124 of 8 May 1960 which proclaims a state of emergency (these two texts were attached to the Government's communication). The Government also referred to Ordinance No. 60/47 of 8 May 1960 providing for an amnesty in respect of political crimes and offences committed prior to the said legislation of May 1960.
  207. 207 At its 26th Session (November 1960) the Committee noted that neither the texts received nor the Government's reply referred to Laws Nos. 121, 122, 123 and 124 of 16 May 1959, on which the complainants' allegations were mainly based. Consequently the Committee requested the Government to indicate whether the laws in question were still in force or whether they had been partially or entirely suspended by the legislation of 1960, and, if they were still in force, to be good enough to furnish the texts thereof.
  208. 208 In its reply of 14 April 1961 the Government declares that no further information can be supplied with regard to the emergency legislation (Laws Nos. 121, 122, 123 and 124) mentioned by the complainants as it had not been possible, after research on the spot, to find any legislative texts bearing these numbers. The Government indicates that the text which the authors of the complaint had in mind may have been Act No. 59/33 of 27 May 1959 respecting the maintenance of public order and the texts of regulations issued thereunder; " however, this legislation is in any case null and void as it was explicitly repealed by section 13 of Ordinance No. 60/52 of 7 May 1960 ", the only text in force in this field.
  209. 209 Although the suspension of certain Constitutional guarantees is possible under Ordinance No. 60/52 of 7 May 1960-the text of which is supplied by the Government-this ordinance contains no provisions from which it might be concluded that, as alleged by the complainants, it is directed against trade union leaders. Its scope is general in character and it is drawn up in terms similar to those used for other legislative texts of this nature. Moreover, it has not been alleged that it was particularly applied to trade union leaders because of their trade union activities.
  210. 210 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to decide that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.