Interim Report - REPORT_NO137, 1973

1. 122. The Committee has already examined this case at its session in February 1973, at which time it submitted to the Governing Body a report contained in paragraphs 211 to 221 of its 135th Report (approved by the Governing Body at its 189th Session, February-March 1973).
2. 123. The Dominican Republic has ratified both 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. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 124. It was alleged in the complaint, sent on 28 July 1972, that Mr. Julio de Pena Valdez, Secretary-General of the Dominican National Workers' Confederation (FOUPSA-CESITRADO) had been arrested and sentenced to ten years' imprisonment. The reason for this arrest and subsequent sentence was that he had allegedly conspired against the safety of the State and been in possession of war material. In fact, according to the complainants, Mr de Peña Valdez, as he himself stated in a letter to the World Federation of Trade Unions, had apparently been condemned because he was the most representative leader of the revolutionary proletariat, because he was the leader of class-conscious trade unionism and because he was "in the forefront of the fight against the oligarchy - the lackey of imperialism - which is despotically governing" the Dominican Republic. In his letter to the WFTU Mr de Pena Valdez alleged that for nine months he had been kept "in a solitary underground cell in inhuman conditions - naked, without air and light, totally isolated". It was also alleged that Mr. Fernando de la Rosa, Secretary for Workers' Education of the Dominican National Workers' Confederation, was in prison although he had been acquitted by the courts; he was said to have been arrested in April 1971, and even though his release had been ordered a year later he was still in prison.
2. 125. In its observations of 19 October 1972 the Government declared first of all that by virtue of article 6, paragraph 11, subparagraph (a), of the National Constitution there was freedom of association in the Dominican Republic, provided that in their bylaws as in their conduct the trade unions observed a democratic organisation compatible with the principles affirmed in the Constitution and strictly for labour ends. The Government stated that it had always respected the provisions of Convention No. 87 by allowing the free development, without official interference, of all trade union organisations which complied with the national labour legislation. As far as the case of Mr. Julio de Peña Valdez was concerned, he had been found guilty by the competent courts of the crime of possessing and trafficking in arms. The Government made no comment upon the allegations concerning Mr. Fernando de la Rosa.
3. 126. At its session in February 1973 the Committee recommended the Governing Body to request the Government to supply the text of the judgement rendered against Mr. Julio de Peña Valdez as well as its observations concerning the allegations relating to Mr. Fernando de la Rosa, indicating what his present situation was and whether he had appeared before a national court, in which case the Government should supply the text of the judgement rendered.
4. 127. By a communication dated 14 April 1973, the Government forwarded copies of the judgements rendered against these two persons, stating that Mr. Fernando de la Rosa had already served his sentence and the Secretariat of State for Labour did not know his present address.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 128. The Committee observes that according to the text of the judgement rendered against Mr. Fernando de la Rosa he was sentenced on 27 April 1972 to six months' corrective detention for breaches of Acts Nos. 6, 70 and 71 of 1963. The judgement gives no details as to the terms of these Acts or as to the offences Mr de la Rosa is said to have committed.
2. 129. As concerns Mr. Julio de Peña Valdez, the text of the judgement of the Court of Appeal of Santo Domingo, dated 3 October 1972, indicates that he was sentenced, together with other persons, to three years' imprisonment and payment of a fine for having in his possession war materials and firearms, in pursuance of the provisions of section 39, subsection IV, of Act No. 36, as amended by Act No. 589, and section 21 of the Penal Code. This judgement of the Court of Appeal amends the judgement of the court of first instance, which had imposed a ten-year sentence for the same offence.

130. The Committee observes that Mr. Julio de Peña Valdez was sentenced for an offence which has no connection with the exercise of trade union activities, and accordingly recommends the Governing Body to decide that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination. As concerns Mr. Fernando de la Rosa, the Committee notes that he is now at liberty. Nevertheless, in order to have all the facts before it when reaching its conclusions, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to furnish details as to the terms of the statutory provisions Mr de la Rosa is alleged to have infringed and as to the offences for which he was sentenced to six months' imprisonment.