Informe provisional - Informe núm. 359, Marzo 2011

1. 580. This case was last examined by the Committee at its November 2009 meeting [see 355th Report, paras 775–866, approved by the Governing Body at its 306th Session].
2. 581. The Movement of Trade Unions, Indigenous Peoples and Agricultural Workers of Guatemala (MSICG) sent new information in a communication dated 14 January 2010. The International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) notified the Committee that it supported the complaint in a communication dated 17 February 2010.
3. 582. The Government sent its observations in communications dated 22 January, 2 February, 25 May, 1 June, 30 July, 12 and 25 August, 1, 7 and 28 September and 29 December 2010.
4. 583. Guatemala 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. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 584. At its meeting in November 2009, the Committee made the following interim recommendations concerning the allegations presented by the complainant organization [see 355th Report, para. 866]:
   • (a) The Committee deeply regrets that the Government has only sent its observations on a limited number of the allegations in this case despite having been invited to do so on several occasions and despite an urgent appeal in that respect, in particular given the extreme gravity of the allegations. The Committee firmly expects that the Government will be more cooperative in the future.
   • (b) Noting the extremely high number of allegations concerning anti-union acts, a significant percentage of which relate to acts of extreme violence against union leaders and members (16 murders, death threats, a disappearance, acts of physical violence) and sometimes against their families, the Committee deplores these extremely serious allegations of violence against trade unionists and other anti-union acts that are incompatible with Conventions Nos 87 and 98 and urges the Government to send its observations in full, without delay, and for this purpose to order that investigations be carried out into each of the cases mentioned by the complainant organization. The Committee urges the Government to send the outcome of these investigations and any decisions or rulings by the authorities.
   • (c) The Committee urges the Government to ensure the physical safety of trade unionists who are threatened or harassed and of witness Roberto Dolores and to confirm the whereabouts of the allegedly missing Francisco del Rosario López and the minor María Antonia Dolores López.
   • (d) Bearing in mind the high number of anti-union dismissals, the delays in proceedings and the failure to comply with judicial orders to reinstate trade unionists, the Committee once again reminds the Government that the ILO’s technical assistance is at its disposal and that the Government must ensure an adequate and efficient system of protection against acts of anti-union discrimination, which should include sufficiently dissuasive sanctions and prompt means of redress, emphasizing reinstatement as an effective means of redress. The Committee extends this invitation to issues relating to criminal matters.
   • (e) The Committee draws the Governing Body’s attention to the serious and urgent nature of this case.

B. Further information provided by the complainant

1. 585. In a communication dated 14 January 2010, the complainant provides new information that is summarized below.
   • Murders
2. 586. Traders’ Guild of Oriente. On 5 December 2009, Ms Olga Marina Ramírez Sanes, a member of the Traders’ Guild of Oriente, was murdered. Ms Ramírez Sanes had earlier received death threats in connection with her union activities. She was murdered at 10.30 a.m. at her place of work in the central market of Chiquimula. Armed individuals shot her four times with a weapon fitted with a silencer, so that there was no general alarm. The incident has not yet been elucidated.
3. 587. Union of Employees of the Criminal Investigation Directorate of the Office of the Public Prosecutor (SITRADICMP). On 7 May 2009, Mr Víctor Alejandro Suyos Surte, a member of the Advisory Board of SITRADICMP, was murdered. The murder occurred just when the union was engaged in a labour conflict with the Office of the Public Prosecutor (the employer). At the time of his murder, one of the victim’s tasks was to document the Office’s anti-union policy.
4. 588. Union of Commercial Workers of Coatepeque. On 17 March 2009, a number of paid gunmen followed a member of the union, Mr Luis Arnaldo Ávila, and shot him several times in the head with an AK47 as he was leaving his place of work. Mr Ávila had received death threats in connection with a union dispute over the transfer of traders of the Coatepeque market which he had opposed. On 12 January 2009 Mr Amado Monzón, who was also against moving the traders out of Coatepeque market, was shot three times in the head. On 6 October 2009, during an eviction process, the Guatemala state security force (army, municipal police and national civilian police) shot Mr Miguel Chacaj Jax eight times: he died on 13 October 2009 from the injuries sustained.
5. 589. Union of Traders of the Public Square of Jocotán. At 5.30 a.m. on 16 July 2009, union member Julián Capriel Marroquín was on his way to work in the municipality of Jocotán, in the department of Chiquimula, when he was accosted by armed gunmen who shot him half a dozen times. The assault was directed specifically against him and not against his companion, who was neither shot nor threatened. He was deputy secretary general of the Union of Traders of the Public Square of Jocotán. The incident has not yet been elucidated.
6. 590. Union of Municipal Workers of Malacatan. At around 8 a.m. on 29 January 2010, Mr Pedro Antonio García left his workplace in the municipality of Malacatan on his way home when minutes later, at 8.15 a.m., he was accosted and killed by heavily armed individuals. The murder took place at the Barranca Honda estate in Malacatan, San Marcos, where 23 shells from a firearm were later found.
   • Attempted murder, assaults and death threats
7. 591. Altiplano Agricultural Workers’ Committee (CCDA) and the MSICG. Since 26 February 2009, Mr Leocadio Juracán has increasingly been the victim of death threats by telephone and messages to his cellphone. The threats focus on his activities at the head of the CCDA and of the MSICG’s political council. Though court proceedings have been initiated, the Office of the Public Prosecutor has not yet investigated the incident.
8. 592. On 25 March 2009, Ms Lesvia Morales, a member of the Coordinating Board of the CCDA, started receiving death threats on her cellphone. Although she has lodged complaints with the Office of the Public Prosecutor, it is still not known whether the investigation has made any progress. In the course of 2009, five members of the MSICG’s Policy Board were the victims of anti-union aggression, including kidnapping, intimidation, attempted murder, libel, etc.
9. 593. Union of Small Traders and Assimilated Workers. On 25 August 2009, the state security forces, notably members of the national civilian police and of the municipal traffic police, attempted to evict members of the union from their stands in the historical centre of Guatemala City, as a result of which union members Camilia Tecum, Antonia Aceituno, María Pu, María Lucinda Ajpí, María Eugenia Tubac, Manuela López, Luciano Díaz Pérez, Marcelo López Xoc and Elvira Móran were wounded. Although complaints have been lodged with the Office of the Public Prosecutor and despite the involvement of the state security forces, the incident has not been investigated.
10. 594. Union of Banana Workers of Izabal (SITRABI). On 16 July 2009, members of the union received a telephone call informing them that a large sum of money had been offered to kill all the members of the union and their families. They were told that, if they wanted to protect themselves and their families, they should give up their union activities. The union members who received these death threats were Noé Ramírez, César Guerra, Jesús Martínez, Selfa Sandoval and José Cartagena. They continue to receive these threats and, although complaints have been lodged with the Office of the Public Prosecutor, the incidents have not been investigated.
11. 595. Union of Workers of the Palo Gordo Sugar Refinery. This is currently the only active trade union in the sugar and ethanol industry, other attempts to organize the workers – such as those at the Magdalena refinery’s El Cóbano sugar plantation – stopped before they could consolidate into a trade union. Although article 28(k) and (l) of the collective agreement on working conditions signed by the employer and the union stipulates that 24 and 25 December are annual days off, the employer nevertheless expected the workers to work on these paid holidays. Consequently, on the morning of 24 December 2009 the workers belonging to the union held a meeting near the refinery to demand that the employer respect the collective agreement. One of the members present was Héctor Eli Arauz Pérez, who at the time was secretary general of the union. During the meeting the administrative head of the César Álvarez refinery arrived by car, started threatening the workers and tried to intimidate them with a weapon that he was carrying. Although the incident was reported to the national police of the municipality of San Antonio Suchitepéquez, the incident has not yet been elucidated.
12. 596. Union of Commercial Workers of Coatepeque. On 6 April 2009, in the middle of a violent and illegal eviction, the state security forces attempted unlawfully to evict union members José Luis Chití Pu, Martín Satic, Daniel Escobar, Víctor Velásquez, Miguel Maldonado, Marín Sajbín, Héctor Hernández, Ramón Gómez, Orlando Miranda, Carlili Miranda and Oswaldino Gómez. On 8 April 2009 Mr Mario Méndez, one of the union’s officials, received death threats by telephone advising him to leave Coatepeque. Since then he has continued to receive threats.
13. 597. National Health Union. In May, July and August 2009, union members Manuel Batz, Olga Santos, Yensy Hernández and Jeovanny Hernández all received death threats warning them that the aggressors were holding their families.
    • Kidnappings
14. 598. Union of Workers of the Winner SA Company. At 6.05 a.m. on 6 January 2010, while she was waiting for the Winners SA company bus to take her to work, Ms Vásquez was kidnapped by two men armed with weapons similar to those used by the state security forces. She was taken to an isolated ravine where she was questioned about her job and her family, especially her children. During her interrogation, Ms Vásquez denied her identity and begged her captors to let her go, claiming that she worked for another assembly plant and was not the person they were looking for. While they held her, her captors made a number of telephone calls, but she could not identify the persons they were calling. After about an hour another two men joined the kidnappers and also questioned her. Her aggressors said they had orders to kill her and started beating and raping her. Fortunately she survived the ordeal, albeit with serious injuries. Proceedings have been initiated with the Office of the Public Prosecutor.
15. 599. MSICG. On 6 November 2009, as part of the MSICG’s ongoing campaign in favour of decent working conditions, union leaders Dora Bajan, Blanca Villatoro, Cristina Ardón, Ingrid Ruano, Deysi Gonzales, Hortensia Gómez, María Ruano, María Barrios and Etelvina Tojín went to the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare to present a complaint concerning the violation of the labour rights of women working on banana plantations for the multinational companies Chiquita Brand and Del Monte Frehs. The complaint asked that a group of labour inspectors be sent to see for themselves how women’s rights (to a crèche and to the deduction of social security contributions, for example) under the country’s legislation were systematically flouted and how they were being denied the right to go to the Guatemala Social Security Institute. The media had been invited to witness the occasion and to inform the public at large. When the women arrived at the Ministry, security guards and members of the staff proceeded to close the entrances to the building and to keep them inside the railings that surround it, thereby preventing the representatives of the media from entering and the women from leaving the premises. During the roughly two hours that the women were thus held against their will, they were photographed, videoed and insulted by Ministry staff in order to intimidate them and prevent them from presenting their complaint officially. The Ministry staff repeatedly told them the photos and videos were being taken on orders from “higher up”, in other words the Minister of Labour and Social Welfare. Under pressure from the media and from workers who had arrived at the scene to denounce the constant violation of their labour rights, the women were eventually freed.
    • Blacklisting
16. 600. For years now, the MSICG has been informing the Committee of its concern regarding the preparation and circulation in the country of lists of union leaders and details of union activities, as well as the inclusion in these lists of details about workers who have taken their employer to court anywhere in the country. The lists are used by employers to avoid recruiting anyone with a trade union background. Given the anti-union sentiment in the country this is a matter of great concern, as people are often dismissed for trying to set up a trade union and are thus immediately denied any chance of finding work anywhere and run the risk of being unable to fend for themselves and for their families. There are two companies in Guatemala that employers or anyone else can pay for this kind of information: these are Trans Union and Infornet. Selling this information affects above all workers who have exercised or are exercising their trade union rights, despite the fact that articles 31 and 44 of the Constitution, section 274 of the Labour Code and section 64 of the Public Information Access Act prohibit the buying and selling of such information, which is punishable by five to eight years of prison.
    • Harassment and intimidation
17. 601. SITRADICMP. At 3.50 p.m. on 21 April 2009, by order of the Prosecutor General, Amílcar Velásquez Zarate, and the director of criminal investigations of the Office of the Public Prosecutor, Mynor Alberto Melgar, the members of SITRADICMP were obliged to leave their offices and to leave the doors open. Employees who were not present at the time were told not to enter the work area. While the union members were absent, a number of computer experts (staff members benefiting from the trust of the employer) entered their offices to remove and upload documents and programs on their computers.
18. 602. On 22 April 2010, when the members of SITRADICMP reported for work as usual and entered their offices, they discovered that their computers were encrypted and the data was all over the place. Realizing how serious the situation was and knowing their employer’s anti-union background, a members of SITRADICMP’s advisory board, Mr Víctor Alejandro Soyos Suret, called in a notary to make an official record of what had happened, and especially of the fact that the members of SITRADICMP were not responsible for the loss or uploading of any physical or electronic evidence involving the use of their computers.
19. 603. On 28 April 2009, the director of criminal investigations of the Office of the Public Prosecutor, Mr Mynor Melgar Valenzuela, lodged criminal charges in writing with the official on permanent duty in which he recognized that the Office was conducting an investigation into the unit where the members of SITRADICMP were employed and that the computer supervisor had accessed their computers for that purpose. According to the employer, the investigators found child pornography, pornography and other files on the computers and the Office of the Public Prosecutor was therefore instituting criminal charges against the whole department, and specifically against the members of SITRADICMP.
20. 604. As noted in the notary’s report requested by Mr Soyos, the so-called investigation undertaken by the employer took place on 21 April 2009, whereas the complaint lodged by the employer says that it took place on 22 April. Moreover, the computer department’s report on which the criminal charges against the members of SITRADICMP were based states that the investigation took place on 27 April and the charges were lodged on 28 April. In light of this, on 5 May 2010, several members of SITRADICMP went to the administrative building of the Office of the Public Prosecutor to inquire what kind of investigation was being conducted against them by their employer. When they saw the charges, they realized that their employer, the Office of the Public Prosecutor, had not made an official record of the investigation that took place on 21 April, as is required by law, yet it was on the basis of that investigation that criminal charges were being brought against members of the union, notably the members of its executive board. The members of SITRADICMP accordingly requested the presence of a notary, who made a copy of the file.
21. 605. Subsequently, the Public Prosecutor presented as evidence a file from another case. The introduction of evidence against the members of SITRADICMP in order to break up the union went so far as to accuse the union’s organization and information secretary, José Alejandro Reyes Canales, of having uploaded pornography onto his computer.
22. 606. On 28 July 2009, the Public Prosecutor announced the removal from office and dismissal of 20 employees of the DICRI and the initiation of criminal proceedings against them, ten of whom are members of the union. This anti-union policy was implemented for the sole purpose of eliminating the trade union, which can only be done by getting rid of all its leaders. It should be mentioned that the Office of the Public Prosecutor is currently facing two court subpoenas, which means that it cannot dismiss anyone without first initiating court proceedings – though it has so far dismissed 15 members of SITRADICMP without seeking a court order and has announced publicly the dismissal of the other members cited above.
23. 607. Union of Workers of the Municipality of Zacapa. In October 2008, members of the Union of Workers of the Municipality of Zacapa held a peaceful demonstration in the vicinity of their place of work, outside working hours, to demand the negotiation of a collective agreement on working conditions. Some days later the mayor of the municipality of Zacapa initiated criminal proceedings against Axel Alberto Ramírez Soto, Gabriel Enrique Ciramagua Ruíz, Nehelia Aracely Morales Díaz, Arturo Enrique Mejía, Heydee Azucena Hernández and Enrique Mayorga Cordón, all of whom are members of the union’s executive committee, on charges of illegal detention, coercion, insurrection, incitement and attempted assassination – most of which are crimes against the security of the State. This is tantamount to criminalizing the exercise of union activities, a tactic frequently used by employers and by the State. Although the MSICG is the principal victim of crimes against trade unionists, it is being denied access to information on the progress of the investigation into the incidents.
24. 608. Union of Workers of the Petén Distribution Company (SITRAPETEN). For 19 months members of the union had been engaged in the constitutionally legitimate exercise of their right of peaceful resistance in front of the National Palace, when on 10 December 2009 the state security forces, using excessive force, illegally evicted them and robbed them of their possessions. For this they employed 250 national civilian police, anti-riot police and traffic police, whereas only 25 union members were demonstrating at the time. In the course of the eviction the state security forces used excessive force, beating members of the political council of the MSICG who were showing their solidarity with SITRAPETEN and members of the executive board. They also sprayed irritants on the faces and bodies of the union members, which blinded them and whose effects they still suffered from 24 hours later. The union members who were assaulted in this way were Edwin Álvarez, Oto Quevedo, Oscar Véliz, Edwin Rodolfo López, Francisco Talé, Mario Roberto Mejía, Velbis Román and Javier Mendoza, all members of SITRAPETEN, and Efrén Emigdio Sandoval Sanabria and María Ruano, members of the MSICG’s political council. After the assault some 200 national civilian police and anti-riot police stayed behind and systematically intimidated the union members. Fearing for the physical integrity and the lives of their comrades, the MSICG immediately petitioned the court of first instance of Guatemala City for a writ of habeas corpus, which should have been issued that very night. In response to the request and given the seriousness of the complaint against the state security forces who had assaulted the union members, the court judge went personally to the scene of the incident to make sure that they were not subjected to further harassment and violations of their human rights. Although the writ of habeas corpus was issued as quickly as possible, it was unfortunately too late to prevent the union members being beaten up and evicted again and at around 11.30–12.00 p.m. the state security forces assaulted them again, spraying their eyes, face and body with toxic substances and hitting them again and again. This new violent incident was not mentioned in the report because the writ of habeas corpus was issued the day after the 3 p.m. assault and criminal charges had already been lodged. In other words, the writ was issued only after the union members had been assaulted a second time and therefore did not have the desired effect. Moreover, the appointed judge did not order any investigation into the complaint lodged by the union members.
25. 609. CCDA and MSICG. On 9 February 2010, a search was carried out at the “Café Justicia” coffee processing plant located at Cerro de Oro, Santiago Atitlán. Here the aggressors left clear messages aimed at intimidating the MSICG and each of its member organizations. In the opinion of security experts, the messages refer to the elimination of the MSICG and of every one of its organizations. The aggression occurred a few days after the MSICG presented a report entitled Guatemala, el costo de la libertad sindical (“Guatemala: The cost of freedom of association”), in which it denounced the violence and assaults aimed at the struggle of indigenous peoples, agricultural workers and trade unionists led by the MSICG, and a few days before the Trade Union Confederation of the Americas (TUCA) issued a statement condemning the climate of violence against the MSICG, the impunity surrounding the violence and the attempts to penetrate and weaken the autonomous trade union, agricultural workers’ and indigenous peoples’ sector. It also coincided with the preparation by the MSICG and the ITUC of the Latin American Forum on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
26. 610. Once the complaint had been presented at the international level the acts of violence against the CCDA and against Leocadio Juracán intensified. On 13 February 2010 the aggressors went to the CCDA’s headquarters and to the coffee processing plant, where they left written notes threatening Leocadio Juracán, the CCDA’s coordinator, and members of the MSICG’s political council. On 14 February 2010, following the same pattern of harassment and intimidation, aggressors slid death threats under the door of the house of a relative of the trade unionist that were aimed not only at Leocadio Juracán but at his family too. On 15 February an MSICG delegation on a visit to the CCDA headquarters and to the coffee processing plant were followed by unknown persons in a deliberate attempt to intimidate them. These aggressions intensified when the CCDA, as a member of the MSICG, had just joined in lodging a complaint in defence of indigenous peoples, agricultural workers and trade unionists. Although complaints were duly lodged with the competent authorities on each occasion, none of the incidents has been elucidated. The most recent incident occurred during the night of 9 February, when the police went to the scene of the crime to look for evidence, but it was all to no avail because they did so without the presence of a representative of the Office of the Public Prosecutor. The latest complaint proved impossible to lodge because the Public Prosecutor repeatedly refused to register it or said that he could not do so because it did not meet all the requirements of the law. Although a request was made for security measures, they were not provided quickly enough and, even when authorized, they were in practice virtually useless. On 20 February 2010, Leocadio Juracán and his family went into exile because of the increasing threats and harassment against them and the MSICG and because of the inability of the State to provide them with adequate security.

C. The Government’s reply

• Murders
  611. 611 In its communication dated 7 September concerning the alleged general climate of violence that is preventing the exercise of trade union rights and the murder of Marco Julio Ramírez Pórtela, Jaime Nery González, Lucila Martínez Zúñiga, Edmundo Noé Herrera Chávez, José Israel Romero Ixtacuy, Freddy Morales Villagrán, Marvin Leonel Arévalo Aguilar, Sergio Miguel García, Carlos Enrique Cruz Hernández, Mario Caal, Miguel Ángel Ramírez Enríquez and Israel Romero Ixtacuy, the Government makes the following observations:
       • - Marco Julio Ramírez Pórtela. The incident is registered as Case No. MP001-20.09-116447. The unit of the Office of the Public Prosecutor that deals with crimes against journalists and trade unionists states that the investigation is still under way and that “at the current stage of the investigation, it can be concluded that the incident was not a direct consequence of the union activities of the murder victim”.
       • - Jaime Nery González. The technical coordination secretary notes that “in this case the name needs to be clarified as several persons with the name Nery Gonzáles are listed as having been the victims of homicide, and it is therefore not clear which is the person referred to here”.
       • - Lucila Martínez Zúñiga. Ms Martínez Zúñiga was director of the Zone 18 prison for women. Her death occurred in the course of a failed attempt to escape from the El Boquerón maximum security prison by two gangsters, 20-year-old Oscar Gabriel Morales Ortiz and 23-year-old Rolando Elíseo Gonzáles Rodas. According to the investigation, the perpetrator of the murder was Roberto Pérez Rosales, a member of the Mara 18 gang. A warrant was issued for his arrest and he was apprehended by investigators of the national civilian police on 19 November 2009. He was charged with aggravated murder with intent to steal by the eighth judge of the narcotics and environment criminal court of first instance on 12 May 2009.
       • - Edmundo Noé Herrera Chávez. The case is being handled by the municipal prosecutor’s office in Amatitlán. The motive for the murder was theft. At about 3.30 a.m., when the victim was driving to work at Rafael Landívar university along Carretera de la Colonia Altos de la Cruz in the municipality of Amatitlán, two individuals attempted to rob him of his belongings. Possibly because of being hard of hearing he did not hear them and the perpetrators concluded that he was putting up resistance. They shot Edmundo Noé Herrera Chávez in the left side of the head and killed him. The incident is still under investigation.
       • - Freddy Morales Villagrán. The case is being handled by the office for crimes against people life and physical integrity of the Office of the Public Prosecutor. The preliminary hypothesis derived from the investigation is that the armed assault was not aimed directly at Mr Morales Villagrán. On the day of the incident, several people were drinking alcohol in the Lupita bar when two armed men came in and started shooting at everyone inside. Three people were killed and three injured, including Mr Morales Villagrán who later died in hospital. The three who died were not friends and were not all at the same table, and according to the investigation all those present agree that the shots were not aimed at anyone in particular. Since the assault was not aimed at him, it is assumed that the incident was not connected with trade union activities. The case is still under investigation.
       • - Marvin Leonel Arévalo Aguilar. The case is being handled by the district prosecutor’s office of Izabal. It is thought that Mr Arévalo Aguilar was the victim of a traffic offence. At the time of the incident he was taking part in a transport strike demonstration on Carretera de la Ruta al Atlántico, when Carlos Humberto Coc Ramos, ignoring all precautions, started overtaking the line of traffic that was being held up, heading towards the demonstrators. The demonstrator tried to get out of the way, but Marvin Leonel Arévalo Aguijar did not manage to do so. The vehicle hit him in the shoulder and he later died from injuries sustained. In the course of the investigation, Carlos Humberto Coc Ramos was charged with culpable homicide and he is currently waiting for the court to set a date for a public hearing.
       • - Sergio Miguel García. The case is being handled by the district prosecutor’s office of Puerto Barrios. The victim died of 13 May 2008 after being shot by a firearm. On 15 May 2008, the victim’s wife went to the prosecutor’s office where she was handed his belongings. She had previously stated expressly that nobody had witnessed the incident and she had no idea why her husband had been killed. On 22 May 2008 the departmental police station was asked to investigate the matter and, in its report dated 28 May 2008, it indicated that the perpetrators were unknown persons who had not been identified. The report added that so far the preliminary investigation did not point to the victim having been killed for his trade union activities. The case is still under investigation.
       • - Carlos Enrique Cruz Hernández. The case is being handled by the district prosecutor’s office of Izabal, which has declared that Carlos Enrique Cruz Hernández was killed for personal reasons connected with a debt that he had contracted as guarantor for a work colleague on the plantation where they were employed. Mr Noé Antonio Ramírez Pórtela, secretary general of SITRABI, said that the victim had accepted to act as guarantor for a debt incurred by Edwín Adolfo Morataya Méndez and that, when the latter failed pay up, the debt reverted to Cruz Hernández (and another guarantor). Cruz Hernández found a legal way to free himself of the debt by transferring it to the wife of Edwin Adolfo Morataya, Ms Reina Saguil Lemus, though Mr Morataya was not happy with the arrangement and apparently threatened to kill him. Members of his family and others also said that he was killed on account of the debt. It is therefore discounted that Cruz Hernández was killed for his trade union activities. However, the investigators have not excluded other explanations for the crime, and the investigation is still open in the hope of finding further evidence that could confirm or rule out the statements that have been received.
       • - Mario Caal. The technical coordination secretary notes that, in this case, the name needs to be clarified as several persons with the name Mario Caal are listed as murder victims and it is therefore not clear which is the person referred to here.
       • - Miguel Ángel Ramírez Enríquez. The case is being handled by the district prosecutor’s office of Escuintla. It is suspected that on 2 March 2008 Efraín López and Víctor Manuel Gómez Mendoza conspired to kill Miguel Ángel Ramírez Enríquez because he had previously lodged a complaint with the Office of the Public Prosecutor stating that Víctor Manuel Gómez Mendoza and others had told him that they were members of a political party but had illegally used all the information about the party to set up a trade union. The outcome was that they threatened to kill him and eventually did so, shooting him and causing him multiple injuries The prosecutor says that so far the investigation shows that it is unlikely that the victim was killed on account of his trade union activities. The incident is still under investigation.
       • - José Israel Romero Ixtacuy. The unit responsible for crimes against journalists and trade unionists of the Human Rights Section of the Office of the Public Prosecutor reported on 5 May 2010 that this homicide was still under investigation.
  612. Attempted murder, assault and death threats
  612. 612 With regard to the alleged assaults on members of the Union of Commercial Workers of Coatepeque, the Government states in its communication dated 30 July 2010 that it was the workers’ refusal to move to a new market that provoked the use of excessive force by the security forces and municipal employees, resulting in a number of people being injured and one death. As a result of the incident the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare sought information from the Office of the Public Prosecutor, which reported that it had so far ascertained only that one person had died and that the investigation was still under way. As to the other people involved, it was reported that no complaint had been lodged on their behalf.
  613. 613 With regard to the attempted murder of trade unionist Julián Capriel Marroquín, the Government states that the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare has taken all proper steps to establish the truth. Asked whether a complaint had been lodged, the Office of the Public Prosecutor said that a complaint had been lodged on 16 April 2009 (Case No. MP297/2009/2455) and that it was currently under investigation. The Government mentions that there are discrepancies in the information supplied by the complainant and records of the Office of the Public Prosecutor regarding the date of the occurrence and that the complainant has been requested to provide clear and precise details.
  614. 614 Regarding the alleged illegal eviction of street traders in the historical centre of the capital, the Government states in its communication of 12 August 2010 that the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare has initiated inquiries to determine the truth of the allegations. The Office of the Prosecutor General has indicated that a complaint has been filed (Case No. M0012-2009-98696) and is currently being investigated.
  615. 615 Regarding the alleged death threats against members of the National Health Union, the Government states that, when asked for information, the Office of the Public Prosecutor and the Human Right Prosecutor reported that no such complaint had been registered and that there was therefore no legal foundation for proceeding with the criminal investigation.
• Kidnapping
  616. 616 In its communication dated 30 July 2010, the Government states regarding the kidnapping and rape of trade unionist María Alejandra Vásquez that the Ministry has taken the necessary steps to determine whether a complaint has been lodged on behalf of the victim with the Office of the Public Prosecutor, which replied that in order to be certain it needed the full name of the victim, since its records showed several complaints under the same name. It considered it irresponsible to denounce an incident that cannot be tied in with the victim and requests the full name of the person concerned so that it can conduct an objective and impartial investigation.
  617. 617 Regarding the alleged holding of a group of leaders of the MSICG on the premises of the Ministry of labour and Social Welfare against their will, the Government states in its communication dated 29 December 2010 that the MSICG lodged a complaint with the Public Prosecutor about the incident. Following an investigation it was established that no crime of any kind had been committed and the investigating magistrate therefore rejected the complaint.
• Blacklisting
  618. 618 Regarding the alleged drawing up and circulation of blacklists to prevent unionized workers being recruited, the Government states in its communication dated 30 July 2010 that the Guatemala does not provide information on people who are or have been engaged in trade union activities or on people who have instituted legal proceedings in the courts for purposes of blacklisting. It firmly rejects any such assertions which it says are based on hearsay and are quite untrue. Moreover, the Office of the Public Prosecutor reports that the persons concerned have never lodged a complaint or provided any evidence of state institutions taking any such extreme action, which the complainant organizations claim is aimed at the country’s workers.
• Harassment and intimidation
  619. 619 Regarding the allegations that the mayor of the municipality of Zacapa brought penal charges against the leaders of the executive board of the Union of Workers of the municipality, the Government states in its communication dated 12 August 2010 that upon the conclusion of the investigation the Office of the Public Prosecutor requested the judicial body handling the case to suspend the investigation provisionally, and that is where proceedings stand at present.
• Obstacles to the exercise of trade union
• rights and to social dialogue
  620. 620 Regarding the alleged violation of trade union rights at the Las Américas SA and Crown Plaza Guatemala hotels, the Government states in its communication dated 25 May 2010 that the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare has taken the necessary steps to establish the truth of the matter. The General Labour Inspectorate has stated that complaints were lodged against it by some of its employees but they differ from the allegations. The Government adds that the Ministry will do everything possible to clarify the matter and will submit its findings in due course.
  621. 621 Regarding the alleged violation of freedom of association and collective bargaining in the Quetzal Port Enterprise, the Government states in its communication dated 1 September 2010 that Quelzal Port was inaugurated and the Quetzal Port Enterprise created to manage it in 1985, in accordance with Legislative Decree 100-85, as a decentralized, autonomous state institution with its own legal status and with the authority to acquire rights and contract obligations. In order to further its objectives, the enterprise’s board of directors issued Agreement No. 8-20-2007 which, in accordance with article 9(b) of the Act establishing the Quetzal Port Enterprise, laid down the operational rules and regulations governing services rendered in Quetzal Port. The relationship between the Quetzal Port Enterprise, the providers of services and the clients involved in all the port’s activities is governed by the International Code for the Security of Ships and of Port Facilities. Companies under contract to Quetzal Port Enterprise are deemed to be contractors in so far as they carry out their activities with their own equipment and capital and are constituted as merchant companies; moreover, the Quetzal Port Enterprise is not jointly responsible for the work carried out by their employees and the latter are not entitled to the benefits accruing to employees of the Quetzal Port Enterprise, who join and establish their own occupational associations with which the collective agreement on working conditions is concluded in strict compliance with the Constitution, the labour legislation and the rules and regulations made under it. The Quetzal Port Enterprise is an autonomous decentralized state institution whose principle purpose is to meet the demand for the loading and offloading of cargo and the boarding and disembarking of passengers. In due course, the workers of the merchant enterprises set up their own union and, guided by their trade union federations, initiated a collective labour dispute in order to negotiate a list of demands through the labour court of the department of Escuintla. Initially, direct talks were held with the Quetzal Port Enterprise in an attempt to have it take part in the negotiations. In the light of the legal arguments put forward by the Quetzal Port Enterprise, it was determined that the enterprise had no labour relationship with the workers concerned nor any responsibility for such labour relationships or for the collective labour dispute that had been instigated. In terms of jurisdiction, it must be emphasized that Quetzal Port Enterprise was at no time taken to court. The various groups of workers pursued their claims against their employers, with whom they subsequently entered into direct negotiations and reached arrangements that brought the dispute to an end. Attention must also be drawn to the fact that the complaint brought before the Committee on behalf of the Union of Dockers and Workers involved in Related Activities in Quetzal Port (SITEGREACOPQ) alleges that a series of violations were committed by the Quetzal Port Enterprise which, as indicated above, is quite separate from the private enterprises that provided services at the port, whose labour relations depend on their own policies and internal rules and regulations. It follows directly from the above that the omission of evidence to back up the claims made in the complaint suggests that the complainant is not acting in good faith, as required by Guatemalan law – and specifically section 17 of the Judiciary Act which reads as follows: “Rights must be exercised in conformity with the requirements of good faith.” The complainant group must, moreover, be requested to provide some kind of evidence that it has indeed brought the matter before some administrative or judicial labour institution capable of elucidating the matter, such as the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare through the General Labour Inspectorate or the labour courts, since it is somewhat odd that the object of the complaint, the Quetzal Port Enterprise, should be held responsible for dismissals carried out by companies that are completely outside its administrative and management purview. The Quetzal Port Enterprise denies the allegations because, in addition to the fact that they offer no evidence, the workers who provided their services through private companies have initiated proceedings with the labour and social welfare court of the department of Escuintla; in some cases the workers have reached a direct arrangement with their employer, while other cases are still awaiting a decision.
• Denial of legal status and anti-union dismissals
  622. 622 SITRAPETEN. In its communication dated 22 January 2010, the Government states that in 2007 the union applied on four occasions for recognition of its legal status, which it was denied. On 29 March 2008, workers of the Petén distribution company met in general assembly and established SITRAPETEN. On 2 April 2008, the Ministry of Labour received a request for recognition of the union’s legal status and approval of its by-laws, which it dealt with accordingly. On 10 April 2008, a ruling was handed down which recognized SITRAPETEN’s legal status, approved its by-laws and ordered its registration in the public record of trade unions. On 21 May, a request was received to issue the credentials of the union’s officers and for the General Labour Inspectorate to decree their trade union immunity. These credentials were issued on 4 June 2008 and on 1 July the upto-date list of members was forwarded to the General Labour Inspectorate and recorded in the corresponding register.
  623. 623 On 11 June 2008, the Ministry received a request to register amendments to the union’s by-laws, inasmuch as an extraordinary general assembly of the union held on 4 June 2008 had agreed to amend articles 1, 2 and 9, subparagraph A, as follows: “To be accepted as a member of the union the applicant must … be an active employee of the company known as “Petén Distribution Company and allied companies with which it constitutes a single economic unit.” Since it was dealing with a company union, the Ministry asked on 18 July 2008 the General Commercial Register of Guatemala whether in its registration archives it had any reference to a private company known as “Petén Distribution Company and allied companies with which it constitutes a single economic unit”. The same day, the General Commercial Register informed the Ministry that its records listed a company under the name “Petén Distribution Company, in process of liquidation”, as well as four other companies with the same name owned by the company concerned. On 29 September 2008, a ruling was handed down refusing registration and on 1 October 2008 an appeal against the ruling was lodged by members of SITRAPETEN’s executive committee. On 17 October 2008, the appeal was denied with due reason by resolution No. 246-2008. The interested party was notified of the resolution on 27 October 2008, and upon expiry of the legal delay for making further submissions the resolution became final and the file was sent to the General Labour Directorate for archiving.
  624. 624 In its communication dated 2 February 2010 regarding the alleged denial of the right to organize and restrictions on registration in compliance with the labour legislation in respect of the Union of Workers of the Prison System, Union of Workers and Independent Agricultural Workers (Liga Campesina) of Cerro Colorado village of the Municipality of La Gomera Escuintla, Union of Workers of the Municipality of Río Bravo Suchitepéquez, Confederation of Trade Union Unity of Guatemala (CUSG), Union of Workers of the municipality of Colomba Costa Cuca, Union of Workers of the Municipality of San Marcos and of the San Marcos Municipal Electricity Company, Union of Independent Fishers of the Village of Tacaton of the Municipality of Amatitlán, Union of Workers of the Municipality of El Tumbador, Union of Workers of the Municipality of Atescaíempa Jutiapa, Union of Workers of the Municipality of San Cristóbal Totonicapán, Union of Workers of the Ministry of the Environment and of Natural Resources (SITRAMARN), Taxi Workers’ Guild of Izabal, Union of Banana Workers of the South, and others, the Government makes the following observations:
       • - Union of Workers of the Prison System. In 2007 the union applied to the General Labour Inspectorate for recognition of its legal status, the approval of its by-laws and the union’s registration. The requests were declared irreceivable under the terms of Decree No. 71-86 (Act respecting unionization of state workers and regularization of their right to strike) and Government Agreement No. 607-88. The Inspectorate’s decision is thus in conformity with the law and there is therefore no cause for alleging any refusal or restriction, since the workers concerned did not comply with the law.
       • - Union of Workers and Independent Agricultural Workers (Liga Campesina) of Cerro Colorado village of the Municipality of La Gomera Escuintla. The workers who set up this organization unanimously decided to dissolve it. The General Labour Directorate was duly informed and asked to make the official announcements required by law for dissolving an organization. In conclusion, the union referred to has been dissolved by decision of its members.
       • - Union of Workers of the Municipality of Río Bravo Suchitepéquez. In 2005, the union presented a formal request for its establishment, and on 30 March 2005, having fulfilled all the legal requirements, the union was registered and an announcement to that effect was published on 8 April 2005.
       • - CUSG. In 2006, the CUSG initiated proceedings with the General Labour Directorate for its recognition. A complaint was subsequently lodged against the request, declaring that it was not entitled to registration. Later, the request was taken up again, subject to the correction of a number of errors in the submission. Finally, the petitioner complained at the delay in the formalities, without doing anything to speed them up, since the decisions taken on this matter were based on section 218(d) of the Labour Code, the last paragraph of which stipulates: “If the errors or defects can be corrected, the interested parties shall be informed accordingly so that they can make the corrections and, if appropriate, ask for the request to be resubmitted.”
       • - Union of Workers of the Municipality of Colomba Costa Cuca. This organization exists, inasmuch as it has complied with all legal requirements.
       • - Union of Workers of the Municipality of San Marcos and of the San Marcos Municipal Electricity Company. On 29 May 2009, the union was registered as required by law.
       • - Union of Independent Fishers of the Village of Tacaton of the Municipality of Amatitlán. This organization was registered on 9 September 1993. It is currently inactive because its registration provided for a two-year mandate for its officers and these have not been renewed.
       • - Union of Workers of the Municipality of El Tumbador. This union is also registered, but its officers’ mandate ended on 19 January 2006 and the union is therefore inactive.
       • - Union of Workers of the Municipality of Atescaíempa Jutiapa. The union was registered on 17 May 2007 and is still functioning.
       • - Union of Workers of the Municipality of San Cristóbal Totonicapán. The union was registered on 4 March 2008.
       • - SITRAMARN. The union was legally registered on 20 November 2008.
       • - Taxi Workers’ Guild of Izabal. The union was legally constituted on 5 June 2007.
       • - Union of Banana Workers of the South. On 15 October 2007 the union’s legal status was recognized and its by-laws were approved and registered. An appeal against this ruling was sustained on the grounds that the workers were not employed by the company. The ruling of 15 October was therefore revoked.
       • - Union of Workers of the Deaf and Blind Committee of Guatemala. The legal proceedings that were initiated with a view to collective bargaining have been taken up by the Chamber of Habeas Corpus and Preliminary Hearings of the Supreme Court of Justice, which has handed down its ruling on the matter. The Ministry has reverted to the Chamber with a request that it inform it whether any of the parties concerned have appealed against the ruling. It is awaiting the Chamber’s reply.
       • - Unions of Workers of the Los Ángeles and La Argentina Plantations. According to the General Labour Directorate’s records with respect to these organizations, the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare requested their dissolution on 22 April 2009 under the applicable procedure. The request is still before the courts.
       • - Union of Workers of the Municipality of Zaragoza. According to the General Labour Directorate’s records, the union has not been dissolved as indicated by the complainant. The organization is legally constituted and has legal status. Regarding the legal proceedings the complainant organizations have initiated, they should be informed that when presenting a complaint against Guatemala they should identify the legal proceedings concerned with the appropriate case number, so that their current status can be established and delays avoided. In the case in point, the labour, social welfare and family court of first instance of Chimaltenango states that proceedings have indeed been initiated against the municipality. The Ministry is currently seeking information on the matter and establishing whether the proceedings relate to requests for reinstatement.
       • - Union of Workers of the Municipality of Chimaltenango. The General Labour Directorate has investigated the incidents referred to and established that the court that investigated the collective dispute instigated by the trade union has taken the appropriate action required by law. The requests for reinstatement are still under discussion in the relevant judicial bodies.
       • - Union of Workers of the Municipality of San Antonio Huista in the department of Huehuetenango. Regarding the complaints against the municipality, the mayor, Carlos Alfredo Morales López, has informed the Ministry of Labour that on 7 February 2008 a group of neighbours took over the municipality and demanded that the municipal employees who worked for the previous administration resign. In his capacity as mayor he informed the demonstrators publicly that they were committing a crime, and the matter was subsequently placed in the hands of the national civilian police and the district office of the Public Prosecutor, located in Democracia Huehuetenango municipality. The employees of the previous administration presented their resignation voluntarily and then initiated legal proceedings that were brought before the labour and social welfare court of first instance of Huehuetenango, which validated the resignations and thus put an end to the deadlock in which the municipality found itself. In a humanitarian gesture the municipality compensated the employees concerned and paid them their employment benefits.
  625. 625 In its communication dated 1 June 2010 the Government states that, in the course of the follow-up of the allegations concerning the request for court protection No. II 24-2006, the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare recognized the legal status of SITRAMARN and approved and registered its by-laws. The court ruled that the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare’s decision was legally justified and disallowed the request for court protection. The Government adds that an appeal was lodged and the ruling was sustained.
  626. 626 In its communication dated 12 August 2010 concerning the refusal to recognize the legal status of several unions, the Government states that the technical and legal advice counsel issues rulings so that the Ministry can sign resolutions recognizing the legal status of trade unions, approving their by-laws and order their registration in accordance with the Labour Code. Consequently, if the documents submitted contain errors or fail to meet legal requirements, the workers concerned are given the opportunity to bring them into conformity with the law so that their union can be granted legal status. This is not designed to prejudice, deny or delay recognition.

D. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 627. The Committee observes that in the case under examination the complainant organization alleges numerous murders and acts of violence against trade unionists and acts of anti-union discrimination, as well as obstacles to the exercise of trade union rights and social dialogue, denial of legal status to several unions and system failures leading to impunity with regard to criminal and labour matters.
2. 628. The Committee draws attention to the serious and urgent nature of this case, given the numerous allegations of murder, attempted murder, assault and death threats, kidnappings, harassment and intimidation and blacklisting. In general, the Committee deplores the numerous allegations of criminal acts of which trade unionists have been victims in a general context of violence and expresses its concern that according to the allegations a large number of union leaders and members have been affected. It draws the attention of the Government to the fact that the rights of workers’ and employers’ organizations can only be exercised in a climate that is free from violence, pressure or threats of any kind against the leaders and members of these organizations, and it is for governments to ensure that this principle is respected [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth (revised) edition, 2006, para. 44].
   • Murders
3. 629. With regard to the numerous murders referred to, the Committee notes that the complainant organizations indicate that the following trade unionists have been murdered since the Committee last examined the case in November 2009, without the facts having been elucidated: Ms Olga Marina Ramírez Sansé, Mr Víctor Alejandro Soyos Suret, Mr Luis Arnaldo Ávila and Mr Pedro Antonio García. The Committee observes that, for its part, the Government provides information on the murder of the following trade unionists: Mr Marco Julio Ramírez Portela, Mr Jaime Nery González, Ms Lucila Martínez Zúñiga, Mr Edmundo Noé Herrera Chávez, Mr Freddy Morales Villagrán, Mr Marvin Leonel Arévalo Aguilar, Mr Sergio Miguel García, Mr Carlos Enrique Cruz Hernández, Mr Mario Caal, Mr Miguel Ángel Ramírez Enríquez and Mr José Israel Romero Ixtacuy (11 of the 14 murders listed in the previous examination of the case).
4. 630. The Committee recalls that the right to life is a fundamental prerequisite for the exercise of the rights contained in Convention No. 87. Freedom of association can only be exercised in conditions in which fundamental rights, and in particular those relating to human life and personal safety, are fully respected and guaranteed [see Digest, op. ci.t, paras 42–43]. The Committee observes that according to the Government’s reply all the murders listed above are under investigation and that so far the inquiries carried out would appear to indicate in most cases that the murders were not related to the trade union activities of the persons concerned. Given the seriousness of the allegations, the Committee urges the Government to take steps to ensure that the investigations are concluded without delay so that the guilty parties can be duly punished and requests the Government to keep it informed in detail of the outcome of the investigations and of the criminal charges brought against the perpetrators. The Committee further notes that in the case of Mr Jaime Nery González and Mr Mario Caal, the Government states that more precise information is needed as it has not been possible to ascertain whether a complaint has been lodged in their case, as several complaints concerning similar incidents have been lodged in connection with persons with the same name. The Committee requests the complainant organization to clarify the matter so that the Government can provide clear information as to how far the investigations into the murder of Mr Jaime Nery González and Mr Mario Caal have progressed. The Committee also urges the Government to provide information on the investigations into the murder of the other trade unionists, namely: Israel Romero Istacuy, Diego Gustavo Chite Pu and Sergio Alejandro Ramírez Huezo.
5. 631. Regarding the murder of trade unionists Ms Olga Marina Ramírez Sansé, Mr Víctor Alejandro Soyos Suret, Mr Luis Arnaldo Ávila and Mr Pedro Antonio García, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided any information on the subject. The Committee recalls that the killing, disappearance or serious injury of trade union leaders and trade unionists requires the institution of independent judicial inquiries in order to shed full light, at the earliest date, on the facts and the circumstances in which such actions occurred and in this way, to the extent possible, determine where responsibilities lie, punish the guilty parties and prevent the repetition of similar events [see Digest, op. cit., para. 48]. The Committee therefore urges the Government to order independent investigations without delay and to keep it informed of their outcome and of the criminal charges brought as a result.
   • Attempted murder, assault and death threats
6. 632. With regard to the Union of Small Traders and Assimilated Workers, the Committee notes that the complainant organization indicates that the state security forces attempted to evict union members from their workplace in the historical centre of the capital and that several workers were injured in the process. The Committee observes that the Government, through the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare, has taken action to determine the facts of the matter and that the Office of the Prosecutor General has indicated that a complaint has been lodged that is currently under investigation. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in detail of the outcome of the investigation under way and of the criminal charges brought in the matter.
7. 633. With regard to the Union of Commercial Workers of Coatepeque, the Committee notes that the complainant organization indicates that state security forces attempted the extrajudicial killing of union members and that a union official, Mr Mario Méndez, has received death threats by telephone ever since. The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the effect that it was the workers’ refusal to move to a new market that resulted in the excessive use of force by the state security forces and employees of the local municipality, with the result that people were injured and one person was killed. The Committee observes that the death is currently under investigation, but that according to the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare none of the other people concerned have lodged complaints. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in detail of the outcome of the investigation under way and of the criminal charges brought in the matter. The Committee also urges that independent investigations be undertaken into the allegations of attempted extrajudicial killings, death threats and injuries of which the union members have been the victim. The Committee urges the Government to keep it informed in detail about these investigations and about the criminal charges brought in the matter.
8. 634. With regard to the National Health Union, the Committee notes that members of the union and their families have been the victims of death threats. The Committee observes the Government’s statement that according to the records of the Public Prosecutor and of the Human Rights Prosecutor no complaint has been lodged and therefore no criminal charges can legally be brought. The Committee urges the Government to order an independent investigation into the aforementioned allegations and to keep it informed in detail of the outcome of the investigation and of any criminal charges that may be brought as a result.
9. 635. With regard to the attempted murder of Mr Julián Capriel Marroquín, the Committee observes that due steps were taken to establish the facts and that a complaint was lodged on 16 April 2009 and the matter is currently under investigation. The Committee notes specifically that, according to the Government, there are discrepancies between the information provided by the complainant and by the Office of the Public Prosecutor regarding the date the incident took place. The Committee requests the complainant organization to clarify the facts so that clear and precise information can be submitted on the incident.
10. 636. Regarding the allegations concerning death threats against the Union of Banana Workers of Izabal (SITRABI) and the Union of Workers of the Palo Gordo Sugar Refinery, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided any information on the subject. It accordingly urges the Government to send its observations without delay.
    • Kidnappings
11. 637. With regard to the kidnapping and rape of Ms María Alejandra Vásquez, the Committee observes that, according to the Government, the Ministry has taken the necessary steps to establish that a complaint lodged by a Ms Alejandra Vásquez does appear in the records of the Office of the Public Prosecutor but that the records contain a list of complaints in which people with the same name are cited. The Committee requests the complainant organization to provide it with additional information so that the Government can conduct an investigation into the matter.
12. 638. With regard to the alleged holding by the security forces of members of the MSICG against their will at the headquarters of the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare, the Committee observes the Government’s statement that the MSICG lodged a complaint with the Office of the Public Prosecutor regarding the incident and that the investigation had shown that no crime of any kind had been committed and the investigating magistrate therefore rejected the complaint.
    • Blacklisting
13. 639. With regard to the alleged blacklisting of trade unionists to prevent their being employed, the Committee observes the Government’s statement that Guatemala does not provide information on people who are or have been engaged in trade union activities or on people who have instituted legal proceedings that can be used for purposes of blacklisting. The Government firmly rejects any such assertions as being based on hearsay and quite untrue. Moreover, the Office of the Public Prosecutor reports that the persons concerned have never lodged a complaint or provided any evidence of state institutions taking such extreme action, which the complainant organizations claim is aimed at the country’s workers. The Committee notes that the complainant organization mentions private companies and recalls that it has expressed the opinion that all practices involving the blacklisting of trade union officials or members constitute a serious threat to the free exercise of trade union rights and, in general, governments should take stringent measures to combat such practices [see Digest, op. cit., para. 803]. The Committee urges the Government to conduct a thorough investigation of the allegations and to keep it informed of the outcome.
    • Harassment and intimidation
14. 640. With regard to the Union of Workers of the Municipality of Zacapa, the Committee notes that according to the complainant organization the mayor of the municipality of Zacapa initiated criminal proceedings against officers of the union’s executive committee. The Committee observes the Government’s statement that, upon the conclusion of the investigation, the Office of the Public Prosecutor requested the judicial body in charge of the matter to suspend the investigation provisionally, and that that is where proceedings stand at present. The Committee urges the Government to keep it informed of developments and to take steps to investigate whether criminal charges were brought in connection with the trade union activities of the union officials referred to.
15. 641. With regard to the detailed allegations of harassment and intimidation presented by SITRADICMP, CCDA, SITRAPETEN and the MSICG, the Committee observes that the Government has not provided any information on the subject. The Committee urges the Government to send its observations without delay.
    • Obstacles to the exercise of trade union rights and to social dialogue
16. 642. With regard to the alleged violations of freedom of association in the Las Américas SA and Crown Plaza Guatemala hotels, the Committee notes that the incidents are currently being investigated. It therefore requests the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the investigation.
17. 643. With regard to the alleged violations of freedom of association and of the right to bargain collectively in the Quetzal Port Enterprise, the Committee observes the Government’s statement that, in the light of the legal arguments put forward by the enterprise, it was determined that the enterprise had no labour relationship with the workers concerned nor any responsibility for such labour relationship or for the collective labour disputes instigated by the workers, and that the groups of workers referred to pursued their claims against their employers with whom they subsequently held direct negotiations and reached an arrangement that put an end to the dispute. Furthermore, with regard to the allegations presented by SITEGREACOPQ concerning anti-union dismissals, the Committee notes that the Government denies the allegations as having no basis in fact and that the workers who provided their services through private companies took the matter to the labour and social welfare court of the department of Escuintla, where some cases are still awaiting a decision. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the cases that are still awaiting a decision and to send it a copy of the rulings when they are handed down. Furthermore, the Committee will examine these matters relating to the company in the framework of Case No. 2341.
    • Denial of legal status and anti-union dismissals
18. 644. With regard to the alleged denial of the right to organize and of restrictions on official registration, as required by law, of the Union of Workers of the Prison System, Union of Workers and Independent Agricultural Workers (Liga Campesina) of Cerro Colorado Village of the Municipality of La Gomera Escuintla, Union of Workers of the Municipality of Río Bravo Suchitepéquez, CUSG, Union of Workers of the Municipality of Colomba Costa Cuca, Union of Workers of the Municipality of San Marcos and of the San Marcos Municipal Electricity Company, Union of Independent Fishers of the Village of Tacaton of the Municipality of Amatitlán, Union of Workers of the Municipality of El Tumbador, Union of Workers of the Municipality of Atescaíempa Jutiapa, Union of Workers of the Municipality of San Cristóbal Totonicapán, SITRAMARN, Taxi Workers’ Guild of Izabal, Union of Banana Workers of the South, and others, the Committee notes the Government’s statement the most of these trade unions have been granted legal status and that the others have been dissolved, are inactive, are awaiting the correction of errors in the documents submitted with the request for recognition or are awaiting a decision. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any decisions taken on the subject and of the recognition of unions once the errors in their documentation have been corrected.
19. 645. With regard to the collective dispute and dismissal of members of the Union of Workers of the Municipality of Chimaltenango, the Committee notes that the General Labour Directorate has looked into the incidents referred to and has established that the court that investigated the collective dispute instigated by the trade union took all the necessary steps required by law. As to the requests for reinstatement, these are still under discussion in the relevant judicial bodies. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the decisions handed down by the courts. With regard to the Union of Workers of the Municipality of San Antonio Huista in the department of Huehuetenango, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, the workers took their case to the labour and social welfare court of first instance of Huehuetenango, which validated the resignations tendered by the employees of the previous administration and thereby put an end to the deadlock in which the municipality found itself. The Committee observes that the municipality compensated the employees and paid them their employment benefits.