Definitive Report - Report No 127, 1972

1. 68. The complaint is contained in two letters addressed direct to the Director-General of the ILO by the Latin American Federation of Christian Trade Unions (CLASC) and the International Federation of Trade Unions of Transport Workers, dated 23 November 1970 and 4 December 1970 respectively.
2. 69. Both of these communications were forwarded to the Government of El Salvador, which sent its observations thereon in a letter dated 13 May 1971.
3. 70. El Salvador has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 71. In their letter dated 23 November 1970, the complainants (CLASC) state that the Government was attempting to destroy the National Union of the Transport Industry and the Trade Union Council of El Salvador (CONSISAL). In particular, state the complainants, in October 1970 the Government, " with the complicity of a transport undertaking whose support it enjoys ", fabricated a charge of blackmail against two of the principal leaders of the Union and members of CONSISAL, Mr. René Barrios Amaya and Mr. Pompilio Martinez, General Secretary and Disputes Secretary respectively of the National Union. This charge, the complainants continue, was sustained by the Attorney-General of the Republic and the case was brought before the Penal Court. When the attorney of the trade union presented himself to be informed of the charge, further proceedings had been instituted on the grounds of " creating anti-democratic anarchic situations ", an offence for which bail is not granted and for which the penalty, according to the law of El Salvador, is three to five years' imprisonment.
2. 72. The complainants further contend that the attorney submitted a written statement to the effect that there had been no such offence. The judge granted bail but the prosecution, on being apprised of the judge's decision, refused to endorse it without, however, explaining the legal grounds for this refusal. The complainants add that this took place prior to the Union's annual meeting and publicity was given to it so as to prevent Mr. Barrios and Mr. Martinez from being re-elected. In fact, state the complainants, both were re-elected.
3. 73. The most serious aspect of the case, continue the complainants, is that the warrant for the arrest of the two leaders is still in force and seven more trade unionists have been charged in a similar manner. By intimidation and even the threat of death, the comrades of the two leaders were being prevented from giving them any support.
4. 74. The International Federation of Trade Unions of Transport Workers, in its communication dated 4 December 1970, stated that it supported the above complaint and added that, for many years, the Government had been placing more and more obstacles in the way of the trade union activities of the National Union of the Transport Industry of El Salvador. This Union, and the two leaders in question, were being subjected to systematic persecution, this being an infringement of the right to organise.
5. 75. In its reply to the foregoing allegations, the Government states that a complaint of blackmail was made by the representatives of the COTSA Transport Company against Mr. René Barrios Amaya and Mr. Pompilio Martinez Larin on the grounds that they had obtained the sum of 5,000 colones from the transport company, having threatened to declare a strike if their demands were not met. This complaint was investigated by the Public Prosecutor of the Republic.
6. 76. This case, adds the Government, was considered in December 1970 by the Penal Court of El Salvador, which decided that the offence complained of had indeed been committed but since, in accordance with the Penal Code, blackmail cannot be committed against a body corporate-in this case the transport company-the case was dismissed and the accused permitted to remain at liberty, bail not being necessary since no detention order had been issued against them. The Government encloses copies of the judgements of the court in this connection.
7. 77. From the information supplied by the complainants and that supplied by the Government in reply to the allegations made, it would appear to the Committee that the two trade union leaders concerned were charged with blackmail or extortion. They were subsequently tried under normal judicial procedure in connection with this charge. From the judgements supplied by the Government, the Committee observes that the case against the two persons concerned was dismissed and they were permitted to remain at liberty.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 78. In the opinion of the Committee, no information has been supplied by the complainants in support of their allegations and in particular the allegation that the charge brought against Mr. Barrios Amaya and Mr. Martinez Larin was fabricated by the authorities with the complicity of the transport company in question; nor does the judgement of the court refer to any charge that these persons had " created anti-democratic situations ", as stated by the complainants. From the aforementioned judgement it is also clear that no warrant for the arrest of the two trade unionists is in force, as alleged by the complainants.

79. The Committee, in the circumstances, can only reach the conclusion that the allegations made by the complainants are not sufficiently substantiated to enable the Committee to reach the conclusion that any infringement of trade union rights has taken place. The Committee accordingly recommends the Governing Body to decide that the allegations, and therefore the case as a whole, do not call for further examination.