Definitive Report - REPORT_NO112, 1969

1. 97. This case has already been the subject of two interim reports by the Committee, in paragraphs 250 to 286 of its 103rd Report and paragraphs 246 to 275 of its 105th Report. The first was approved by the Governing Body at its 171st Session (February-March 1968), the second at its 172nd Session (May-June 1968).
2. 98. The case involved three sets of allegations: allegations relating to the strike in July 1967; allegations relating to the arrest and sentencing of Mr. Mahjub ben Seddik, General Secretary of the Moroccan Federation of Labour (UMT) and President of the All-African Trade Union Federation; and allegations relating to measures taken against the newspaper L'Avant-Garde, the organ of the Moroccan Federation of Labour.
3. 99. The Committee formulated definite conclusions on the first two sets of allegations, which will therefore not be dealt with again in the following paragraphs. As regards the last set of allegations, the Committee recommended the Governing Body to request the Government to supply further information.
4. 100. Since the Committee's session in May 1968, when it submitted its 105th Report to the Governing Body, the Director-General has received communications from 111 local branches of the Moroccan Federation of Labour on the questions at issue in this case. He has also received four communications from the Moroccan Federation of Labour itself.
5. 101. In a communication dated 11 February 1969, supplemented by a communication dated 14 April 1969, the Government supplied the further information requested.
6. 102. Morocco has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), but it has ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

• Allegations relating to Measures Taken against the Newspaper L'Avant-Garde, the Organ of the Moroccan Federation of Labour
  103. 103 It was alleged that since the arrest and sentencing of Mr ben Seddik, the police, without any legal justification, frequently entered the premises of the UNIT newspaper L'Avant-Garde and, without any explanation, destroyed the formes and smashed the types of the newspaper, thereby preventing its publication.
  104. 104 As the Government had not presented its observations on this aspect of the case, the Committee, at its session in February 1968, recommended the Governing Body to request the Government to be good enough to furnish them. The Government did so in a letter dated 2 March 1968.
  105. 105 In these observations the Government declares that the UMT weekly L'Avant-Garde is not a purely trade union publication but " often deals with questions which are in no way connected with working-class conditions ".
  106. 106 The result, the Government continues, is that from time to time this UMT newspaper publishes articles liable to disturb public order, and this accounts for the measures taken against it. The Government adds that these decisions are, moreover, in conformity with section 77 of the Press Code, which empowers the Ministry of the Interior to seize a newspaper and the Prime Minister to forbid its publication by decree whenever it contains statements damaging to the political, religious and other institutions of the Kingdom.
  107. 107 When the case was before it at its session in May 1968, the Committee recalled that in several cases where allegations as to the banning or suppression of trade union newspapers have been met by governments with the statement that the measure was taken because they published seditious matter or matter of a political or anti-national character, the Committee has formulated its conclusions for the Governing Body only after it has had before it extracts from the publications concerned which the governments regard as justifying their prohibition, and has requested the governments to furnish such extracts where they have not already done so in their observations.
  108. 108 Accordingly, at its session in May 1968 the Committee recommended the Governing Body to request the Government to be good enough to forward the extracts from the weekly L'Avant-Garde which, in its view, justify the measures taken against this publication and to specify the nature of these measures.
  109. 109 This recommendation was approved by the Governing Body, and the request for information contained therein was brought to the notice of the Government in a letter dated 4 June 1968.
  110. 110 The Government forwarded the information requested by a communication dated 11 February 1969.
  111. 111 This communication consists essentially of a rather large number of extracts from the newspaper L'Avant-Garde by means of which the Government wishes to show that this organ exceeded its role as a trade union newspaper, thereby justifying the measures taken by the authorities in seizing it.
  112. 112 It appears from the documentation submitted by the Government that the weekly, although dealing with trade union matters, often touched upon subjects outside the purely trade union context. For example reference is made to " the mobilisation of the state police and military machine to ensure an Israeli victory over the Arabs of Morocco "; also to " those who have turned independence to their own advantage " and who " have only taken the place of the settlers or even joined their ranks ", to " Zionist imperialist control of the country's economy", to the "puppet Parliament" and " neo-colonialist-dominated reactions ", to the " liquidation of the Zionist fifth column " and to the denouncing of " the support given by the Moroccan Government to the agents of Zionist imperialism ", etc.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 113. The Committee considers that there may well be extravagances in the language used, from which trade union publications should be urged to refrain. The primary role of publications of this type should be to deal in their columns with matters essentially relating to the defence and furtherance of the interests of the unions' members in particular and with labour questions in general. This having been said, it is necessary, nevertheless, to recognise that it is difficult to draw a clear distinction between what is political and what is properly speaking trade union in character. These two notions overlap, and it is inevitable and sometimes usual for trade union publications to take a stand on questions having political aspects as well as on strictly economic or social questions.
2. 114. However unfortunate or even out of place they may be, the expressions noted above must in fact be situated in this context.
3. 115. The fact remains, however, that the newspaper L'Avant-Garde, in its allusions and accusations against the Government, seems on occasion to have exceeded the admissible limits of controversy.
4. 116. Nevertheless, it seems that the seizures carried out by the Government are almost automatic, since, according to the latest information received from the complainant, L'Avant-Garde has been seized on seventy-seven consecutive occasions. As this publication is a weekly, this means that the publication of the newspaper in question has been prevented for almost one-and-a-half years. While it is possible to accept that the occasional seizure of a trade union publication might be justified, the attitude adopted by the authorities towards L'Avant-Garde, because of its systematic character, does not in fact seem to be compatible with the principle, upheld by the Committee on numerous occasions, that the right to express opinions through the press or otherwise is one of the essential elements of trade union rights.