Definitive Report - Report No 56, 1961

1. 81. The allegations in this case, which were analysed more fully in paragraphs 81 to 84 of the Committee's 49th Report, related to the strike called in the Union of South Africa on 28 March 1960, in protest against the events which had taken place at Sharpeville on 21 March 1960, and to the events which followed the strike. Among other things it was alleged that, when a state of emergency was proclaimed on 30 March 1960, many persons, including a number of trade union leaders named by the complainants, were arrested and held without trial. After considering these allegations at its meeting in November 1960, together with the observations of the Government, which were analysed in paragraphs 87 to 90 of its 49th Report, the Committee submitted to the Governing Body the recommendations contained in paragraph 97 of that report.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 82. Paragraph 97 of the Committee's 49th Report, which was approved by the Governing Body at its 147th Session (15-18 November 1960), reads as follows:
2. 97. In all the circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
   • (a) to decide that the allegations relating to violation of the right to strike in connection with the strike said to have been called on 28 March 1960 do not, for the reasons indicated in paragraph 92 above, call for further examination;
   • (b) to draw the attention of the Government to the importance which the Governing Body 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;
   • (c) to request the Government, having regard to the principle set forth above, to be good enough to furnish information to the Governing Body as to the legal or judicial proceedings which the Government states are to be taken in the case of the detained trade union leaders referred to by the complainants and as to the result of such proceedings.
3. 83. At its meeting in February 1961 the Committee, as indicated in paragraph 8 of its 52nd Report, adjourned its further examination of the case, as the information requested from the Government in paragraph 97 (c) of its 49th Report cited above had not then been received.
4. 84. In a communication dated 3 March 1961 the Government expressed the view that the subject-matter of the complaint falls outside the competence of the International Labour Organisation and that it does not consider itself obliged, therefore, to entertain further correspondence on the subject. However, adds the Government, the state of emergency was lifted completely on 31 August 1960 and all persons still in detention at that date were released, while in no case have legal proceedings been instituted against a trade union leader.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 85. With regard to the Government's expression of its view that the subject-matter of the complaint is outside the competence of the I.L.O, the Committee observes that the Government made a similar statement in its earlier reply dated 25 June 1960, contending that the subject-matter of the complaint was wholly political and, therefore, outside the scope of the functions of the I.L.O. At its meeting in November 1960, when it considered this argument by the Government with regard to the present case, the Committee, recalling its practice in earlier cases, took the view that, in so far as the persons involved by name in the present case were trade union officers and members, it was competent, while confining itself to the question as to how far the measures alleged to have been taken may have been related to or have affected the exercise of trade union rights, to examine on their merits the issues raised with respect, among other things, to the arrest and detention of trade union militants. The Governing Body having approved this report, the Committee considers that it is unnecessary to comment further on this aspect of the question.