Informe provisional - Informe núm. 157, Junio 1976

1. 106. The Committee already examined this case in February and November 1975 and submitted an interim report to the Governing Body on each occasion. These reports are contained in paragraphs 89 to 112 of its 149th Report and 133 to 145 of its 153rd Report.
2. 107. Mauritius has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), but it has ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 108. The allegations still outstanding concern the suspension of the registration of several trade unions (including the General Workers' Federation) and the arrest of some of their leaders, following a labour dispute and the proclamation in December 1971 of a state of emergency.
2. 109. When it first examined this case, the Committee recommended, in connection with these allegations, that the Government: (a) supply information concerning the arrested members of the General workers' Federation and unions affiliated to it, specifying in particular the precise grounds for their arrest and indicating also whether proceedings were brought against them and, if so, what the outcome of these proceedings was, and (b) indicate the precise reasons why some of the unions concerned, including the General Workers' Federation, still had not been re-registered.
3. 110. In a communication of 18 June 1975, the Government stated that 13 trade unions had been suspended under the Trade Union (Suspension of Registration) Order 1971; after the coming into force, on 7 February 1974, of the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, nine of the suspended unions had formed again under the same or similar names and applied for registration under the Act. The Government added that five of them had been re-registered, three others bad been refused registration under the terms of section 9 of the Industrial Relations Act and an objection had been lodged against the registration of the other union. The objection was being heard by the Central Whitley Council. The other four unions had not applied for registration. The Government communication contained no reply to the Committee's request for information concerning the arrested trade unionists.
4. 111. In its 153rd Report, the Committee recommended that the Governing Body request the Government, in particular: (a) to indicate the reasons for the refusal to re-register three unions and the nature of the objection which had been lodged with regard to the re-registration of another union, as well as the final decisions taken in this connection, and to state the reasons why the General Workers' Federation had not been re-registred; (b) to request the Government once again, as a matter of urgency, to supply information concerning those members of the General Workers' Federation and its affiliates who were arrested, specifying, in particular, the precise grounds for their arrest, indicating whether proceedings had been brought against them and, if so, to state what the outcome of these proceedings had been.
5. 112. When this report was being approved by the Governing Body, the Government representative of Mauritius provided certain information on the matter and the Government submitted written information by a communication of 26 January 1976.
6. 113. In its communication, the Government states that the persons detained had been arrested while engaging in subversive activities, disturbing public peace and creating difficulties for the Government. They included prominent leaders of the General Workers' Federation political party, which in fact proclaimed that its activities were designed to replace the Government, and even gave publicity to the composition of its proposed "cabinet". The arrests which followed the declaration of the state of emergency had, therefore, to be resorted to for the preservation of public order and of the sovereignty of the nation. While the Government respected its undertaking with regard to ILO standards, it had a responsibility to deal with any emergency situation affecting internal security, and if the situation was such that action was required to restrain extremism on the part of trade unionists, then such action had to be taken. In any event, the persons who had been taken into custody were free and had been so for years.
7. 114. The Government also stated that registration had been refused the General Workers' Federation because it did not apply for registration in accordance with the industrial Relations Act, 1973. Registration had been refused to the three unions mentioned pursuant to a direction of the industrial Relations Committee (to which the relevant applications were referred in view of the objections received). The ground for refusal was, in each case, the existence of a registered trade union sufficiently representative of the interests which were intended to be safeguarded by the applicant trade union (section 9(1)(d) of the Industrial Relations Act). On appeal against this decision, the Government added, the Permanent Arbitration Tribunal ordered that the trade unions be provisionally registered, and directed the Commission to reopen the case and decide whether such provisional registration should be maintained. The three unions were provisionally registered on 11 August 1975. Subsequently, the objecting trade unions applied to the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari and prohibition against the judgment of the tribunal. Consideration of the cases had therefore been deferred by the Commission depending the decision of the Supreme Court. The Government also referred to the objections which had been lodged by two other unions against the application for registration of the Association of Government Hospitals Employees. These unions claimed that they already catered for some of the grades concerned and that various rules of the applicant trade union were not in order. The Government stated that the first objection had been rejected and that consideration of the other objection had been deferred pending a decision on the application for permanent registration of the objecting union.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 115. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government and particularly the fact that the arrested trade unionists have been released.
2. 116. The Committee recalls that it stressed in its previous reports on this case, certain principles and considerations affecting the registration system foreseen by the Industrial Relations Act of 1973. It had pointed out, in particular, that a provision authorising the rejection of an application for registration (which is compulsory to enable a union to obtain legal recognition) if another union already registered is sufficiently representative of the interests which the union seeking registration proposes to defend means that in certain cases workers may be denied the right to join the organisation of their choosing, contrary to the principles of freedom of association. Whilst fully appreciating the desire of a government to promote a strong trade union movement and avoid the defects resulting from a multiplicity of small and competing trade unions, the Committee considered that it was desirable in such cases for the Government to endeavour to encourage the unions to join together voluntarily to form united organisations, rather than to impose upon them by legislation a compulsory unification which deprives workers of their right to establish and join organisations of their own choosing.