Interim Report - REPORT_NO81, 1965

1. 115. The Committee already examined this case at its session in June 1964 and made an interim report, which appears in paragraphs 368 to 380 of its 76th Report adopted by the Governing Body at its 159th Session (June-July 1964) and at its session in November 1964, when it presented another interim report, which appears in paragraphs 225 to 247 of its 78th Report, adopted by the Governing Body at its 160th Session (November 1964).
2. 116. When examining this case in its 78th Report the Committee already observed that, by reason of the many complaints received of infringement of trade union rights in the Pacific banana zone, the Government had decided to appoint a committee to investigate these events. At the time the Committee recommended the Governing Body to note that the Government had promised to furnish the results of the investigations being conducted, together with its own observations on the allegations made by the Costa Rican Workers' Confederation " Rerum Novarum ", and to decide to postpone further examination of the case.
3. 117. In a note of 26 December 1964 the Government communicated its observations together with the results of the investigations carried out by the above-mentioned committee. The Committee has studied the conclusions of this investigating committee with the greatest interest; in addition to dealing with the complaints presented to the Committee, they also treat of other complaints made directly to the investigating committee itself.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

• Allegations concerning the Intervention of the Authorities and of Employers' Representatives at Trade Union Meetings
  118. 118 The Golfito Workers' Union had stated in its communication of 27 February 1964 that at estates 62 and 63 of the Costa Rica Banana Company the fiscal authorities had attempted to interfere in meetings at which petitions were discussed and signed. For its part, on 19 June 1964, the Costa Rican Workers' Confederation " Rerum Novarum " sent a communication in which it stated that on 18 February 1963 the authorities, by order of the Banana Company, made them break up a meeting being held by trade union leaders and banana workers at plantation 7. On 20 September 1963 the same occurred at plantations 3 and 4; all these plantations are in the Palmar Sur district. On 9 May 1964, when a trade union meeting was being held in a dwelling house in the public area of the port of Golfito, the authorities set a watch on the house in accordance with instructions given to them by the Company, which had introduced two of its representatives in order to make a list of the persons present. On 13 June 1964, when a group of workers and trade union leaders had met at plantation 8, Palmar Sur district, they were compelled by the authorities to break up the meeting. Finally, the Golfito Workers' Union and the Workers' Union of Puerto González Viquez reported on 29 June 1964 that on 24 July [sic] the fiscal authorities of the port broke up a meeting of workers which was being held on the ground floor of the house occupied by the worker Salomon Bustos Morales.
  119. 119 On 17 September 1964 the Government had already stated that the Manager of the Banana Company had decided to prohibit workers from meeting with trade union leaders on Company property because persons with extremist ideas were sowing hatred, confusion and discontent with the intention of disturbing social peace in the plantations. An appeal having finally been made to the President of the Republic invoking the Constitutional right of ownership which protects the Company, the Chief Magistrate sent instructions to the local authorities prohibiting meetings on Company property without prior authorisation from the Company.
  120. 120 In its communication of 26 December 1964 the Government gives the results of the investigations made by the committee it had appointed to examine the various complaints presented concerning intervention in trade union meetings. With regard to the allegations of the Golfito Workers' Union contained in its communication of 27 February 1964 the committee reports that two Company officials were present at the workers' meeting, one of them a private detective. With reference to the complaint dated 19 June 1964 presented by the Costa Rican Workers' Confederation " Rerum Novarum " the investigating committee verified that the meeting held on 18 February 1963 at plantation 7 was in fact broken up by the authorities at the Company's request. These authorities, acting on instructions from the President, also wanted to break up the meeting held on 20 September 1963 at plantations 3 and 4; however, they were unable to do so because the meeting had already terminated. With regard to the meeting held on 9 May 1964, whose object was to found a union of railway workers, the investigating committee verified that this meeting had been observed from a nearby place by a police official and a fiscal official, and that two Company employees had been present (although no objections had been raised to their entering the house).
  121. 121 The Committee observes that in several of the cases complained of the investigating committee appointed by the Government was in fact able to verify the breaking up of trade union meetings by the authorities or the presence of representatives of the employers. The Committee has already analysed a number of complaints concerning the violation of the right of assembly of certain trade union organisations in Costa Rica, most recently in its 78th Report when examining this same case. As was noted at the time, the present situation seems to be that as far as the plantations of the Costa Rica Banana Company are concerned, trade union meetings of all kinds, whether public or held in private dwellings, are prohibited, unless the authorisation of the Company to hold them has been obtained. The President of the Republic himself had given instructions of this kind to the local authorities. In these circumstances, and bearing in mind the provisions embodied in the National Constitution, according to which (section 26) " Previous authorisation shall not be required for meetings held in private places. Meetings held in public shall be regulated by law ", the Committee had already stated that the situation regarding application of the laws on the right of assembly was not clear. The Government itself had stated in the present case that, in the case of conflicts arising from the application of the Constitution and other provisions on property rights and the duties of the public authorities, the only means available to members of the population, if they consider themselves wrongly treated, is to have recourse to the judicial power.
  122. 122 The Committee feels that it would be extremely useful for the high judicial authorities of the country to have the opportunity to state their views on the scope of the right of assembly granted by the National Constitution in situations such as those which have arisen in the present case. For its part, the Committee also recalls that on various occasions, it has drawn the Government's attention to the principles laid down in the resolution adopted by the Committee on Work on Plantations (Bandung, 1950) concerning the facilities that should be granted to plantation workers in trade union matters. The Committee has also stressed the importance that the Governing Body attaches to the right of plantation workers to hold trade union meetings, and has suggested that it might be appropriate to adopt clear provisions as to the meaning to be attached to the terms " public meeting " and " private meeting ", and that the right of trade unions to meet freely on their own premises, without need for prior authorisation and without control by the public authorities, constitutes a fundamental element of freedom of association.
  123. 123 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body, in view of the special situation which has arisen, and taking into account the factors emerging from the present proceedings, to reiterate to the Government the principles set forth in the fore going paragraph concerning the facilities that should be granted to plantation workers, particularly having regard to the right to hold trade union meetings, and to point out the need to take such steps as are necessary to bring about the effective application of these principles.
• Allegations concerning the Detention of Trade Unionists and the Confiscation of Trade Union Literature
  124. 124 The Costa Rican Confederation of Workers " Rerum Novarum " stated in its communication of 19 June 1964 that on 13 April 1964 at Puerto González Viquez, the military police threatened union officials Climaco Sandi and Salustiano Méndez Picado with machine guns. For its part, the Golfito Workers' Union and the Workers' Union of Puerto González Viquez allege in their communication of 29 June 1964 that the authorities, after breaking up the meeting referred to in paragraph 118 above, proceeded to detain the workers Salomón Bustos Morales, Saturnino Alvarez Moreno, Efrain Quesada Chaverri and Esteban Fonseca Moraga, as well as the trade union officers Sabino Juárez and Guillermo Fuentes Ortega. At the same time, these authorities confiscated a memorandum with nine signatures on the back of the petition, stub books of trade union subscription receipts, and other trade union documents.
  125. 125 In its reply of 26 December 1964 the Government states that it has not been possible to furnish the investigating committee with proof of the events referred to in the communication of the Costa Rican Confederation of Workers " Rerum Novarum ". As to the complaints presented by the other two organisations and referred to in the foregoing paragraph, the Government has not communicated its observations on these.
  126. 126 The Committee observes that, according to the Government, it has not been possible to furnish the investigating committee appointed by the Government with proof of the events referred to in the complaint presented by the Costa Rican Confederation of Workers " Rerum Novarum ". Nor, moreover, does the Committee possess any further precise elements submitted by the complainants themselves regarding the events complained of.
  127. 127 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to take note of the information furnished by the Government and to decide that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
  128. 128 As regards the allegations made by the Golfito Workers' Union and the Workers' Union of Puerto González Viquez, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to be good enough to furnish its observations on the matter and to decide in the meantime to postpone further examination of this aspect of the case.
• Allegations concerning the Dismissal of Trade Unionists
  129. 129 In the same communication from the Costa Rican Confederation of Workers " Rerum Novarum " mentioned above, it is stated that the following workers were dismissed because of their trade union activity: Adriano Barquero Camacho, Gustavo Arias Calvo, Rafael Reyes Chávez, Octavio Delgado, Victor Araya Araya, Germán Jiménez, Jesús Muñoz Arce, José Gutiérrez Sequeira, Antonio Méndez Barrantes, Anselmo Núñez Escalante, Salustiano Méndez Picado, Climaco Sandi Solano and Gregorio González Valdés.
  130. 130 The Government in its reply declares that the complainants were unable to demonstrate that the dismissal of the workers in question was motivated by their trade union activity. As regards the workers Gustavo Arias Calvo, Rafael Reyes Chávez and Octavio Delgado the Committee did not make any investigations because in the complaint that the trade union representatives made directly to it no mention was made of these cases.
  131. 131 In these circumstances, and in view of the lack of precise elements in the complaint concerning the allegations, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to note that it has been impossible to obtain proof of the events complained of and to decide that this aspect of the case does not call for any further examination.