Interim Report - REPORT_NO204, November 1980

1. 348. By a communication dated 22 May 1980, the Union of Metalworkers, Employees and Technicians of Piraeus and the Islands presented a complaint of infringement of trade union rights in Greece. Subsequently, the complainant forwarded additional information in a communication dated 19 July 1980. The Government furnished its observations in a letter dated 29 September 1980.
2. 349. 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. The complainant's allegations

1. 350. The complainant alleges in its communication of 22 May 1980 that several pro-government, pro-employer trade union organisations launched a campaign against it and introduced a court suit seeking the overturn of the court decision validating the founding of this union in November 1979.
2. 351. The complainant explained that its organisation has 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 points out that the union was duly registered after court decision No. 283/79 and during the first six months of its life, was able to solve some of the most urgent problems facing the workers.
3. 352. However, the complainant points out that the Labour Centre of Athens, the Pan Hellenic Federation of Metalworkers, the Mechanics' Union, the Marine Mechanics' Union "Anagennisis" and other organisations of a similar type launched a campaign against the union accusing it of being a pyramid-type organisation which does not accord with the structure of the unions in the western world but allegedly fellows the Soviet pattern. According to the complainant, the rival organisations claim that the factory Committees provided in the Constitution of the complainant's organisation are actually local unions whose mission is 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 accuse it of seeking the overthrow of the Greek trade union system and of the social peace which the above-mentioned organisations have contributed to maintaining in the country during the last seventy years.
4. 353. The complainant concludes by saying that it believes that this campaign is seeking not only its dissolution but to prevent the establishment and functioning of every democratic union which attempts to 90 against the established regime of State trade unionism in Greece.
5. 354. By its communication of 19 July 1980, the complainants states that the appeal which sought the dissolution of this union was heard by the Piraeus Court on 30 May 1980 and that the Court decided in favour of the rival organisations.

B. The Government's reply

1. 355. In its reply the Government confirms that legal recognition had been granted to the complainant organisation by the Court of First Instance of Piraeus in its decision No. 283 of 1979. However, the Government explains that the Labour Centre of Athens, the Federation of Metalworkers and Employees and nine other trade union organisations 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 adds that the trade union in question may take its case to the Court of Appeals.
2. 356. The Government recalls that Greek legislation obliges it to refrain from interfering in any manner in questions relating to the internal management of trade unions and that the Judiciary is independent in Greece. Nevertheless, it adds that in accordance with article 28 of the Constitution, International Labour Conventions which have been ratified are an integral part of its municipal law and are applied by the courts.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 357. The Committee notes that the present case concerns the dissolution by court decision of a trade union organisation.
2. 358. The Committee stresses firstly the importance which it attaches to the view that the decision to prohibit the registration of a trade union which had received legal recognition should not become effective until the statutory period has expired without an appeal being lodged against this decision or until it has been, confirmed on appeal by a decision of the court.
3. 359. However, as regards the present case, in the absence of the text of the judgement prohibiting the registration of the trade union in the special register of trade union associations and of the judgement on appeal if it has been delivered, the Committee is not in a position to express a considered opinion on the main issue at stake.