Seguimiento dado a las recomendaciones del Comité y del Consejo de Administración - Informe núm. 349, Marzo 2008

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 298. At its March 2007 meeting, the Committee regretted that, despite the seriousness of the case, the Government had not sent information relating to the following recommendations [see 344th Report, paras 237–243]:
   • – bearing in mind the importance of due process of law being respected, the Committee trusts that the trade union leader, Carlos Ortega, will be released without delay and requests the Government to send it the decision handed down by the authority hearing the appeal. The Committee also requests the Government to send it a copy of the sentence handed down by the court of first instance (with all the reasons and conclusions therefor) in respect of the trade union leader Carlos Ortega (the Venezuelan Workers’ Confederation (CTV) has sent only a copy of the record of the public hearing at which the decision of the court and the sentence were made public);
   • – the Committee requests the Government to recognize FEDEUNEP and to take steps to ensure that it is not the object of discrimination in social dialogue and in collective bargaining, particularly in the light of the fact that it is affiliated to the CTV – another organization that has encountered problems of recognition which the Committee has already examined in the context of this case. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any invitation it sends to FEDEUNEP in the context of social dialogue. The Committee recalls the principle that both the government authorities and employers should refrain from any discrimination between trade union organizations, especially as regards recognition of their leaders who seek to perform legitimate trade union activities [see Digest, 1996, para. 307];
   • – with regard to the dismissal of over 23,000 workers from PDVSA and its subsidiaries in 2003 for having taken part in a strike during the national civic work stoppage, the Committee notes the Government’s statements, and specifically that only 10 per cent of the appeals lodged with the labour inspectorate and other judicial authority have not yet been ruled upon. The Committee deeply regrets that the Government has disregarded its recommendation that it enter into negotiations with the most representative workers’ federations in order to find a solution to the dismissals at the PDVSA and its subsidiaries as a result of the organization of or participation in a strike during the national civic work stoppage. The Committee reiterates this recommendation;
   • – the Committee calls on the Government to take steps to vacate the detention orders against the officials and members of UNAPETROL, Horacio Medina, Edgar Quijano, Iván Fernández, Mireya Repanti, Gonzalo Feijoo, Juan Luis Santana and Lino Castillo, and to keep it informed in this respect;
   • – the Committee considers that the founders and members of UNAPETROL should be reinstated in their jobs since, in addition to the fact that they were participating in a civic work stoppage, they were dismissed while they were undergoing training;
   • – with regard to the alleged acts of violence, arrests and torture by the military on 17 January 2003 against a group of workers from the PDVSA enterprise – leaders of the Beverage Industry Union of the State of Carabobo – who were protesting against the raiding of the enterprise and the confiscation of its assets, which was a threat to their source of work, the Committee notes that the complaints submitted by José Gallardo, Jhonathan Rivas, Juan Carlos Zavala and Ramón Díaz are currently under investigation and stresses that the allegations refer to the detention and torture of these workers, as well as of Faustino Villamediana. While regretting that the proceedings currently pending at the Office of the Attorney-General with respect to four workers have not been concluded despite the fact that the events go back to December 2002 or January 2003, the Committee firmly hopes that the authorities will rapidly conclude the investigations and requests the Government to keep it informed of any decision that is taken;
   • – the Committee requests the Government to send it the decision adopted by the labour inspectorate regarding the reassessment of the dismissal of trade unionist Gustavo Silva and draws attention to the delays in the conduct of these proceedings;
   • – with regard to the dismissal of FEDEUNEP trade unionist Cecilia Palma, the Committee requests the Government to inform it whether she has appealed against the ruling of 1 September 2003 and, if so, to keep it informed of the outcome of her appeal; and
   • – in general, the Committee deeply regrets the excessive delay in the administration of justice with regard to several aspects of this case and emphasizes that justice delayed is justice denied and that this situation prevents the trade unions and their members from exercising their rights effectively.
2. 299. Furthermore, the Committee reiterated its previous recommendations and urged the Government to send the requested information urgently and without delay, and to give effect to these recommendations [see 344th Report, para. 243].
3. 300. In its communications of 2 March and 27 September 2007, the complainant, UNAPETROL, indicates that the auditing body of the PDVSA enterprise summoned around 200 dismissed workers – including union officials – who participated in the 200203 work stoppage in the petroleum sector as part of investigations into the losses of millions of dollars incurred during the stoppage. According to UNAPETROL, these were undefined and vague accusations, which lacked proof, and are yet another example of anti-union persecution.
4. 301. UNAPETROL adds that the public summons issued by the enterprise puts forward conclusions relating to the national civic work stoppage which are not within its remit, when stating that “an analysis of the information contained in the written and audiovisual mass media showed that the prerequisites for workers to initiate strike procedures were not met …”.
5. 302. The complainant also points out that there is a substantial amount of proof, which was duly presented to the Attorney-General’s Office – as well as records of public statements made by UNAPETROL spokespersons and public hearings in which they participated – relating to inappropriate operational procedures, acts of negligence, incompetence and the use of physical violence at various operational sites of the enterprise just after the dismissals had taken place and once members of the national armed forces had taken control of the facilities, and that this proof attests to the absolute innocence of all the dismissed workers. The evidence has been completely omitted and ignored by the Tax Auditor’s Office, the PDVSA Operational Audit Unit and even the Attorney-General’s Office. In this connection, UNAPETROL sent the following:
   • – copies of the document presented by a group of lawyers and representatives of these workers to the Attorney-General’s Office in April 2003, containing certificates of safe transfer for installations that were later found to be damaged, once officials of the regime had taken control of operations; and
   • – documents presented to the Tax Auditor’s Office and the PDVSA Operational Audit Unit by Messrs Víctor Ramos and Horacio Medina, the internal control secretary and the president of UNAPETROL, who were summoned to meetings on 16 and 22 December 2006, respectively. According to UNAPETROL, the documents demonstrate how these workers were subjected to an act of persecution and retaliation while they were totally defenceless. Furthermore, union officials Edgar Quijano and Rodolfo Moreno, the labour assistance secretary and the vice-president of the disciplinary tribunal of UNAPETROL, were publicly summoned to meetings on 12 April and 28 June 2007; Horacio Medina, president of UNAPETROL, was also summoned.
6. 303. Although UNAPETROL also alleges the further dismissal of over 1,500 workers by the PDVSA enterprise, it points out that these were politically motivated dismissals and related to the signing of the referendum on the recall of the President of the Republic (the Committee recalls that its remit covers anti-union dismissals only, and not politically motivated ones).
7. 304. In its communication of 18 May 2007, the CTV refers to statements made by the President of the Republic, in which he said that “in the revolution, the differences between the trade unions and the revolutionary party must disappear; the trade unions must disappear”, and other statements attacking the independence of trade unions, such as: “If they want to be autonomous, then we will have tamed trade unions; they want their own guidelines and standards.” This attitude explains the continual interference by the authorities (the National Electoral Council, and so on) in union elections and in collective bargaining procedures.
8. 305. In its communications of 3 May and 19 September 2007, the Government responds to the allegations made by the CTV by invoking the right of all citizens to freedom of speech and by pointing out that the statements were made at a meeting to swear in the supporters of a partisan political act to promote the formation of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela and cannot, therefore, be considered as an official act; on the contrary, Hugo Chávez, as a citizen, was exercising his political and social rights and supporting the idea that a trade union organization must be the mouthpiece of a political party. Convention No. 87 and freedom of association enjoy excellent health in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, with the registration of 300 new trade unions so far that year. As it did in its reply during the previous examination of the case in March 2007, the Government criticizes UNAPETROL for presenting allegations after allowing the proceedings initiated with the Supreme Court of Justice to lapse in May 2006 through an absence of procedural activity for over one year (and that these proceedings referred to the refusal to register the organization). According to the Government, the case should be closed.
9. 306. The Committee notes this information from the Government concerning the new allegations made by the CTV. Nonetheless, the Committee recalls that the resolution concerning the independence of the trade union movement, adopted on 26 June 1952 by the International Labour Conference, states that: “When trade unions in accordance with national law and practice of their respective countries and at the decision of their members decide to establish relations with a political party or to undertake constitutional political action as a means towards the advancement of their economic and social objectives, such political relations or actions should not be of such a nature as to compromise the continuance of the trade union movement or its social and economic functions irrespective of political changes in the country.” The Committee hopes that, in future, this principle will be taken fully into account.
10. 307. Lastly, the Committee regrets that the Government has not provided information relating to the recommendations which it formulated in March 2007 and which it therefore reiterates. The Committee requests the Government to respond specifically to the allegations made by UNAPETROL in the communications of 2 March and 27 September 2007, given that it has merely reiterated the information already given on the lapsing of the judicial proceedings concerning the refusal to register the organization.