Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2001, publiée 90ème session CIT (2002)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its latest report. It notes with satisfaction that several provisions of the national legislation which were inconsistent with the Convention have been repealed or amended. Section 160 of the Agricultural Labour Code, which prohibited strikes in the agricultural sector, and section 262 of the same Code which provided that anyone instigating or participating in a strike or a lockout was liable to a term of imprisonment of from three months to one year, have been repealed by Act No. 34 of 2000. Furthermore, Legislative Decree No. 25 of 2000 repeals or amends the following provisions of Legislative Decree No. 84 of 1968 on the organization of workers and Legislative Decree No. 250 of 1969 concerning craftworkers’ associations, on which the Committee has been commenting for many years:

-  section 32 of Legislative Decree No. 84 and section 6 of Legislative Decree No. 250, which prohibit unions from accepting gifts, donations and legacies without the prior agreement of the General Federation of Workers’ Unions and the approval of the Ministry;

-  section 35 of Legislative Decree No. 84 which conferred on the Ministry broad powers of intervention over trade union finances at every level;

-  section 36(2), (3), (4) and (5) of Legislative Decree No. 84 and section 12 of Legislative Decree No. 250 requiring first-level unions to allocate a certain percentage of their resources to higher level trade unions;

-  section 44(4)(b) of Legislative Decree No. 84 under which eligibility for trade union office was subject to prior exercise of the occupation for at least six months; and

-  section 25 of Legislative Decree No. 84, as amended in 1982, which restricted the trade union rights of non-Arab foreign workers by continuing to subject them to a reciprocity requirement.

However, the Committee again points out that the following provisions need to be amended:

-  section 44(3)(b) of Legislative Decree No. 84 subjecting eligibility for trade union office to Arab nationality; and

-  section 1(4) of Act No. 29 of 1986 amending Legislative Decree No. 84 which determines the composition of the congress of the Federation and its presiding officers.

With regard to section 18(a) of Legislative Decree No. 84, as amended by section 4(5) of Legislative Decree No. 30 of 1982, which authorizes the Minister to set the conditions and procedures for the use of trade union funds, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government that the General Federation is not bound by such procedures. The Committee nonetheless recalls that this provision is not compatible with Article 3 of the Convention, which establishes the right of workers’ organizations to organize their management and activities without intervention by the public authorities, and asks the Government to amend this clause in order to bring it into line with Article 3.

With regard to the legislative provisions establishing trade union monopoly (in particular sections 3, 4, 5 and 7 of Legislative Decree No. 84, sections 4, 6, 8, 13, 14 and 15 of Legislative Decree No. 3 amending Legislative Decree No. 84, section 2 of Legislative Decree No. 250 of 1969 and sections 26 to 31 of Act No. 21 of 1974), the Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s reports for several years, that the General Federation of Trade Unions and the General Federation of Farmers and Craftworkers support the principle of trade union unity in order to maintain their organizational strength. The Committee again recalls that laws which organize the structure of trade unions on a single union basis impair the right of workers to establish organizations of their choice and that workers should have the possibility of establishing another federation if they so wish. Although it was clearly not the purpose of the Convention to make trade union diversity an obligation, it does at the very least require this diversity to remain possible in all cases (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 91). The Committee therefore requests that the Government take the necessary measures to amend these provisions so as to ensure that trade union pluralism remains possible in all cases, in conformity with Article 2 of the Convention.

The Committee notes with interest that the Ministry of Justice has established a committee to consider amendments to the Syrian Penal Code. The Committee notes that the draft laws amending the Penal Code do not repeal sections 330, 332, 333 and 334 of Legislative Decree No. 148 of 1949 issuing the Penal Code, restricting the right to strike by imposing heavy sanctions including imprisonment. The Committee recalls that it has been asking the Government for several years to repeal or amend these sections. Section 330 of the Penal Code provides for loss of civic rights for public servants who, as an organized group, hinder the functioning of a public service. Section 332 of the Penal Code imposes a term of imprisonment or a fine for any organized strike action by more than 20 workers in the transport, postal, telegraph and telecommunications, water and electricity-generating services and for strikes accompanied by demonstrations on roads or at public places or where strikers occupy offices and buildings (even peacefully). Section 333 imposes a term of imprisonment of from two months to one year or a fine not exceeding £50 on anyone who has encouraged a strike or lockout or assemblies on roads and at public places (reference to section 332(3)). A term of imprisonment of from two months to one year is enforceable under section 334 for anyone who refuses to execute or defers executing an arbitration award or any other decision by an industrial tribunal. The Committee recalls that the prohibition of the right to strike should be limited to public servants exercising authority in the name of the State and to employees in services which are essential in the strict sense of the term, namely services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population (see 1994 General Survey, paragraphs 158 and 159). Transport and postal services are not essential services in the strict sense of the term. Consequently, the Committee asks the Government to ensure that the above provisions of the law that impose restrictions on the right to strike that are enforceable by imprisonment are amended in order to ensure full observance of the abovementioned principle, in conformity with Article 3 of the Convention.

The Committee further recalls that it also asked the Government to repeal section 19 of Legislative Decree No. 37 of 1966 concerning the Economic Penal Code which imposes forced labour on anyone causing prejudice to the general production plan decreed by the authorities, by acting in a manner contrary to the plan. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard in its next report.

The Committee reminds the Government that it may seek technical assistance from the ILO, and expresses the hope that measures will be taken at the earliest possible date to bring the national legislation concerning trade union monopoly, restrictions on non-nationals and penal sanctions for exercising the right to strike into full conformity with the Convention. The Government is asked to provide information in its next report on progress made in this respect and to send copies of any amended laws.

The Committee is also addressing a request concerning other points directly to the Government.