Interim Report - Report No 139, 1974

1. 468. The complaint of the World Federation of Teachers' Unions is contained in a communication dated 23 March 1973, addressed direct to the ILO. The Federation made another allegation in a later communication sent on 4 April 1973. These complaints were transmitted to the Government of Senegal, which forwarded its observations in a communication dated 16 June 1973.
2. 469. Senegal 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. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 470. The complainant alleges, in the first place, that forty leaders of the Senegal Teachers' Union (SES), suspected of responsibility for the agitation which has been taking place in the Senegalese schools, have been arrested. The Federation regards this action by the Government as an infringement of the trade union rights of the teachers of Senegal, and asserts that the teachers' union has been disbanded by the Government, "a step at once unjustified and unjustifiable and an inadmissible encroachment on trade union rights and on the teachers' right to organise themselves freely to protect their interests".
2. 471. In its answer, the Government states that ten teachers, and not forty, as the Federation claims, were arrested, not for anything arising from trade union activities, but for having manoeuvred and acted "in such a fashion as to endanger public security, occasion serious political disturbances and cast discredit on the political institutions of the State and the way in which they function, and for having acted in breach of national laws", i.e. committing offences punishable under section 80(2) of the Criminal Code. The Government goes on to say that ill-meaning people, opposed to every action taken by the Government, found it appropriate to take advantage of the serious economic difficulties currently being encountered in Senegal as a result of five years of drought, in order to stir up serious political disturbances, with the ultimate aim of overthrowing the legally established régime. The Government adds that two statements issued by the SES (the Government appends them to its communication), together with the student disturbances they brought about, are most instructive in this respect.
3. 472. "Trade union activity" the Government affirms "must be limited exclusively to the protection of the interests of its members", and must not endeavour to further extraneous interests and by so doing jeopardise public security. It is open to those who disagree with government policy "to form a political party and they should have the courage to demonstrate their opposition in the political forum". Political parties, however, like individuals, are subject to the law. "Freedom of association does not in the least mean licence." When people avail themselves of it for blameworthy purposes, enforcement of the law cannot be prevented.
4. 473. As regards the disbanding of the SES, this organisation had, the Government affirms, wilfully placed itself outside the law by choosing to carry its activities into the political arena, creating disturbances and discrediting institutions and the way in which they function. Such activities are offences made punishable by the Seditious Associations Law, No. 65-40, of 22 May 1965, section 1(4) of which provides that "associations or groups subject to dissolution by decree include those ... (4) whose activity is of such a nature as to disturb, by whatsoever illegal means, the functioning of the Constitutional system".
5. 474. The Government ends by saying that although it is mindful of trade union rights and freedoms, it cannot accept the accusations which the Federation has continuously brought against it for nearly three years and that "it is time the ILO distinguished between reprehensible political acts and trade union activity. The people in question should not be able, according to circumstances, to doff the unionist's hat and don that of the politician, and engage in illegal activities under cover of freedom of association." Hence, it claims, the ILO is not in a position to take this matter further.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 475. The Committee would, first of all, recall the principles enunciated in paragraph 29 of its first report, in connection with the consideration of complaints which the governments concerned feel are of a political nature. It recalls its decision to the effect that although an allegation may be political in origin or present political aspects, it should be examined in substance if it raises questions directly concerning the exercise of trade union rights.
2. 476. From the information provided by the Government, it appears that a number of leaders of the Senegal Teachers' Union were arrested and charged with sedition, and that for similar reasons, the union itself was dissolved by decree.
3. 477. As regards the arrest of trade union leaders, the Committee has, in the past, repeatedly emphasised (and in fact in one case involving Senegal), the importance it attaches to the principle that in all cases in which trade unionists have been detained, including those where they are accused of political offences or offences under ordinary law which the government considers to be unconnected with their trade union duties or activities, the persons concerned should receive a fair trial at the earliest possible moment by an impartial and independent judicial authority. Where the information received by the Committee has made it clear that the persons concerned were tried by the competent judicial authorities with all the safeguards of a normal judicial procedure, and sentenced for offences unconnected with their trade union activities or outside the scope of normal trade union activities, the Committee has considered that the cases in question did not call for further examination. Nevertheless, the Committee has insisted that the question whether the matter in respect of which sentences have been imposed is to be regarded as a matter relating to a criminal offence or as a matter relating to the exercise of trade union rights is not one which can be determined unilaterally by the Government concerned, but that it is incumbent upon the Committee to decide this in the light of all the information, and in particular in the light of the text of the judgement.
4. 478. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Governing Body to ask the Government to indicate whether all the trade unionists concerned have been brought to trial, and, if so, to specify the nature of the court which heard the case and to forward the text of the judgement pronounced together with the reasons adduced therefor.
5. 479. As regards the dissolution of the Teachers' Union by decree, the Committee would stress the importance of the principle Article 4 of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), i.e. that workers' organisations should not be liable to be dissolved or suspended by administrative authority. As it has already pointed out in connection with other cases, dissolution by the Executive in virtue of a law conferring full powers or in the exercise of legislative functions, like dissolution by administrative authority, does not ensure the right of defence which normal judicial procedure alone can guarantee, this procedure being considered by the Committee to be essential.,