Rapport où le comité demande à être informé de l’évolution de la situation - Rapport No. 22, 1956

A. A. The complainants' allegations

• Analysis of the Complaint of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions
  66. 66 The complaint of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions is contained in a telegram addressed to the Director-General on 29 June 1956 and in a further communication dated 8 August 1956.
  67. 67 The complaining organisation prefaces its allegations by recalling that in a previous complaint against the Government of Poland it drew attention to the fact that only trade unions which accept the politics and control of the Communist Party and the Government are allowed to function and that they do so as part of the apparatus of the State and have the duty to induce the workers to greater efforts but do not deal with such questions as wages and living standards. This history of suppression of trade union rights, declares the complainant, reached its climax with the strike in Poznan on 28 June 1956.
  68. 68 The complainant gives the following account of the events leading to; the strike. The immediate causes were the unilateral decisions of the Zispo factory management and the Government which reduced the income of the workers. The then First Secretary of the Polish (Communist) United Workers', Party, Mr. Ochab, is stated to have admitted that some of these decisions were taken without adequate consideration and that 75 per cent of the workers had suffered as a result of the abolition of the progression in piece-work wages in the second half of 1955, which was further aggravated by a decrease in overtime due to a falling off in the amount of orders placed. Other contributing factors were loss of earnings due to the irregular flow of supplies to the works, upward adjustment of norms in 1953, 1954 and 1955 which increased output by 25 per cent but was not reflected by a rise in wages, the considerable tax deductions made from pay packets, and delay in reimbursing sums incorrectly assessed. There were other grievances. The Zispo management concentrated on production targets to the neglect of labour protection and safety and health rules, etc. Collective agreements providing for such increases and for the provision of houses for workers were not implemented. There was also a considerable food shortage.
  69. 69 The Zispo workers pressed their just demands for several months prior to the strike at meetings of the works committee, in discussions with management and in statements sent to the regional union of metal workers and to the Polish United Workers' Party. Now, states the complainant, Mr. Ochab attributes the delays to bureaucratic methods, but the fact is that the demands of the workers met with evasive answers and even the trade union failed to press them, so that discontent grew not only in the Zispo factory but in other works as well.
  70. 70 In June the workers held unauthorised meetings in working hours, without the participation of the union, and a long list of demands was agreed upon, covering wages, tax questions and living conditions and also claiming that the workers should participate in the management of the factory through freely elected delegates rather than through the " puppet works committee ". As these demands met with no response, the workers by-passed the trade union hierarchy and elected a delegation to approach the Minister. According to reports, a meeting at the Zispo factory on 27 June was attended by the Minister of Engineering and representatives of the Metal Workers' Union at which promises were given that most of the demands would be met. However, members of a delegation of workers sent to Warsaw on the same day had failed to return, and it was suspected they had been detained. The authorities, according to the complainants, state that the delegation returned to Poznan on 27 June with a favourable answer to the demands made. The complainant, in questioning this, states that it is improbable that, knowing " the dangers of a strike in a Communist country ", workers would decide to strike after their demands had been met.
  71. 71 The complainant gives the following account of events on the day of the Poznan strike 28 June 1956. On that day, the Zispo workers formed a procession about 8 a.m. and marched towards the centre of Poznan to demonstrate their dissatisfaction. Workers from other factories joined them and by 10 a.m. the strike movement was general in the town. The public was sympathetic and thousands of people joined the demonstrators. Communist officials disappeared from the scene. From then on, reports are not entirely clear. It would seem that some workers protested at Communist Party headquarters, others pressed their demands at the town hall and at the seat of the Regional People's Council and another large group went to the Mlynska prison, where they thought that Zispo delegates might be in detention. Apparently, the whole town was now in the hands of the demonstrators. When a large group of demonstrators came in front of the headquarters of the security police demanding the liberation of the Zispo delegates, they were shot at from the windows of the building and this led to general fighting throughout large parts of the town. Demonstrators released prisoners from the Mlynska prison ; others took firearms from the prison guards and armoury. Army formations and tanks arrived and began to massacre the demonstrators and fighting did not end until late on the following day.
  72. 72 While the economic situation of the workers was the immediate cause of the trouble in Poznan, declares the complainant, the general background must also be taken into account. Increased norms without wage increases is the price the workers have to pay for the huge rearmament programme. While the authorities claimed until recently that real wages had risen 27.6 per cent during the Six-Year Plan period, Mr. Ochab, the complainant declares, stated in a speech a few weeks after the events in Poznan that the increase was 13 per cent, but failed to justify even this figure and admitted that the situation of certain groups of workers had actually worsened. It is contended that a speech made by Mr. Ochab in April 1956 revealed the misery of the Polish workers because he admitted that hundreds of thousands of workers earned less than 500 zlotys a month, the average wage in Poland being 800 zlotys a month, whereas the issue of the semi-official Zycie Gospodarcze dated 20 May 1956 stated that " a person who earns only 1,000 zlotys a month cannot make ends meet " and that " masses' of people live in indescribable conditions ". In a recent article this journal admitted that, in order that his family be properly fed, a married man with two children requires an income of at least 1,727 zlotys a month. The deep discontent of the Polish workers and the loss of contact between the Polish trade unions and the masses have since been admitted by the General Secretary of the World Federation of Trade Unions. In other words, states the complainant, the unions have done nothing for the workers, which explains why the Poznan workers had to act independently of the official trade unions. The sufferings of the workers have resulted from a government policy which has not been checked by a freely elected Parliament or by the trade unions, because there are no free elections and no free and democratic trade unions are allowed to exist.
  73. 73 According to the complainant, reports show that the demonstrations in Poznan were peaceful until the security forces opened fire and that the right of assembly had been violated. Reports also show that some at least of the workers' delegation sent to Warsaw on 27 June were detained, contrary to the principle that workers should have the right to elect their own representatives and that such representatives should have the right to present the claims of the workers to the authorities. The complainant calls on the I.L.O to approach the Government in order to secure the release of the strikers arrested in Poznan and the assurance that there will be no victimisation of the Poznan workers and that any victimisation that has already occurred will be redressed ; the complainant asks the I.L.O also to make an on-the-spot investigation, through a fact-finding mission, into all the circumstances of the strike and demonstrations in Poznan and their suppression by armed force. On the basis of the facts and investigation, the complainant asks the Governing Body to state that the Government has infringed fundamental workers' and trade union rights because (a) the absence of the right of the workers to set up trade unions affords them no way of pursuing their legitimate demands as the official trade unions are simply a Government instrument, (b) the strike and demonstrations against exploitation were met by the use of arms and a declaration of martial law, and (c) freedom of association was violated by the detention of the Zispo workers' delegates.
• Analysis of the Complaint of the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions
  74. 74 The complaint of the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions is contained in a telegram addressed to the Director-General on 29 June 1956 and in a further communication dated 4 August 1956. Referring to the economic and financial grievances of the workers, grievances over improper application of regulations and the alleged admissions with respect to this matter by Mr. Ochab, the then First Secretary of the Polish United Workers' Party, which have been set forth at length in the analysis of the complaint of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, the complainant states that the Zispo workers sent a delegation to the authorities in Warsaw and, their report being unsatisfactory, decided to call a strike and organise a public demonstration.
  75. 75 The complainant states that no formal regulation prohibits strikes and workers' demonstrations in Poland but that a resolution of the Communist-ruled Central Trade Union Organ in 1947 recognised that there can be no strikes in Poland, the latter accounting for the fact that Mr. Ochab has made a speech to the effect that " trouble-makers and demagogues " managed to bring about a strike and demonstrations in Poznan, while it was stated in an official article in Trybuna Ludu, on 6 July, that "the people's rule and our State" are "definitely against a strike " and that the Poznan workers' form of protest " was improper and harmful ". Hence, the Government used troops and tanks to defeat this "improper and harmful" form of the Poznan workers' protest which it "definitely opposed ".
  76. 76 To sum up, states the complainant, the dissatisfaction of the Poznan workers was justified, their representations brought no result, and therefore they resorted to strikes and demonstrations ; the authorities are " definitely against " strikes and demonstrations which they regard as " improper and harmful " and so deny the workers the right to strike and demonstrate in defence of their justified demands ; the authorities repressed a justified strike by force, many people being killed or injured. The complainant asks the I.L.O to intervene to secure the termination of repression and the free use of their rights by the workers.
• Analysis of the Remaining Complaints
  77. 77 In a communication dated 7 July 1956 the Polish Confederation of Christian Trade Unions Abroad protests against the use of armed force at Poznan and the subsequent repression of the Polish working class. It calls on the I.L.O to secure the restoration of the freedom of the Polish workers and the cessation of proceedings against those workers who participated in the events at Poznan.
  78. 78 In a communication dated 11 July 1956 the New Zealand Federation of Labour expresses its support for the complaint of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions.
  79. 79 In a communication dated 12 August 1956 the Federación Autónoma de Trabajadores del Este (Uruguay) protests against a strike in favour of the most modest economic demands being repressed by force. It calls on the I.L.O to demand that the names of those being prosecuted be given, that they be given a public trial attended by representatives of the international press, the I.L.O and the I.C.F.T.U and that they be given the right to be represented by foreign counsel ; and that the Government's assurance be obtained that the accused will not be deported to the U.S.S.R and will be allowed to be visited periodically by representatives of the I.L.O and the I.C.F.T.U.
  80. 80 In a communication dated 14 August 1956 addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and transmitted by him to the I.L.O, the International Federation of Free Teachers' Unions (Brussels) expresses its solidarity with the Poznan workers, states that the fact that the movement in Poznan started outside the recognised organisations proves that there are no trade unions worthy of the name to represent the workers, and demands the re-establishment in all countries of democratic rights and free elections, freedom to exercise trade union rights and an amnesty for political prisoners and emigrants.
• ANALYSIS OF THE GOVERNMENTS REPLY
  81. 81 In its reply dated 27 October 1956 the Government of Poland admits that the origin of the Poznan incidents is to be found in the fact that " the justifiable demands of the Zispo workers were not met as they should have been or in due time " and that " the responsibility for the profound causes of these events falls on the authorities of the central and local administration, who permitted practices which were prejudicial to the Zispo workers ". The Government considers, however, that the question of this responsibility is a purely internal matter for Poland and cannot be the subject of I.L.O discussion.
  82. 82 The Government gives the following account of events. When the Zispo workers decided to strike and demonstrate publicly in favour of their demands, the Poznan authorities did not oppose the demonstration, because " existing Polish legislation ensures to all workers the freedom to demonstrate and the right to strike ". In a socialist State, where the means of production are in the hands of the workers, it is considered that strikes should not take place, so that the popular power, without prejudice to the right to demonstrate and to strike, tries to explain to the workers that it is both in their interest and in that of the State that efforts should be made to settle claims by methods other than strikes.
  83. 83 The Government denies that the strike at Poznan was broken by force or that participants in the demonstrations have been repressed. During the demonstrations, states the Government, armed bands formed and attacked buildings and representatives of authority, occupied the prison and looted shops and houses for several hours without meeting resistance from the security forces, who had been ordered not to use weapons against a demonstration which had begun as a workers' demonstration. On the eve of events in Poznan a delegation freely elected by the Zispo workers discussed the workers' grievances with the authorities and the factory management and, according to the Government, returned freely and in their full numbers to Poznan to report to the workers. The Government declares that no delegates were detained and that the spreading of a rumour to the contrary the day following contributed to the worsening of the atmosphere ; hence, the Government states that it has not violated the principles respecting freedom of association which bind the States Members of the I.L.O.
  84. 84 According to the version given by the Government, " adventurers and criminal elements " joined the demonstrations and introduced murder, violence and looting, a " public security official was bestially murdered ", and the Mlynska prison guards were disarmed and 257 criminals liberated. Then a group, reinforced by some of the convicts, attacked the public security forces' building. The struggle round this building and disturbances elsewhere caused the deaths of 53 persons, including nine soldiers and police, and 300 persons were injured, including 39 soldiers, police and militiamen. Other public buildings were attacked and shops looted and peaceful persons robbed. During and immediately after these incidents, several hundreds of persons were arrested for carrying arms or being in possession of loot or on suspicion of having attacked public institutions, soldiers or police. The large majority were released after questioning and proceedings taken against the others according to an impartial judicial procedure.
  85. 85 The Government declares that no person was arrested for taking part in the strike or in the demonstration itself, but only for criminal acts which entirely transformed the original character of the demonstration and seriously disturbed public order. The Government adds that the Attorney-General has submitted to the judicial authorities a proposal to liberate all persons held on charges other than those of murder and looting.
  86. 86 The Government concludes that the complainants' demands are baseless and should be rejected-especially the demand for an on-the-spot investigation. While the Government rejects as an inadmissible interference in Polish internal affairs the demand for a mission of investigation, it declares that both the Polish authorities and the whole people desire to co-operate ever more closely with the International Labour Organisation and the other international organisations by continuing and developing the trend in this direction followed up to the present time.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

• Preliminary Question as to Competence
  87. 87 The Government considers that the determination of the responsibility for the causes which led to the events in Poznan is a matter of Polish internal concern which should not be discussed by any organ of the I.L.O.
  88. 88 In this connection, the Committee reaffirms the statement it made in an earlier case relating to Argentina (Case No. 12) and repeated in two further cases relating to the Union of South Africa (Cases Nos. 63 and 102 ) that, in view of the decision taken on this matter by the International Labour Conference at its 33rd Session in 1950, it is not called upon to examine further the question of the competence of the I.L.O to establish the fact-finding and conciliation procedure in matters of freedom of association.
  89. 89 The Committee notes with satisfaction, however, that the Government has seen fit to present its observations on the substance of the complaints.
• Allegations as to the General Trade Union Situation
  90. 90 In the course of their surveys of the circumstances forming the background to the events in Poznan on 28 June 1956, certain of the complainants, in addition to analysing the various economic developments which, they allege, have worsened the living and working conditions of the workers, refer to the existing trade unions as being subservient to the Government and to the non-existence of free trade unions to represent the workers' interests. The I.F.C.T.U, the I.C.F.T.U, and the International Federation of Free Teachers' Unions conclude their complaints by calling upon the Governing Body to recommend the Polish Government to ensure that workers may exercise freely all trade union rights.
  91. 91 In view of the fact that in Case No. 58 relating to Poland (examined in paragraphs 4 to 65 above) the Committee has considered a complaint presented by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions which was founded directly on the alleged general trade union situation in Poland and in which the allegations covered the whole field of trade union rights in far greater detail than do the allegations made in the present case, the Committee considers it unnecessary to examine at this juncture allegations which it has been called upon to examine on a more comprehensive basis in the course of its consideration of Case No. 58. At the same time, the Committee has borne the allegations made in this connection in mind in forming its appreciation of the general background against which the events in Poznan took place which form the subject of the specific allegations made in the present case.
  92. 92 In connection with these events at Poznan, the matters alleged can appropriately-and even chronologically-be divided into four separate series of allegations : (a) allegations relating to the detention of workers' delegates ; (b) allegations relating to the Poznan strike and the right to strike ; (c) allegations relating to the Poznan demonstration ; and (d) allegations relating to subsequent reprisals against strikers and demonstrators.
• Allegations relating to the Detention of Workers' Delegates
  93. 93 While the I.F.C.T.U alleges that the Zispo delegates sent to Warsaw on 27 June 1956 returned with a report which the workers regarded as unsatisfactory, whereupon the workers demanded to call a strike and a demonstration, the I.C.F.T.U alleges that, " according to some reports ", the delegation or some of its members had not returned by 27 June and it was suspected that they had been detained. The detention of these delegates, declares the I.C.F.T.U, would constitute a breach of the principle that workers should have the right to elect their representatives and that such representatives should have the right to present the claims of the workers. The Government states that this delegation had discussions in Warsaw on 27 June and that no one was detained, the whole delegation returning after the discussions to report to the workers. Next day, the Government states, there were rumours that delegates had been detained and this contributed to a worsening of the atmosphere at the time of the demonstration on 28 June 1956. While the Government categorically denies that any delegates were arrested, there appears to be a slight conflict of evidence between two of the complainants, the I.F.C.T.U stating that the delegates returned with an unsatisfactory report, and the I.C.F.T.U stating that they -or some of them-had not returned " by 27 June ", i.e., the same day as that on which they went to Warsaw. The I.C.F.T.U, moreover, states that its information is based on " some reports ".
  94. 94 In view of these circumstances the Committee emphasises the importance that it attaches to the principle that workers and workers' organisations should have the right to elect their representatives in full freedom and that such representatives should have the right to present the demands of the workers.
• Allegations relating to the Poznan Strike and the Right to Strike
  95. 95 It is alleged that because their justified claims were not granted, the workers called a strike beginning on the morning of 28 June 1956. While there appears to be an occasional tendency in certain of the complaints, especially in retrospect, to regard the strike and the ensuing demonstration as synonymous, the Committee considers that it is necessary to distinguish between the two, particularly as the issues involved are not quite the same. For the moment, therefore, the Committee confines its consideration to the actual strike and the question of the right to strike.
  96. 96 Both from the detailed accounts of the complainants and from the admissions made by the Government in its reply, it appears clear that the reasons for the Poznan strike were entirely economic in character. The Government itself declares that the origin of the Poznan incidents is to be found in the fact that justifiable demands of the workers were not met or properly considered and that the authorities were responsible for this. The Committee considers, therefore, that the strike was called for the essential purpose of supporting the workers' economic demands.
  97. 97 The second question is that of the legality of the particular strike, depending on the question of the right to strike in general. None of the complainants allege that the law prohibits the right to strike in Poland-in fact, the I.F.C.T.U says that it does not. What they do allege is that any strike in a Communist country is dangerous, that the Central Trade Union Organ adopted a resolution in 1947 in which it recognised that there can be no strikes in Poland and that the view of the authorities is that " the people's rule and the State " are " definitely against a strike " and that the Poznan workers' form of protest " was improper and harmful ". The Government declares that no person has been arrested for participating in the strike or that the strike as such was repressed, and states that existing legislation ensures the right to strike although every effort is made to explain to the workers that it is in their interests and in the interests of the State that disputes should be settled without resort to strikes.
  98. 98 It would appear in the present case that the right to strike is not prohibited by law but is officially disapproved of in Poland and that the Poznan strike was a lawful strike in support of economic demands called after the workers had exhausted all means of securing a peaceful settlement. The Government admits that there had been unreasonable delay in dealing with demands which were justified.
  99. 99 In a number of cases the Committee has recognised in general terms the importance of the right to strike. In Case No. 47 relating to India, the Committee stated that " the right to strike is generally admitted as an integral part of the general right of workers and their organisations to defend their economic interests " but that " in the case of essential services strikes may be temporarily restricted until existing means of negotiation, conciliation or arbitration have been exhausted ". Similar reasoning was followed by the Committee in its examination of Case No. 50 relating to Turkey. In Case No. 11 relating to Brazil, the Committee drew attention to the importance which it attaches to the principle that, where strikes are prohibited, adequate guarantees should be ensured to safeguard to the full the interests of the workers thus deprived of an essential means of defending occupational interests, a principle which it reaffirmed in Case No. 60 relating to Japan, in which case, also, it indicated its view that such safeguards should include, for example, the provision of joint conciliation procedure and, where and only where conciliation fails, the provision of joint arbitration machinery whose decisions are binding on both sides.
  100. 100 In these circumstances, the Committee draws attention to the importance which it attaches to the principle that the right to strike is generally admitted as an integral part of the general right of workers and their organisations to defend their economic interests and that, while strikes may be temporarily restricted by law-or, as in the present case, be officially discouraged and disapproved-until existing means of negotiation, conciliation or arbitration have been exhausted, such restriction or discouragement should be accompanied by appropriate, impartial and expeditious procedures of conciliation and arbitration, to which those concerned are parties at all stages. The Committee, therefore, recommends the Governing Body to note these conclusions, to bring them to the notice of the Polish Government, and to express the hope that it will consider taking appropriate measures to give effect to them, and that it will make clear to the workers that, while it is desirable that disputes should be settled wherever possible without recourse to direct action, workers in Poland, if they do consider it necessary to exercise the right to strike which the Government says is ensured by law, may do so without any fear of reprisal on the part of the authorities.
• Allegations relating to the Poznan Demonstration
  101. 101 The principal allegations relate directly to the public demonstration staged by the striking workers and to the action taken by the authorities. According to the complainants, the workers formed a procession, which marched towards the centre of Poznan, as a demonstration in support of their demands and in protest against their oppression ; although virtually the whole populace eventually joined in, it was a peaceful demonstration. The demonstration spread to the whole town and from this point on, state the complainants, it is difficult to reconstruct with absolute precision and absolute certainty the events which took place ; according to reports from witnesses, groups of demonstrators went to the town hall, to the Regional People's Council Headquarters and to the Mlynska prison, where they obtained firearms and released the prisoners ; one group passed before the public security office and were shot at from the building ; general fighting followed and then the army and tanks arrived. The Government states that the demonstration began as a workers' demonstration ; the security forces had been ordered not to use firearms against the workers and this position was maintained even after armed bands had formed and started to attack buildings and loot shops. The Government agrees that one section of the crowd took firearms from the Mlynska prison and liberated the prisoners. Where the accounts differ most widely is with reference to the fact that, whereas the reports received by the complainants indicate that the events took a sanguinary turn because security police opened fire on demonstrators passing in front of their building, the Government states that murder and looting broke out, including the " bestial " murder of a policeman, and a band reinforced by convicts released from the prison attacked the public security office, after which general fighting broke out.
  102. 102 In Case No. 28 relating to Jamaica the Committee held that the right of workers to organise meetings is an essential element of trade union rights and that measures taken to ensure public order should not result in preventing unions from organising meetings during labour disputes. In Case No. 40 relating to Tunisia the Committee reaffirmed that the right to hold public meetings is an important aspect of trade union rights. In Case No. 62 relating to the Netherlands the Committee took the view that while the right of meeting is a basic requisite of the free exercise of trade union rights, the organisers must observe the general provisions relating to public meetings applicable to all. It has been the practice of the Committee to differentiate between demonstrations for purely trade union objects, which it has regarded as an exercise of a trade union right, and demonstrations for other purposes. In cases in which the dispersal of public meetings (or demonstrations) by the police has involved loss of life, the Committee has attached special importance to the circumstances being fully investigated by an immediate and independent special inquiry and to the regular legal procedure being followed to determine the justification and responsibility for the action taken by the police.
  103. 103 In the present case the Committee, noting that it is a matter of common ground between the parties that the strike and holding of a demonstration by the workers in Poznan constituted a lawful exercise of their rights in support of economic and occupational demands, emphasises once again the importance which it attaches to the principle that the right to demonstrate peacefully, and with due regard for public order, in support of occupational demands is an essential element in trade union rights. In view of the conflicting evidence available with respect to the precise sequence of events which took place some little time after the demonstration at Poznan had become general and, especially, with respect to the critical period when the demonstration changed to a battle in which many lives were lost, the Committee considers that it is not in a position to pronounce as to the respective responsibilities of the parties involved in initiating the particular actions which led to bloodshed but reaffirms that in such cases it is especially important that the circumstances should be fully investigated by an immediate and independent special inquiry, attended by regular legal procedure, to determine the justification and responsibility for the action taken by the security forces. The Committee recommends the Governing Body to note this conclusion and to bring it to the notice of the Polish Government.
• Allegations relating to Subsequent Reprisals against Strikers and Demonstrators
  104. 104 The complainants ask the I.L.O to intervene to secure the release of strikers arrested at Poznan and an assurance that no victimisation of the Poznan workers will be allowed and that any victimisation which has occurred will be redressed. The Government states that no one has been arrested for taking part in the strike or in the demonstration itself but that arrests have been confined to those who, in its view, committed criminal acts which transformed the character of the demonstration. The Government adds that the Attorney-General has submitted to the judicial authorities a proposal to liberate all persons held on charges other than those of murder and looting.
  105. 105 In these circumstances, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to request the Government of Poland to keep it informed as to the action taken on the proposal stated to have been made by the Polish Attorney-General and as to the outcome of the proceedings taken in the case of those persons who are not included in the liberation terms of that proposal.