Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 218, Novembre 1982

416. The Committee has already examined these cases on several occasions and most recently at its February 1982 meeting, when it presented an interim report to the Governing Body. The Industrial and General Workers' Union of Ceylon (IGWU) presented comments in a communication of 20 March 1982. The Trade Unions International of Workers of the Building, Wood and Building Materials Industries (UIBWM) did likewise on 7 September 1982. The Government sent its observations in a communication of 31 August 1982.

1. 416. The Committee has already examined these cases on several occasions and most recently at its February 1982 meeting, when it presented an interim report to the Governing Body. The Industrial and General Workers' Union of Ceylon (IGWU) presented comments in a communication of 20 March 1982. The Trade Unions International of Workers of the Building, Wood and Building Materials Industries (UIBWM) did likewise on 7 September 1982. The Government sent its observations in a communication of 31 August 1982.
2. 417. Sri Lanka has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), but has ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 418. The complainants referred to the victimisation of workers during and after a general strike which lasted from 11 July to 9 August 1980, in particular the passing of state of emergency regulations outlawing strikes, the mass dismissal of several thousand strikers, the arrest without trial of workers, including five named trade union leaders, suspension of the check-off system, the closure of trade union premises, refusal to negotiate with public employees' unions and the death of a trade union official.
2. 419. After taking note of the replies, observations and information communicated by the Government on the various aspects of the case, the Committee, at its February 1982 meeting, recommended the Governing Body to approve the following interim conclusions:
   • "(a) As regards the allegations relating to the death of a trade unionist, the removal of the check-off facility and the closure of trade union offices housed in public buildings during and after the July 1980 general strike, the Committee considers that these aspects of the case did not call for further examination.
   • "(b) As regards the alleged mass dismissal of strikers and refusal to re-employ thousands of them, while noting that many appeals obtained relief in this connection, the Committee draws the Government's attention to the fact that the imposition of excessively severe sanctions, such as mass dismissal of workers on account of their participation in a strike, cannot be conducive to the development of harmonious industrial relations and urges it to keep the Committee informed of any further reinstatements or relief which might be granted to the dismissed workers in the framework of independent judicial appeals.
   • "(c) As regards the court cases pending against five named trade union leaders since June 1980, the Committee would recall the right of all detained persons to receive a fair trial at the earliest possible moment and requests the Government to inform it as soon as the courts' decisions are handed down, providing copies of the judgements.
   • "(d) As regards the alleged withholding of annual benefits which were due to the strikers, the Committee would generally recall that the development of harmonious labour relations could be impaired by an inflexible attitude being adopted in the application of sanctions to workers who participate in strike action."

B. The complainants' comments

1. 420. Since then, the Industrial and General Workers' Union (IGWU) has protested, in a communication of 20 March 1982, against some of the Government's replies which it considers false.
2. 421. According to the Union, no trade union premises closed since the July 1980 strike have been given back to the unions concerned. Moreover, the assertion that the court had found the death of the trade union leader, D. Somapala, to be accidental was not correct.
3. 422. The complainant Union goes on to say that the strikers have suffered extreme hardship under the state of emergency law ending the strike. Two years have passed since the strike took place and absolutely no measure has been taken by the Government with regard to the workers in the private sector who took part in the strike and have still not been reinstated in their jobs.
4. 423. In this respect, the complainant Union has noted with interest that the Committee on Freedom of Association, in its 214th Report, drew the Government's attention to the fact that the imposition of excessively severe sanctions, such as mass dismissals of workers on account of their participation in a strike, could not be conducive to the development of harmonious industrial relations. The complainant Union has also noted with interest that the Committee stated that it could not escape the conclusion in this case that trade unionists had been victimised on account of their trade union action and were subject to anti-union discrimination in contravention of Article 2 of Convention No. 98.
5. 424. The Trade Unions International of Workers of the Building, Wood and Building Materials Industries has confirmed that 3,000 building workers are still jobless: the Chairman of its affiliated union in Sri Lanka having stated in a letter of 12 July 1982 that the Government was continuing to prevent the re-engagement of the persons concerned.

C. The Government's reply

1. 425. In its letter of 31 August 1982, the Government states that it did not claim, in the reply previously sent to the ILO, that the government premises where union offices were located had been given back to the unions concerned.
2. 426. The Government goes on to reiterate its previous statement that the court which conducted the judicial inquiry into the death of Mr. D. Somapala concluded that his death was accidental.
3. 427. Finally, on the question of the dismissals, the Government again states that the workers who lost their jobs as a result of the operation of the law did so for absenting themselves from their workplaces while the emergency law was in force. According to the Government, since these workers deliberately broke the law, they must suffer the consequences. The Government specifies that the courts did not uphold any appeal for reinstatement and rejects the allegation that mass dismissals took place for strike offences. On the other hand, it indicates that those who provided their employers with explanations for their absence, for reasons having nothing to do with violation of the state of emergency regulations, have been reinstated. According to it, the process is continuing and more and more workers are being reinstated or re-employed as job vacancies are available.
4. 428. Regarding the arrest of trade union leaders named by the complainants, the Government states that these persons will be tried by the High Court of Colombo, as they have already been found guilty by the lower court. None of them is still in detention, the Government adds, and most of them have returned to their political activities. The Government assures the Committee that it will communicate a copy of the judgements concerning them as soon as they are handed down.

D. The Committee's conclusions

1. 429. Generally speaking, the Committee takes note of the complainants' further comments and the Government's recent replies regarding the various outstanding aspects of the case.
2. 430. More particularly on the questions of the closure of the trade union premises and the death of Mr. Somapala, the Committee notes the complainants' dissatisfaction with the Government's reply.
3. 431. With regard to the closure of trade union premises, the Committee recalls that, in its written reply of January 1982, the Government had stated: "All trade union property found in offices located within state premises [was] taken over by the officials of the respective unions. The offices of these unions continue to function". The Committee had therefore assumed that the trade union offices located within state premises were continuing to function.
4. 432. Since the Government, in its reply of 31 August 1982, states that it did not claim that the government premises where union offices were located had been given back to the respective unions, the Committee can only reiterate its previous requests and conclusions concerning the occupation of trade union premises set out in paragraph 338 of its 208th Report. It therefore recalls that the right to protection of trade union property is one of those civil liberties which is essential to the normal exercise of trade union rights and again requests the Government to consider reopening the premises for the use of the trade unions and, in particular, those of the 18 unions listed by the Trade Unions International of Public and Allied Employees in its written communication of 13 April 1981.
5. 433. With regard to the death of the trade union leader, Mr. D. Somapala, the Committee can only note the contradictory nature of the statements of the complainants and the Government. The Committee recalls that, according to the Ceylon Federation of Labour in its written communication of 29 July 1980, Mr. Somapala's death occurred on 5 June 1980, at a time when the Government had organised a counter-picket to provide an excuse for hired men to attack the workers' strike pickets, the clash resulting in the death of a government employee affiliated to the Public Service Trade Union Federation. According to the Government, this death was purely accidental. In the absence of more accurate information, the Committee can only deplore the death of the trade unionist, Mr. D. Somapala, in the context of a labour dispute.
6. 434. As regards the reinstatement of many strikers dismissed following the July-August 1980 labour dispute, while noting that the process of reinstatement of certain workers who did not strike is under way, the Committee regrets that, as the Government itself acknowledges, the courts have not upheld any appeal for reinstatement by the workers who lost their jobs under the emergency law outlawing strikes. Recalling the importance which it attaches to the right to strike as a legitimate means of defending the occupational interests of workers, the Committee again invites the Government to re-examine the situation in order to try to improve the climate of industrial relations.
7. 435. Concerning Gunasena Mahanama, Alavi Moulana, Vasudeva Nanayakkara, Darunaratha Bandara and I.G.D. Dharmasekara, the five arrested trade union leaders, the Committee notes that they have been found guilty by the lower court, that their case will be tried by the High Court of Colombo and that the Government will communicate the judgements as soon as they are handed down. The Committee also notes the Government's assurance that these persons have been released. In these circumstances, the Committee trusts that it will receive a copy of the judgements concerning these five trade union leaders as soon as they are handed down. It requests the Government to inform it whether the released persons have been able to return to their trade union activities.