Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 27, 1958

1. 21. At its 127th Session (Rome, November 1954), the Governing Body, in adopting the 14th Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association on the work of its Tenth Session (Rome, November 1954), approved the recommendations submitted to it by the Committee with regard to a complaint presented by the World Federation of Trade Unions against the Government of Iran, contained in two letters dated 20 March and 24 July 1954.
2. 22. In accordance with these recommendations, the Governing Body decided that certain allegations made in the complaint in general terms and other allegations relating to incidents at the Recht prison did not call for further examination. The Governing Body took note of the interim report presented by the Committee with respect to allegations concerning the banning of trade union meetings, the prohibition of the right to strike, the prohibition of trade union newspapers, arrests and deportations, dismissals for trade union activities and acts committed against workers on the ground of their trade union activities, it being understood that the Committee would report further on these matters when it had received more detailed information from the Government.
3. 23. In a letter dated 25 March 1955, addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and transmitted by him to the I.L.O, the World Federation of Trade Unions presented further allegations relating to the arrest of 31 trade union leaders and militants. The Director-General transmitted this communication to the Government of Iran for its observations by a letter dated 23 April 1955. A communication dated 18 April 1955 from the Moroccan Federation of Railway Workers' Unions and one dated 19 April 1955 from the Union of Confederated Trade Unions of Morocco deal with the same matters.
4. 24. Further consideration of the case was adjourned by the Committee, pending the receipt of more detailed information from the Government, at its 11th Session (Geneva, February 1955) and again at its 12th Session (Geneva, May 1955).
5. 25. When the Committee, at its 13th Session (Geneva, November 1955), resumed its examination of the allegations on which it had presented its interim report at its Tenth Session and also considered the allegations relating to the arrest of 31 trade union leaders and militants which had been presented in the meantime, it had before it further observations furnished by the Government in two communications dated 5 January and 21 May 1955.
6. 26. At its 13th Session, the Committee recommended the Governing Body (a) to draw the attention of the Iranian Government to the importance which it attached to the free exercise of the right of meeting, the right to express opinions freely through journals or publications and the protection of workers against transfer or dismissal on account of trade union activities, as essential elements in trade union rights ; (b) to decide that, subject to these observations, the remaining allegations in the two original communications from the World Federation of Trade Unions enumerated in paragraph 22 above did not call for further examination ; and (c) to take note of the interim report presented by the Committee with regard to the allegations relating to the arrest of 31 trade union leaders and militants referred to in paragraph 23 above and to express a desire to be kept informed as to the outcome of the investigations being made. These recommendations were approved by the Governing Body when it adopted the 17th Report of the Committee at its 130th Session (Geneva, November 1955).
7. 27. The only allegations still remaining before the Committee, therefore, when it met at its 14th Session (Geneva, May 1956), were those relating to the arrest of 31 trade union leaders and militants contained in the complaint of the W.F.T.U dated 25 March 1955, a matter also referred to in the complaints of the Moroccan Federation of Railway Workers' Unions and the Union of Confederated Trade Unions of Morocco (see paragraph 3 above), on which the Government had, in the meantime, furnished further observations in a communication dated 16 February 1956. The Committee noted that in the last-mentioned communication the Government stated that three of the 31 persons concerned had been liberated conditionally but that it was intended to bring the remaining 28 to trial. The Committee therefore once more adjourned its examination of the case, again requesting the Government to keep it informed with respect to the trials still pending.
8. 28. At its 15th Session (Geneva, November 1956), the Committee had before it a further communication from the Government dated 30 September 1956, in which the Government gave the names of 20 persons who had been acquitted or liberated. One of these persons, however, was among the three of whose liberation the Committee had already been informed prior to its 14th Session, while another did not appear in the lists furnished by the complainants. The Committee noted, therefore, that the communication of 30 September 1956 related in fact to 18, and not 20, of the 28 persons whose cases had still been outstanding at its previous sessions. The Committee again adjourned its examination of the case, requesting the Government to furnish information in due course concerning the remaining ten persons whose cases were still outstanding.
9. 29. At its 16th Session (Geneva, February 1957), the Committee had before it a further communication from the Government dated 29 January 1957, in which the Government furnished more information on the cases relating to these ten persons. With respect to eight of these cases, the Committee requested the Director-General to ask the Government to be good enough to supply further information and adjourned its examination of the case until its next session.
10. 30. At its 17th Session (Geneva, May 1957), the Committee had before it a further communication from the Government dated 25 April 1957, in which additional information on the eight cases in question was given. The Committee decided to request the Government to supply more details with regard to certain points, and adjourned its examination of the case until its present session. In a communication dated September 1957 the Government furnished the details requested by the Committee.
11. 31. The analysis given below is confined to the parts of the complaints dealing with these outstanding allegations and to the observations presented thereon by the Government in its aforesaid communications dated 21 May 1955, 16 February 1956, 30 September 1956, 29 January 1957, 25 April 1957 and September 1957.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

• Allegations relating to the Arrest of 31 Trade Union Leaders and Militants
  32. 32 In its communication dated 25 March 1955 the World Federation of Trade Unions stated that the Iranian Official Gazette (Ettlaat Havai) of 16 March 1955 published a communiqué of the Military Governor from the Teheran area announcing the arrest of 31 trade union leaders and militants, all the names and trade union offices of whom were cited by the complainants, including, in particular, Mahboub Azimi, Secretary of the Council of Trade Unions of Teheran, and a substitute member of the General Council of the W.F.T.U. The communications dated 18 April 195:), from the Moroccan Federation of Railway Workers' Unions, and 19 April 1955, from the Union of Confederated Trade Unions of Morocco, both related to the same question and referred by name to the case of Mahboub Azimi.
• ANALYSIS OF THE REPLIES
• Allegations relating to the Arrest of 31 Trade Union Leaders and Militants
  33. 33 In its communication dated 21 May 1955 the Government declared that the military authorities, in accordance with the laws and regulations in force, had endeavoured to discover centres of underground activity by an illegally constituted political party, the dissolution of which the Government proclaimed with the approval of Parliament. Following their inquiries, these authorities arrested a number of militant members of the Tudeh Party, who were charged, among other things, with distributing clandestine, subversive and legally prohibited publications of that Party. The persons arrested would be liberated if investigations established their innocence. The Government pointed out that, the political party in question having on several occasions attempted to endanger the safety of the State and the independence and integrity of Iranian territory, those of its members who took part in its underground and subversive activities were liable to be prosecuted in accordance with the laws in force. It was possible that among the persons arrested some, or even all, were trade union militants or leaders, but they had not been prosecuted as trade unionists or because of their occupational activities. The Government emphasised that trade unionism and political agitation are two very different things, that trade unionists cannot be exempt from the liability to prosecution which they incur by their non-trade union, illegal and subversive activities and that a political party cannot be allowed, under the guise of trade unionism, to re-form itself and to undertake with impunity illegal and anti-Constitutional activities.
  34. 34 The Committee, having noted at its 13th Session (November 1955) the Government's statement that an investigation was in progress and its assurance that any of the persons whose innocence might be established in the course of such investigation would be liberated, recommended the Governing Body to express a desire to be kept informed as to the outcome of the investigations being made -a recommendation approved by the Governing Body when it adopted the 17th Report of the Committee at its 130th Session (Geneva, November 1955).
  35. 35 Further information was forwarded by the Government in a letter dated 16 February 1956. The Government stated once again that the persons in question were arrested and proceeded against as members of the illegal Tudeh Party, which sought the overthrow of the established régime and carried on anti-Constitutional and terrorist activities endangering public order and the safety of the population and not by reason of their occupational or trade union activities, which are recognised by law and respected by the authorities. Three of the accused, Messrs. Akbar Abdi, Ali Abbas Pourzandjani and Réza Pojoutan, were liberated when the preliminary investigation revealed no certain proof of the charges made against them, but undertook not to leave the region of Teheran in case further information should be required of them. The competent authorities considered that the cases of the other 28 accused must be brought before the competent tribunals when the dossiers were completed. While: expressing its opinion that this case should now be closed, the Government stated that it was prepared to forward information in due course as to the acquittal or conviction of these 28 persons.
  36. 36 In its communication dated 30 September 1956 the Government gave the names of 20 persons who had been acquitted or liberated under recognisances because, although found guilty of being members of an illegal political party or of engaging in anti-Constitutional activities, the courts took into account such mitigating circumstances as their repentance of their acts. Inquiries having revealed evidence of more serious offences on the part of five of the accused, the latter were awaiting sentence by the courts.
  37. 37 The Committee having noted at its 15th Session (Geneva, November 1956) that there were still ten persons regarding whose cases it was awaiting information from the Government (see paragraph 28 above), again adjourned its examination of the case. Further information was furnished by the Government in a communication dated 29 January 1957. The Government stated once again that the investigations in the ten outstanding cases showed that the persons concerned had been guilty of serious offences against public security and the independence of the country and that they had been proceeded against not because they were trade union militants or leaders but because of their adherence to an illegal political party (the Tudeh Party, dissolved by law) and their participation in subversive and anti-Constitutional activities. Nevertheless, stated the Government, the courts had taken account of mitigating circumstances wherever possible. Thus, Mr. Nassiri-Yazdi and Mr. Kheyrollah-Chafizadeh had been released. Mr. Djahandidepour had been sentenced to 20 months' imprisonment, Mr. Mahboub Azimi to seven years' imprisonment, Mr. Fardjami Azad to 15 years' imprisonment and Mr. Saadotoghli to two years' imprisonment. The courts had not yet pronounced sentence on Messrs. Khosro-Ivazian, Iradj-Zandpour, Miraci and Bahrain.
  38. 38 At its 16th Session (Geneva, February 1957), the Committee, noting the sentences passed on T Messrs. Djahandidepour, Mahboub Azimi, Fardjami Azad and Saadatoghli; decided to request the Government to be good enough to furnish more precise details, accompanied if possible by copies of the judgments, as to the unlawful activities of which these four persons had been found guilty, and also to furnish similar information in the cases of any of the four persons (Messrs. Khosro-Ivazian, Iradj-Zandpour, Miraci and Bahrain) whose trials were still uncompleted if they were sentenced to punishment by the courts.
  39. 39 In its next communication, dated 25 April 1957, the Government stated that Mr. Djahandidepour and Mr. Saadatoghli were sentenced because of their adherence to the illegal Tudeh Party, dissolved by law, and acts contrary to the safety of the State and public order, and that they have now been liberated. The Government declared that Mr. Mahboub Azimi and Fardjami Azad were sentenced to longer terms of imprisonment because, according to the judgments of the court of second instance, they had committed serious crimes, such as fomentation of disorder, endangering public security, incitement of the population to armed revolt, and plotting against the Constitutional régime. These two persons, added the Government, had been committing offences against the independence of the country and public order for a period of 25 years. The Government stated that they had confessed to their crimes and that these had no connection with trade union activities or the exercise of trade union rights. Moreover, concluded the Government, the accused enjoyed at their trial all the rights afforded to the defence by the legislation in force, their sentences being pronounced by the court of second instance. With respect to the four persons whose trials had not been completed when the Committee met in February 1957, the Government stated that Mr. Khosro-Ivazian and Mr. Miraci had been liberated conditionally, having repented of their crimes. The trials of Mr. Iradj-Zandpour and Mr. Bahrain were still pending. In conclusion, the Government stated that martial law had ceased to be in force since 3 March 1957.
  40. 40 In its communication dated September 1957, in reply to the request for additional information made by the Committee at its 17th Session (May 1957), the Government states that Mr. Iradj-Zandpour is a high-school teacher and never belonged to a trade union organisation, and that, acting on the instructions of the illegal Tudeh Party, he incited persons to commit acts contrary to public order, to revolt and to foment disturbances. Apart from denying his trade union status, the Government declares that Mr. Zandpour, having repented of his actions, was liberated and returned to his teaching post. Mr. Bahram was sentenced to 30 months' imprisonment by the court of second instance. According to the extract of the judgment furnished by the Government, he was found guilty of subversive activities, spreading propaganda on behalf of the illegal Tudeh Party and incitement of workers to revolt. Having served his sentence, states the Government, he has now been liberated.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

• Allegations relating to the Arrest of 31 Trade Union Leaders and Militants
  41. 41 The complainants allege that 31 named trade union leaders and militants were arrested by virtue of a published decision of the Military Governor of the Teheran area, including Mahboub Azimi, Secretary of the Council of Trade Unions of Teheran and a substitute member of the General Council of the W.F.T.U. The Government states that the military authorities did, in fact, arrest the persons in question but that they were arrested because of their membership of and activities on behalf of the Tudeh Party, dissolved by law after attempting to endanger the safety of the State and the integrity of national territory. The Government pointed out that any of the persons arrested whose innocence might be established by the investigations being made would be liberated. In fact, in its communication dated 16 February 1956, the Government stated that three of the persons concerned had already been conditionally liberated.
  42. 42 When examining this case at its 13th Session (November 1955) the Committee recalled that in several earlier cases it had been called upon to give a decision with regard to the application of measures which, although of a political nature and not intended to restrict trade union rights as such, might nevertheless affect the exercise of such rights, and took the view in the present case that, as the persons arrested assumed responsibilities of a trade union nature, their arrest might, even if that were not the intention, have affected the exercise of trade union rights. Recalling further that, if in certain cases it had concluded that allegations relating to the arrest of trade union militants did not call for further examination, this had been after it had received information from the governments showing sufficiently precisely and with sufficient detail that the arrests were in no way occasioned by trade union activities but solely by activities outside the trade union sphere which were either prejudicial to public order or of a political nature, and observing that investigations in the present case were still pending, the Committee made an interim report recommending the Governing Body to express a desire to be kept informed as to the outcome of these investigations.
  43. 43 From the series of replies furnished by the Government in response to the several requests for further information addressed to it by the Committee at its subsequent sessions, it would appear that, at varying times, 26 of the 31 persons named in the complaint have been liberated without being indicted or have been acquitted or have been set free as the result of the competent courts having taken mitigating circumstances into account. Of the remaining five, Messrs. Djahandidepour, Saadatoghli and Bahram Yaghoubzadegan were sentenced to imprisonment for, respectively, 20 months, 20 months and 24 months and, according to the Government, have served these terms and since been liberated. Messrs. Mahboub Azimi and Fardjami were sentenced to seven and 15 years' imprisonment respectively. The Government states that, according to extracts of the judgments of the competent courts of second instance, Messrs. Djahandidepour and Saadatoghli were sentenced because of their adherence to the illegal Tudeh Party and of activities contrary to the security of the State and public order, and quotes from the judgment in the case of Mr. Bahram Yaghoubzadegan a passage to the effect that it was proved that he committed subversive activities, spread propaganda on behalf of an illegal party and incited workers to revolt. According to the judgments of the court of second instance in the case of Messrs. Mahboub Azimi and Fardjami as referred to by the Government, these persons were sentenced to longer terms because they had committed serious crimes such as fomentation of disorder, endangering public security, incitement of the population to armed revolt and plotting against the Constitutional régime.
  44. 44 The Committee considers, having regard to the details given by the Government and to its references to the judgments of the courts of second instance in the cases of the five persons sentenced, that the persons in question, after trials before the courts of second instance, were sentenced to imprisonment in respect of criminal offences committed outside the scope of legitimate trade union activities and that the complainants have not offered sufficient evidence to show that the measures taken constituted, in the instances under review, violations of trade union -rights.