Informe en el que el Comité pide que se le mantenga informado de la evolución de la situación - Informe núm. 308, Noviembre 1997

1. 526. The complaint submitted by the Free Confederation of Workers of Mauritania (CLTM) against the Government of Mauritania is contained in a communication dated 25 June 1996. The complaint from the Mauritanian Transport Workers' Federation (FTM) is contained in a communication dated 3 October 1996. The CLTM submitted new allegations in a communication dated 11 May 1997. As the Government failed to reply, the Committee had to adjourn the examination of the case in its meetings of November 1996 and March and June 1997. (See 305th Report, para. 4; 306th Report, para. 5, and 307th Report, para. 9.) In view of the time which had elapsed since the complaint was submitted, the Committee made an urgent appeal to the Government pointing out that, in accordance with the procedural rules set out in paragraph 17 of its 127th Report, approved by the Governing Body, it may present a report on the substance of this case at its next session, even if the observations or information requested had not been received in due time. To date, the Government has not sent any observation.
2. 527. Mauritania has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87); however, it has not ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainants' allegations

1. 528. In a communication dated 25 June 1996, the Free Confederation of Workers of Mauritania (CLTM) claims that the Government refused to acknowledge the legal existence of this Confederation despite the fact that law and regulations provide for and guarantee the free exercise of trade union rights.
2. 529. The CLTM explains that, following the split which occurred within the General Confederation of Workers of Mauritania (CGTM) at its Congress in February 1995, the CLTM was set up on 19 March 1995 in Nouakchott after the constitutive congress of the following federations and trade unions: National Federation of Infrastructure Workers; Energy and Fuel Workers' Trade Union; National Federation of Employees in Public Works, Waterworks and Municipal Organizations; Trade Union of State Contract Workers and Auxiliaries; and the Trade Union of Army Civilian Workers. The CLTM states that, during the week after the file had been submitted, the public prosecutor had promised to issue a certificate once the inquiry into the "good conduct"of the organization had been completed - which was due the following week. A few days later, the public prosecutor informed the CLTM that he had been ordered by his superiors not to issue a recognition certificate to the CLTM. The CLTM states that after several months, the public prosecutor sent the whole file to the Director of Public Prosecution, informing him that the file was complete and in accordance with the regulations but that he had received instructions from the Ministry of Justice to hold it up for purely political reasons. To date, the CLTM still has not obtained recognition of its trade union status from the Mauritanian authorities.
3. 530. In a communication dated 11 May 1997, the CLTM alleges that a meeting of its followers, who had peacefully gathered to celebrate 1 May 1997, had been violently suppressed by the police and that this action had resulted in many people being injured. In addition, approximately ten people were arrested - all of whom have since been released.
4. 531. In a communication dated 3 October 1996, the Mauritian Transport Workers' Federation (FTM), established on 7 February 1996, also alleges that the Government refused to recognize its federation. According to the FTM, it had submitted its file for recognition to the public prosecutor in accordance with section 22 of the Labour Code, after which it had received a temporary acknowledgement of receipt. After waiting one month for a reply from the public prosecutor, the FTM noted that the file was still with the Minister of Justice awaiting an opinion and instructions. Since that time, despite numerous reminders to the ministers concerned and notwithstanding the fact that only the public prosecutor can refuse to grant recognition to an organization if it fails to comply with the laws in force, the request for trade union recognition has remained unheeded.

B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 532. The Committee deeply regrets that, despite the time which has elapsed since the complaint was submitted, the Government has failed to reply to any of the allegations presented by the complainants, although it has been requested on a number of occasions, including by means of an urgent appeal, to submit its comments and observations on this case.
2. 533. In such circumstances, in accordance with the applicable procedural rule (see para. 17 of its 127th Report, approved by the Governing Body at its 184th Session), the Committee is obliged to present a report on the substance of the case without being able to take into consideration the information it had hoped to receive from the Government.
3. 534. The Committee reminds the Government that the purpose of the whole procedure instituted by the International Labour Organization to examine allegations of violations of freedom of association is to promote respect for this freedom in law and in fact. The Committee remains confident that, if the procedure protects governments against unreasonable accusations, governments on their side will recognize the importance for the protection of their own good name of formulating for objective examination detailed factual replies to the allegations put forward (see 1st Report of the Committee, para. 31).
4. 535. The Committee notes firstly that this case contains two different complaints which deal with the same issues. The Committee notes that in the complaints from the CLTM and the FTM, the complainants claim that the Mauritanian authorities have refused to legally recognize trade unions set up in accordance with Mauritanian law.
5. 536. In this respect, the Committee recalls that the principle of freedom of association would often remain a dead letter if workers were required to obtain any kind of previous authorization to enable them to establish an organization. Such authorization could concern the formation of the trade union itself, the need to obtain discretionary approval of the constitution or rules of the organization, or authorization for taking steps prior to the establishment of the organization. The Committee is of the opinion that although the founders of a trade union should comply with the formalities prescribed by legislation, these formalities should not be of such a nature as to impair the free establishment of organizations. The Committee insists on the fact that the formalities prescribed by law for the establishment of a trade union should not be applied in such a manner as to delay or prevent the establishment of trade union organizations and that any delay caused by authorities in registering a trade union constitutes an infringement of Article 2 of Convention No. 87. (See Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition, 1996, paras. 244, 248 and 251.)
6. 537. Furthermore, the Committee recalls that there must be a right of appeal to the courts against any administrative decision concerning the registration of a trade union. The Committee considers that the absence of recourse to a judicial authority against any refusal by the Ministry to grant an authorization violates the principles of freedom of association (see Digest, op. cit., paras. 246 and 264).
7. 538. Observing that the CLTM and the FTM submitted their applications for recognition to the competent Mauritanian authorities in accordance with Mauritanian law, the Committee deplores the lack of any response from the Government and urges the Government to take all the necessary steps to ensure that both trade unions obtain legal recognition in the very near future so that they might defend and promote the interests of their members. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the measures taken in this respect.
8. 539. Concerning the allegations that a peaceful gathering of CLTM followers to commemorate 1 May 1997 was violently suppressed and that arrests were subsequently made, the Committee insists on the fact that measures depriving trade union officials and members of their freedom on grounds related to their trade union activity, even where they are merely summoned or questioned for a short period, constitute an obstacle to the exercise of trade union rights. Furthermore, the Committee recalls that the holding of public meetings and the voicing of demands of a social and economic nature on the occasion of May Day are traditional forms of trade union action. The Committee is of the view that trade unions should have the right to organize freely whatever meetings they wish to celebrate May Day, provided that they respect the measures taken by the authorities to ensure public order (see Digest, op. cit., paras. 77 and 135). The Committee, therefore, requests the Government to respect these principles in future.