Report in which the committee requests to be kept informed of development - REPORT_NO208, June 1981

1. 174. The Committee already examined this case at its meeting in November 1980 when it presented an interim report to the Governing Body. The Government communicated its observations in a letter dated 3 February 1981.
2. 175. Greece 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. Previous examination of the case

1. 176. The complaint involved in the present case concerns the dissolution of a trade union organisation by a decision of the Piraeus Court of 30 May 1980 (Decision No. 270/80) at the request of pre-existing rival trade union organisations.
2. 177. The complainant explained that its organisation had a total of 500 members and was founded in answer to the desire of the workers for a trade union which would truly campaign for their demands and vital interests. The complainant pointed out that the union was duly registered after Decision No. 283/79 of the Court of First Instance of Piraeus and was able during the first six months of its life to solve the most urgent problems confronting the workers.
3. 178. However, the Labour Centre of Athens, the Pan-Hellenic Federation of Metalworkers, the Marine Mechanics' Union "Anagennisis" and other trade union organisations, had accused it of being a pyramid type organisation which did not accord with the structure of the unions in the western world but allegedly followed the Soviet pattern, and had obtained its dissolution by court, decision. According to the complainant, the rival organisations claimed that the factory Committees provided in the Constitution of the Trade Union of Metalworkers, Employees and Technicians of Piraeus were actually local unions whose mission was to keep watch on the owners, contrary to article 17 of the Greek Constitution which protects private property. The complainant also adds that the rival organisations accused it of seeking the overthrow of the Greek trade union system and of the social peace which the above-mentioned organisations had contributed to maintaining in the country for 70 years.
4. 179. In its reply, the Government confirmed that legal recognition had been granted to the complainant organisation by a decision of the Court of First Instance of Piraeus and that several older trade union organisations had lodged third party opposition to this decision with the same court, which then revoked its original decision and forbade the registration of the said union in the special register of trade union associations held by the Court of First Instance. As concerns this last-mentioned decision, the Government added that the trade union in question could take its case to the Court of Appeal.
5. 180. At its meeting in May 1980, the Governing Body, on the recommendation of the Committee, noted that the prohibition of the registration of the Union of Metalworkers, Employees and Technicians of Piraeus and the Islands had been pronounced by a court of law and that the complainant organisation had the right to appeal against this decision to prohibit registration. The Committee, in reminding the Government of the suspensive effect which should be applied to the decision of the Court of First Instance until the statutory period for appeal had expired, requested the Government to supply a copy of the judgement of the court and of any judgement on appeal pronounced in the intervening period.

B. The Government's reply

1. 181. The Government provides a copy of the judgement of the Court of First Instance prohibiting the registration of the Union of Metalworkers. It also points out that it was the rival organisations which took the case to the Court of Appeal in order to seek acceptance of all the grounds for complaint which they had invoked in lodging their third party opposition, and to request the definitive dissolution of the Union of Metalworkers. The case was heard on 15 January 1981 although the judgement has not yet been published. The Government adds that it will communicate this decision as soon as it is published.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 182. The Committee has examined the decision of the Court of First instance annulling the registration of the complainant, organisation on the ground that the latter has infringed the provisions of section 281 of the Civil Code.
2. 183. In lodging third party opposition, the rival organisations also claimed that the organisation whose prohibition they were seeking had been established in opposition to the Constitution and current legislation respecting trade union organisations, that it had led to confusion and was detrimental to their own trade union interests. They sought a ruling which stipulated that co-existence between the Union of Metalworkers and the rival organisations and their simultaneous operation were illegal and unauthorised.
3. 184. By Decision No. 270/80, the Court overturned its previous Decision No. 283/79 and rejected the complaints whereby the said organisation was contrary to the Constitution and current trade union legislation. It recalled that the simultaneous creation and operation within the same city of more than one organisation pursuing the same objective, including the same occupational objective, was not contrary to the Constitutional right of freedom of association in Greece.
4. 185. However, the Court accepted the complaint alleging that the union of Metalworkers had misused the right to freedom of association by exceeding the limits prescribed by section 281 of the Civil Code. In this connection, the Court pointed out that the Constitution of the complainant organisation stipulated that all employees and wage earners without exception in metallurgical undertakings may be become members of the said organisation, irrespective of their own occupation, nationality, sex, religion, political or philosophical opinions, and whether they have a fixed term contract or a contract without limit of time. The Court concluded that all persons who are already members of the trade union organisations which lodged the appeal seeking the annulment of the Union of Metalworkers, most of which were metallurgical employees or wage earners, could therefore become members of this organisation.
5. 186. The Court concluded that the establishment of the new trade union in violation of the provisions of section 281 of the Civil Code is improper, since it is detrimental to the existence and harmonious operation of pre-existing organisations.
6. 187. However, the two parties were ordered to pay costs, on the ground that, in the view of the Court, reasonable doubt exists as to the outcome of a possible appeal.
7. 188. The Committee notes that section 281 of the Civil Code upon which the Court based its decision to annul the registration of the complainant trade union concerns abuse of right section 281 stipulates that the exercise of a right is prohibited if it clearly constitutes a breach of the limits prescribed by honesty or morality or by the social or economic objective of the said right.
8. 189. However, the Committee notes that the grounds upon which the decision to annul the said organisation were based do not appear to contain any concrete elements to substantiate the claim that the new trade union organisation exercised its right to freedom of association by undertaking activities which clearly constituted a breach of the limits prescribed by honesty, morality or the social and economic objectives of the right of association, which could justify the annulment of the registration.
9. 190. Consequently, the Committee is of the opinion that the annulment in question of the new trade union for the reasons set out above is not compatible with the workers' right to establish, without distinction whatsoever and without previous authorisation, organisations of their own choosing, a right guaranteed in Convention No. 87, ratified by Greece, and which became part of the national law by virtue of the Greek Constitution in force.
10. 191. The Committee would also draw attention to the principle to which reference has often been made that an annulment of the registration of a trade union should take place only where serious acts have been committed and have been duly proved.
11. 192. The Committee therefore requests the Government to re-examine the situation and inform it of any measures which might be taken, in particular, informing the competent judicial bodies of the points raised in paragraph 190 above, to ensure that the complainant organisation remains included in the special register of occupational associations and unions, in accordance with the provisions of Legislative Decree No. 890 of 27 May 1971 which regulates such matters, since no serious acts appear to have been committed by the organisation.