Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 125, 1971

1. 51. The complaint of the Latin American Federation of Workers of the Construction and Wood Industry was contained in a communication dated 17 November 1970 addressed to the Director-General of the ILO. The complaint was communicated to the Government for observations on 4 December 1970 and when the case first came before the Committee at its session in February 1971, the Committee decided to adjourn its examination of the case since the Government's observations had not been received. The Government's observations were received in the form of a letter dated 15 March 1971 addressed to the Director-General of the ILO.
2. 52. El Salvador has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 53. The complaint was signed by Mr. Marcelo Luvecce, General Secretary of the Latin American Federation of Workers of the Construction and Wood Industry, who, the complaint states, on 1 October 1970, in his official capacity, was on mission in accordance with a plan of technical assistance for the member organisations of the Federation. This mission began in Guatemala, from where Mr. Luvecce proceeded to Honduras, where he stayed until 14 October 1970. On that day, the complaint continues, Mr. Luvecce flew to Ilopango airport in El Salvador, where, upon showing his passport, he was told that the Government had issued instructions not to permit him to enter the country. The complaint adds that his travel ticket was taken from him and he was deported to Costa Rica, the nearest country he could enter without a visa. The complaint points out that Mr. Luvecce, being a Chilean citizen, had no need of a visa to enter El Salvador, which he had visited on two previous occasions.
2. 54. The complaint explains that the purpose of Mr. Luvecce's visit to El Salvador was connected with technical assistance to the two member organisations of the Federation which had invited him. Furthermore, as Secretary of Workers' Action of the Latin American Federation of Christian Trade Unions, he was to visit and make contact with comrades from the national organisation affiliated to this federation.
3. 55. The complaint continues that Mr. Luvecce protested to officials at the airport and pointed out that their action constituted an infringement of freedom of association. In addition to being mistreated, Mr. Luvecce's technical assistance plans were upset as a result of his arrival in other countries being advanced.
4. 56. The Government, in its reply, states that the Minister of Labour and Social Welfare was informed of this complaint and a detailed inquiry was subsequently carried out. As a result of this inquiry the Government states that it views with great concern the incident reported on behalf of Mr. Luvecce. The Government admits that Mr. Luvecce may indeed have been mistreated as alleged but that the matter must have arisen solely in connection with immigration formalities. The Government deplores and regrets that such an incident should have been interpreted as an interference in the exercise of freedom of association, a principle which, the Government states, it has accepted as one of the bases of its policy of peace and social harmony.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 57. The Committee notes the Government's statement that Mr. Luvecce's inability to enter El Salvador must have arisen solely in connection with immigration formalities. The Committee also notes, however, that no explanation is given by the Government in reply to the statement that Mr. Luvecce was informed that the Government had issued instructions not to permit him to enter the country. Nor does the Government specify the immigration formalities with which Mr. Luvecce seems to have failed to comply.
2. 58. The present case concerns an official of an international trade union organisation who apparently wished to make contact with two affiliated national member organisations. In previous cases of this kind, the Committee has applied the principle that the right of national workers' organisations to affiliate with international organisations-a right embodied in Article 5 of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87)-carries with it the right of national unions to make contact with the international organisations with which they are affiliated and to take part in the work of such organisations. The right of affiliation is not, in the present case, in question. The Committee has, in the past, considered that it was not competent to deal with measures deriving from national legislation on aliens unless these measures had direct repercussions on the exercise of trade union rights. The measures taken by the authorities in this case could, in the opinion of the Committee, indeed have repercussions on the exercise of trade union rights. The Committee considers that in order to avoid the danger of these rights being restricted the authorities should check up on each specific case as quickly as possible and should aim-on the basis of objective criteria-at ascertaining whether or not there exist facts which might have a real effect on public order and security.