Interim Report - REPORT_NO147, 1975

1. 364. The World Confederation of Labour, in a communication dated 4 January 1974, and the Pan-African Workers' Congress (PAWL), in a communication dated 9 January 1974, submitted complaints that there had been breaches of freedom of association on the part of the Government of the Central African Republic. In letters dated 15 February and 10 May 1974, the WCL submitted further information. The Government sent in its comments in two communications dated 16 January and 25 September 1974 respectively.
2. 365. The Central African Republic 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. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 366. The WCL pointed out that on 28 December 1973 a number of trade unionists and workers' delegates to the International Labour Conference had been arrested, including Mr. Sandos, General Secretary of the Central African General Trade Union Congress. The complainants stated that they did not know the exact grounds for the arrests. The Pan-American Workers' Congress (PAWC), in its communication, made similar allegations.
2. 367. In answer to these allegations the President of the Central African Republic, through the ILO, invited one of the complainants (the WCL) to send a mission to see for itself the real situation.
3. 368. In its letter dated 15 February 1974, the WCL said that it had sent such a mission, which had been told that the charges brought against Sandos and Malikanga, trade union leaders, related to activities prejudicial to state security and not to their trade union activities. In the light of the information gathered, the WCL felt there was no reason to doubt that the persons concerned would be treated in accordance with a principle the importance of which the Committee has consistently emphasised in its dealings with governments, namely, that accused persons should receive "a prompt and fair trial by an independent and impartial judiciary", no matter what the charges brought against them might be. Consequently, the WCL stated that it was temporarily withdrawing its complaint, and the Committee, at its 66th Session in February 1974, decided to postpone consideration of the case.
4. 369. On 10 May 1974, the WCL sent in a further communication to the effect that the trade unionists mentioned above had been in prison for nearly six months, and that to the best of its knowledge and belief they had neither been able to receive legal assistance nor had they been brought to trial. This being so, the WCL requested the ILO to approach the Government to find out what steps it intended to take in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, particularly those embodied in the resolution, adopted by the International Labour Conference in 1970, concerning trade union rights and their relation to civil liberties. The complainants referred, on the one hand, to the right to freedom and security of the person and freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention, and, on the other hand, the right to a fair trial by an independent and impartial tribunal.
5. 370. In its letter dated 25 September 1974, the Government stated that it had no knowledge of any problems relating to violations of trade union rights within the Central African Republic The case involving Sandos was purely political and came within the context of state sovereignty. The WCL mission had been fully informed about this matter; in fact, the WCL, to express its satisfaction, had withdrawn its complaint. The Government was surprised that the WCL should have changed its position. It felt that this denoted a certain lack of consistency on the WCL's part. The Government added that Sandos had in fact been released on 13 August 1974.
6. 371. From the information available to the Committee, it appears that Messrs. Sandos and Malikanga, trade union leaders and workers' delegates to the International Labour Conference, were arrested on 28 December 1973 for activities considered by the Government to have been of a political nature. They do not appear to have been brought to trial. Nevertheless, in its last communication, the Government announced that Sandos had been released on 13 August 1974.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 372. The Committee has often emphasised the importance which it attaches to the principle of prompt and fair trial by an independent and impartial judiciary in all cases, including cases in which trade unionists are charged with political or criminal offences which the Government considers have no relation to their trade union functions. If, in certain instances, the Committee has concluded that allegations relating to measures taken against trade unionists did not call for further examination, this was only after it had received information from the Governments showing sufficiently precisely and with sufficient detail that the measures were in no way occasioned by trade union activities, but solely by activities outside the trade union sphere which were either prejudicial to public order or of a political nature.
2. 373. The Committee emphasises that these principles, applied to all similar complaints, are of particular importance in that the persons detained were in 1973 Workers' delegate and substitute Workers' delegate respectively to the International Labour Conference.
3. 374. The Committee regrets that these trade unionists do not seem to have been brought to trial and that the Government, in explaining why Mr. Sandos was arrested, does no more than refer in very general terms to political matters. The Committee takes due note of Mr. Sandos's release, but observes that the Government has nothing to say about the fate of Mr. Malikanga.