Interim Report - Report No 281, March 1992

1. 442. In communications of 25 June and 16 August 1991 the Organisation of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU) presented allegations of violations of trade union rights against the Government of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania. The complainant provided further information in a communication dated 2 September 1991.
2. 443. The Government reported its observations regarding the allegations made against it in a communication dated 30 October 1991.
3. 444. The Islamic Republic of Mauritania has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), but has not ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainant's allegations

1. 445. In its letter of 25 June 1991 the OATUU alleges that the Government flagrantly violated Conventions Nos. 87 and 98. The complainant states that, in order to ensure the failure of the general strike called for 19 and 20 June, by the Union of Workers of Mauritania (UWM) - the national trade union confederation - the Mauritanian authorities published false information through the state media, exerted pressure, intimidated a large number of trade union leaders and falsified documents produced by the UWM's directorate.
2. 446. In a further communication of 2 September 1991 the OATUU clarifies its allegations and indicates that the Government issued through the state media, in the name of the UWM's National Executive Office, a press release stating that the strike called for 19 and 20 June had been cancelled. According to the OATUU, the Mauritanian authorities attempted to use this misrepresentation to thwart a lawful strike by the workers.
3. 447. The OATUU further alleges that the Mauritanian Government arrested and forcibly brought from Nouadhibou and Zouérate to Nouakchott some 20 members of the UWM's National Executive Office. It states that these people, upon their arrival in Nouakchott allegedly signed under duress a press release demanding that the UWM's Executive hold a special meeting, during which they were to repudiate the strike which they had freely decided upon a few days earlier.
4. 448. A third allegation concerns the arrest and torture of members of the Nouakchott and Nouadhibou regional trade union executive offices, with the aim of forcing them to support a puppet executive committee established by the Mauritanian authorities to serve their purposes.
5. 449. Finally, the OATUU alleges that on 22 June 1991 the Government made public a petition that some of the UWM's National Executive Office's members had been forced to sign by the police, declaring the expulsion of Mr. Mohamed Mahmoud Ould Mohamed Radhi, the Secretary-General of the UWM's Executive Committee legally elected by the organisation's congress; it further alleges that the authorities illegally occupied the headquarters of the UWM's National Workers' Education Centre in Nouakchott.

B. The Government's reply

1. 450. In its communication dated 30 October 1991 the Government begins by stating that the gravity of the accusations directed against it by the complainant is clearly out of all proportion to the tenuousness of the evidence.
2. 451. According to the Government, the OATUU's accusations are based solely on the allegations of the UWM's former Secretary-General, who was suspended by a two-thirds majority of the trade union confederation's National Executive Office because the general strike launched at his initiative was called in violation of the statutes and by-laws of the UWM and because the strike was strictly political, as illustrated by the speeches and practices of the former Secretary-General.
3. 452. The Government explains that the behaviour of the former Secretary-General caused a growing split between the overwhelming majority of the UWM's members and Mr. Radhi, the former Secretary-General. The sudden and unilateral breaking off of negotiations which, according to the Government, had been taking place in a climate of openness between the social partners, began to make the majority of the trade unionists and workers suspect the real objectives of the former Secretary-General. His purely political statements, which accompanied the decision to declare a general strike in violation of article 38 of the UWM's statutes (which stipulates that "general strikes shall be decided by a two-thirds majority of the confederation's National Executive Office when the action involves all workers") and the fact that the decision to strike was taken without the National Executive Office placed the former Secretary-General in a critical situation which, according to the Government, made his expulsion inevitable. The Government believes that the OATUU made the mistake of going along blindly with Mr. Radhi's allegations and ignoring the trade union crisis which left the former Secretary-General's statements devoid of any credibility. The Government goes on to state that it is all too understandable that the former Secretary-General should want to shift the problem to the international field by involving the Mauritanian Government in questions internal to the trade union confederation.
4. 453. As regards the allegation concerning the publication through the state media of a press release announcing that the strike called for 19 and 20 June 1991 had been cancelled, the Government states that this accusation is entirely unfounded and that the overwhelming majority of trade unionists had in fact issued their own press releases to the effect that they were dissociating themselves from an irregular strike and from the political drift of their trade union confederation. In the Government's view, this was one of the inevitable consequences of the crisis which Mr. Radhi had taken the responsibility of precipitating by breaking off negotiations unilaterally and by deciding to call a general strike without going to the National Executive Office, the sole body empowered by the statutes to take such a decision. The Government adds that the observance of freedom of association demanded strict neutrality on its part in this affair.
5. 454. As regards the allegations according to which members of the UWM's Executive Offices were arrested and forcibly brought from Nouadhibou to Nouakchott, and regarding the allegations of torture of members of the Nouakchott and Nouadhibou regional trade unions, the Government states that no trade unionists were arrested or tortured, and points out that this particularly serious accusation has been made without any mention of the names of the alleged victims or the duration or circumstances of their arrest.
6. 455. As regards these same allegations, the Government states that, had the OATUU carried out the least investigation on this matter, it would be aware that freedom of association has never been challenged in Mauritania and that no intimidation of any kind was resorted to against trade unionists or other citizens during the period referred to by Mr. Radhi and the complaint. The Government points out that during this period it was preparing to hold a referendum on a draft Constitution embodying all the liberties recognised by civilised nations. This draft, which was overwhelmingly approved by the Mauritanian people and promulgated in July 1991, guarantees freedom of association and stipulates, in article 13, "that a person may not be arrested, detained, judged or sentenced except by a competent court of law and according to a regular procedure" and that "any form of physical or moral violence is prohibited". The Government adds that the promulgation of the Constitution's text was followed by orders authorising the free establishment of political parties and introducing freedom of the press. It points out that no newspapers have mentioned any breach of freedom of association and claims that, if the former Secretary-General of the UWM had been able to find the least prima facie evidence to support his accusations, he would have said so in the press or to the opposition parties.
7. 456. As regards the allegation that the state media had made public a petition that some members of the UWM's National Executive Office had allegedly been forced to sign by the police, declaring the expulsion of the Secretary-General elected by the organisation's congress, the Government points out first of all that it was not a petition but a press release issued by the legal body of the UWM, the National Executive Office (with a two-thirds majority), appointing an interim Secretary-General pending the convening of the confederation's congress, in accordance with its statutes and by-laws. It notes that the state media then merely published this news, and states that if the former Secretary-General had wanted to challenge the validity of the decision taken by the UWM's National Executive Office he could have done so before the labour tribunal; but he did not.
8. 457. Finally, as regards the allegation of illegal occupation of the UWM's National Worker Education Centre, the Government states that the accusation is ridiculous and that, had it been true, it would in all likelihood have been reported in the independent newspapers and taken up by opposition parties.
9. 458. The Government concludes its observations by reaffirming its commitment to freedom of association which, it states, will no doubt develop and blossom in the pluralistic democracy which the Islamic Republic of Mauritania has irreversibly chosen.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 459. The Committee notes that the various allegations made by the complainants and the reply of the Government on these points are for the most part contradictory.
2. 460. Such is the case, in particular, of the issues concerning the lawfulness or unlawfulness of the general strike announced for 19 and 20 June 1991, the expulsion of Mr. Radhi from the UWM's Executive Committee, the issuing of a press release by the Government cancelling the strike announcement, the holding of a special meeting by the UWM, the occupation of the union headquarters as well as the arrest and torture of trade unionists.
3. 461. From these obvious contradictions the Committee considers that it is unable, based on the available information, to determine whether there was a breach of trade union rights by the Mauritanian authorities. The Committee therefore deems it necessary, in accordance with its procedure, to transmit the Government's observations to the complainant organisation so that the latter may make the comments it deems appropriate.