Definitive Report - REPORT_NO157, June 1976

1. 20. The Director-General has received a communication from the WCL, dated 3 November 1975, containing allegations regarding interference with the exercise of trade union rights in Mexico.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 21. In its letter, the WCL states that on the orders of the Governor of the State of Sonora in Mexico, the police of that State fired upon several hundred peasants to drive them from the land they had occupied in application of the Agrarian Reform Act. This decision to open fire without warning on totally unarmed workers constitutes, the complainants add, an act of bloody and utterly inexcusable repression which cannot be condemned too strongly.
2. 22. The WCL states that it is submitting a complaint concerning infringement of trade union rights and it holds the view that the type of action which the Mexican authorities put a stop to must be put on the same footing as an occupation of work premises by urban workers. The action taken by the peasants, who are organised in ejidos ("communes") does indeed, according to the WCL, relate to trade union activities and thus falls within the competence of the Committee. Mexico has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) in Article 10 of which the term "organisation" is defined as any organisation of workers or of employers for furthering and defending the interests of workers or of employers. According to the WCL, Convention No. 87 is applicable even though it is peasants who are involved and their organisations are-called "ejidos" and not "trade unions". Mexico, the WCL goes on to state, is not respecting the fundamental conditions that are essential for exercising the rights set forth in Convention No. 87 and, if an act has been committed which may be described as being outside the law, it is the Mexican authorities and police who are mainly responsible for committing it. The WCL adds that this intervention involves a violation of fundamental human rights and civil liberties in respect of peasants who want nothing more than to hold land in accordance with the Agrarian Reform Act.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 23. The case now before the Committee contains allegations of a particularly grave nature, but the Committee must consider whether these matters involve a breach of trade union rights and can be examined under the procedure in force.
2. 24. The Committee recalls that it has already examined another case in which peasants had occupied land to which they claimed a right. When they refused to leave the land a confrontation had taken place and the police and armed forces had resorted to force. While acknowledging that these events were extremely serious, the Committee had considered that the issue was not the exercise of trade union rights but rather a question of land ownership and tenure governed by specific national legislation having nothing to do with the problems of freedom of association.

25. The Committee considers that the issues involved in the present case are much the same. In the circumstances, it recommends the Governing Body to decide that the complaint is not receivable under the procedure in force and to file it without transmitting it to the Mexican Government.