Definitive Report - REPORT_NO177, June 1978

1. 66. This case was already examined by the Committee at its meeting in February 1977 when it submitted an interim report thereon to the Governing Body (165th Report of the Committee, paras. 110-117).
2. 67. Jordan has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organisation Convention, 1948 (No. 87); it has ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 68. According to the allegations made by the complainant organisations in communications addressed to the ILO in March 1976, Mr. Mousa Kwaider and Mr. Fathalla Omran, both leaders of the Textile Workers' Federation of Jordan, an organisation affiliated to the Trade Unions International of Textile, Clothing, Leather and Fur Workers, had been arrested. In its original reply to the complaint, dated 24 January 1977, the Government had stated that these persons were being detained for political reasons affecting the security of the State and not for reasons connected with their trade union activities.
2. 69. At its meeting in February 1977, the Committee requested the Government to supply detailed information regarding the specific acts with which the persons named by the complainants had been charged, to indicate whether judicial proceedings had been instituted against them and, if so, to transmit the text of the judgments delivered together with the grounds adduced therefor. In so requesting, the Committee drew the attention of the Government to the importance which it has always attached 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. The Committee also pointed out that where the information received by it has made it clear that the persons concerned have been tried by the competent judicial authorities with all the safeguards of a normal judicial procedure, and sentenced for offences unconnected with their trade union activities, the Committee has considered that the cases in question did not call for further examination. The Committee recalled, however, that the question as to whether the matter in respect of which sentences have been imposed is to be regarded as a matter relating to a criminal offence or as one relating to the exercise of trade union rights is not one which can be determined unilaterally by the Government concerned, but that it is incumbent upon the Committee to decide this in the light of all the information, and in particular in the light of the text of the judgment.
3. 70. No information having been received from the Government in reply to the request made by it, the Committee addressed an urgent appeal to the Government at its meeting in November 1977.3 In a communication dated 8 December 1977 the Government stated that the persons mentioned by the complainants had been detained for reasons involving state security and not for the exercise of legitimate trade union rights. The Government added that they were released on 1 May 1977 without having been tried and that they were now practising freely their trade union rights.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 71. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government and in particular that the detained trade unionists referred to in the complaint were released on 1 May 1977. It cannot, however, overlook the fact that these persons were held in detention for more than one year and that they were subsequently released without having been brought to trial. In the light of the information now before in the Committee again would draw the attention of the Government to the principles set forth in paragraph 69 above and would, in addition, point out that the detention by the authorities of trade unionists concerning whom no grounds for conviction are subsequently found is liable to involve serious restrictions on trade union rights.