Definitive Report - Report No 168, November 1977

1. 44. The Committee examined this case in November 1976 and at that session submitted to the Governing Body an interim report which is reproduced in paragraphs 316 to 325 of its 160th Report.
2. 45. Spain 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. 96).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 46. In a telegram dated 5 March 1976, the WFTU alleged that the police had intervened brutally in Victoria to crush a demonstration by workers in support of their legitimate demands. The complainants added that, as a result of this intervention, two persons were killed and several were injured.
2. 47. The government had stated that it deeply deplored the loss of human lives and the injuries resulting from the incidents which took place in Victoria following acts of violence and public disturbance constituting a threat to the peace of the city, which it was the bounden duty of the forces of law and order to preserve. The Government added that the forces of law and order had acted with the greatest possible restraint and had made use of their firearms only when forced to do so in self-defence, their lives being in danger. Following these incidents, charges were laid and legal proceedings were initiated, as a result of which two persons were deprived of their liberty, namely Jests Fernández Naves and Manuel Olabarría Bengoa. In a later communication, the Government had added that these persons had finally been freed on 4 August 1976 in application of the Legislative Decree granting amnesty.
3. 48. The Committee had recalled that in cases in which the dispersal of public meetings or demonstrations by the police have involved loss of life, it has attached special importance to the circumstances being fully investigated by an immediate and independent inquiry and to a regular legal procedure being followed to determine the justification and responsibility for the action taken by the police. In the opinion of the Committee, it was not clear from the Government's reply whether such an inquiry had in fact been carried out.
4. 49. In these circumstances, the Committee had recommended the Governing Body to request the Government to indicate whether an inquiry had been carried out to determine the justification and responsibility for the action taken by the police and, if so, to provide details as to the findings and conclusions of this inquiry.
5. 50. In a communication dated 10 February 1977, the Government stated that proceedings had been initiated immediately with a view to clarifying the facts and determining responsibility, but that questions of jurisdictional competence arose in regard to the bodies which were to hear this case. In accordance with the law, these questions had been submitted to the Supreme Court which was to give a decision on the matter. In the meantime, added the Government, important changes had been made in the administration of justice: the court and Tribunal of Public Order had been abolished and their powers entrusted to the ordinary courts. The Government added, in its communication of 16 May 1977, that once the questions of competence had been settled, the court appointed by the Supreme Court had, on the basis of the investigations carried out, decided that the case should be dropped.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 51. The Committee is faced with particularly serious allegations concerning the death of two persons. It notes, however, that an investigation was carried out and that an ordinary court decided that the case should be dropped.