Definitive Report - REPORT_NO323, November 2000

1. 132. The complaint in this case is contained in communications of the Cameroon Workers' Trade Union Confederation (CSTC) dated 7 January and 27 March 2000. In communications dated 15 and 18 February 2000, the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and the Organization of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU), respectively, supported the CSTC's complaint.
2. 133. The Government sent its observations in a communication dated 27 April 2000.
3. 134. Cameroon 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. The complainant's allegations

1. 135. In his communication dated 7 January 2000, the President of the CSTC, Mr. Benoît Essiga, states that from 7 to 9 April 1999 the CSTC held an extraordinary congress, one of the purposes of which was to elect its executive committee. A large number of observers were present at the congress, including some from the Ministry of Employment, Labour and Social Welfare and from the Ministry of the Interior. According to the complainant, these observers confirmed in their reports that the proceedings had taken place in the proper manner.
2. 136. However, the complainant alleges that the Minister of Employment, Labour and Social Welfare subsequently contested the results of the CSTC congress on a number of occasions. Among them, the complainant refers to tendentious statements by the Minister on state television to the effect that the CSTC did not have an executive committee, despite the fact that it had held the April 1999 congress. The complainant also states that its elected officers had been prevented from leading events during the May Day celebrations in 1999, that the CSTC was not consulted on the nomination of the Workers' delegate to the 87th Session of the International Labour Conference in June 1999, and that the CSTC was not invited to the official ceremony at which the Head of State was presented with New Year's greetings.
3. 137. The complainant states further that the Ministry of Labour took over by force a villa belonging to the CSTC and installed in it an officer of the National Independent Federation of Energy and Water Employees of Cameroon, which is not a CSTC affiliate, Mr. Abena Fouda. Lastly, the complainant alleges that three CSTC officers, including himself, were arbitrarily arrested and later released under international pressure.

B. The Government's reply

1. 138. In its communication dated 7 April 2000, the Government reiterates its position of neutrality and non-interference in the persisting leadership split within the executive bodies of the CSTC. It affirms once again that it never wanted this situation and is still waiting for a single executive committee to be formed in accordance with the Confederation's by-laws. The Government recalls that in Cameroon, over 500 trade unions organized by geographical area and sector carry out their activities freely both in enterprises and in their dealings with the administrative authorities. Moreover, the vast majority of these trade unions, whether or not they are registered, are - or claim to be - CSTC affiliates. The Government states that it is therefore incorrect to claim that trade union rights are violated in Cameroon and stresses that acts of turpitude committed by individuals or groups in order to take over the leadership of the CSTC cannot mask the fact that freedom of association prevails in the country.
2. 139. As regards the allegation of tendentious statements made by the Minister of Employment, and in particular his calling into question the executive committee of the CSTC after the April 1999 congress, the Government recalls that it had written to the Director-General of the ILO informing him of the crisis that had arisen within the CSTC and pointing out that the April 1999 congress appeared to have been the congress of only one faction of the CSTC. Despite mediation by third parties, which led to a joint communiqué by the leaders of the two factions (Mbappe/Sombes and Bakot/Essiga), the Mbappe/Sombes faction did not participate in this congress on the grounds that the rules and agreements reached in the joint communiqué had been violated, in particular those concerning the convening of delegates. The Government therefore considers that to recognize the executive committee elected at this congress as the interlocutor representing the CSTC would in fact constitute interference in this Confederation's internal affairs.
3. 140. As regards the allegation concerning the May Day celebrations in 1999, the Government affirms that Mr. Essiga and the leaders of his faction, who are the authors of this complaint, actively participated in that day's events in Yaoundé (the parade, meeting and speeches).
4. 141. As regards the allegation concerning the presentation of New Year's greetings to the Head of State, the Government considers that New Year's greetings do not come under freedom of association or trade union rights.
5. 142. As regards the occupation of the CSTC's villa, which the Government had placed at its disposal, by Mr. Abena Fouda, the President of the National Federation of Energy and Water Employees of Cameroon, a CSTC affiliate, who belongs to the rival faction headed by Mr. Mbappe and Mr. Sombes, the Government observes that this is a matter in dispute between the two factions of the CSTC and that the case has been brought before the judicial authorities. As a token of its non-interference in trade union matters, the Government points out, however, that Mr. Essiga and his supporters violently seized the premises of the CSTC, which are also state property placed at the CSTC's disposal free of charge for a number of years.
6. 143. As regards the allegations of so-called arbitrary arrest of officers of one of the factions of the CSTC, the Government explains that it resulted from acts committed by Mr. Essiga and his colleagues that come under criminal law, after the rival faction of the CSTC filed a complaint of attempted murder, aggravated robbery, threats and forcible entry perpetrated on the Secretary-General of the CSTC, Mr. Abena Fouda, who occupied the house on a regular basis.
7. 144. Lastly, the Government states that all of the allegations in this complaint are the product of a trade union officer suffering from an illegitimacy complex, since one could point out that a parallel executive committee of the CSTC is active at the national and international levels.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 145. The Committee observes that this case concerns allegations of discrimination against a trade union and arbitrary detention of trade union officers. The Committee further notes that several of the issues raised in the complaint relate to a dispute within a trade union organization. In this respect, the Committee recalls that it examined similar allegations in Case No. 1969, concerning a complaint presented by the CSTC against the Government of Cameroon. At the time, the Committee recalled that it is not competent to make recommendations on internal dissensions within a trade union organization, so long as the Government did not intervene in a manner which might affect the exercise of trade union rights and the normal functioning of an organization. While it has no competence to examine the merits of disputes within the various tendencies of a trade union, the Committee noted, however, the Government's mediation efforts in this connection and invited the Government to persevere with its efforts, in consultation with the organizations concerned, to enable the workers concerned freely to choose their representatives (see 311th Report, paras. 144 and 145).
2. 146. In this case, the Committee observes that the allegations concerning statements made by the Minister of Labour to the effect that the CSTC does not have a single executive committee despite the holding of the April 1999 congress, concerning the refusal to invite the CSTC to the ceremony at which the Head of State was presented with New Year's greetings, concerning the dispute over the occupation of the CSTC's villa and the refusal to consult the CSTC in the nomination of the Workers' delegate to the 87th Session of the International Labour Conference in June 1999 are all linked to the question of the CSTC's leadership, which has been the subject of an internal dispute since the end of 1997. In this respect, the Committee notes that, once again this year, the CSTC submitted an objection to the Credentials Committee concerning the nomination of the Workers' delegate of Cameroon to the 88th Session of the International Labour Conference. At this stage, the Committee deems it appropriate to refer to the decision of the Credentials Committee of the 88th Session of the Conference. In its decision, that Committee noted the information supplied by Mr. Essiga concerning the internal conflicts existing within the CSTC since 1997 and which had led to the convening of an extraordinary congress in 1999 to try to bring together the rival factions. That congress, at which Mr. Essiga was elected President of the CSTC, was contested by the rival faction, alleging procedural irregularities, which had not been upheld by the tribunals. Therefore, though there could be doubt as to the legitimacy of the various bureaux elected since the split within the leadership of the CSTC in 1997, the Conference Committee had considered that the information made available this year was not of such a nature as to challenge the validity of the results of the 1999 congress aimed toward unity at which the Government had been represented. Nevertheless, it was also reasonable to believe, taking into account the available information, that part of the bureau of the CSTC had broken off from the confederation. The Committee had considered that conflicts of this nature, while not within its competence but rather of the relevant national authorities, had, in this particular case, bearing on the examination of the conformity of the nomination of the Workers' delegation with the provisions of the ILO Constitution. However, the Committee had decided not to uphold the CSTC's objection, trusting that the Government as well as all interested parties in the CSTC, would find the means to ensure that, in future, the nomination of the Workers' delegation to the Conference could be made in agreement with the country's most representative organization of workers in its entirety.
3. 147. For its part, the Committee notes that according to the information supplied by the complainant itself annexed to the complaint, the National Federation of Trade Unions of Water and Electricity Employees of Cameroon, whose President is Mr. Abena Fouda, and which according to him is a CSTC affiliate, although denied by Mr. Essiga, has some 4,500 members in 29 trade unions. This federation offered whole-hearted support for steps taken to hold a CSTC congress for unity in April 1999. However, the organization committee of the CSTC congresses of 7, 8 and 9 April 1999 refused to allow it all of the rights recognized for its affiliates. Moreover, it is clear from the information on file that the CSTC has accumulated a debt of over 16 million CFA francs to the federation of which Mr. Fouda is the President. In the light of the foregoing, the Committee finds itself obliged to reiterate its previous position, that is that it is not competent to make recommendations on allegations arising out of internal dissensions within a trade union organization so long as the Government did not intervene in a manner which might affect the exercise of trade union rights. In this respect, the Committee considers that the allegations concerning refusal of an invitation to the New Year's greetings and the sharing of the official villa between the CSTC factions contain no elements constituting violations of trade union rights. As regards the nomination of the Workers' delegate to the International Labour Conference, the Committee notes the conclusions of the Credentials Committee and considers in these circumstances that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination. In the Committee's view, only the statements of the Minister of Labour to the effect that the CSTC does not have an executive committee could constitute a form of interference and affect the normal functioning of this organization. The Committee therefore requests the Government to refrain in future from any discriminatory acts or statements which might constitute a form of interference in the internal affairs of the CSTC.
4. 148. As regards the allegations concerning the May Day events in 1999, the Committee observes the contradictory versions given by the complainant and the Government. In these circumstances the Committee is not in a position to draw conclusions and can only recall that trade unions should have the right to organize freely whatever meetings they wish to celebrate on May Day, provided that they respect the measures taken by the authorities to ensure public order (see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition, 1996, para. 135).
5. 149. As regards the allegations of arbitrary arrest of three trade union officers of the CSTC, including Mr. Essiga himself, who were subsequently released, the Committee notes that according to the Government these arrests resulted from a complaint lodged by Mr. Abena Fouda and essentially came under criminal law. It appears from the police report of the complaint that Mr. Essiga and other CSTC officers had broken into the CSTC villa at night, breaking down the doors, and that they were armed with machetes with which they had threatened Mr. Fouda's family. However, the court of first instance of Yaoundé had ruled on 16 December 1999 that it was incompetent and instructed the parties to take proceedings in the proper court. In these circumstances, the Committee can only remind the parties to the dispute that, while persons engaged in trade union activities or holding trade union office cannot claim immunity in respect of the ordinary criminal law, trade union activities should not in themselves be used by the authorities as a pretext for the arbitrary arrest or detention of trade unionists (see Digest, op. cit., para. 83).