Rapport où le comité demande à être informé de l’évolution de la situation - Rapport No. 230, Novembre 1983

1. 376. The Committee examined this case in its November 1982 Session, when it presented an interim report to the Governing Body.
2. 377. Since then, both the complainant and the Government sent the ILO a copy of the Judgement of the Supreme Court with letters dated 18 May and 15 June 1983 respectively.
3. 378. Cyprus has ratified the Freedom of Association and the Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 379. The complaint presented in this case related to the refusal of the Registrar to register the new management of an elementary schoolteachers' union elected in May 1981. According to the Registrar, the refusal to register was due to the violations and omissions imputable to the former trade union management in carrying out the preparations for the elections.
2. 380. The Registrar also ordered the previous management to resume its duties and to organise new elections.
3. 381. The complainant appealed to the Supreme Constitutional Court against the interference of Government officials in the functioning and administration of its union and despite the fact that the Supreme Court issued a provisional order dated 25 February 1982 suspending the decision of the Registrar which ordered the previous management to resume its duties and carry out new elections, the authorities continued to recognise the previous management.
4. 382. The Government, in its communications of 31 May 1982, described the facts as follows: on 28 May 1981, trade union elections did in fact take place in various branches of the POED. The trade union representatives elected then proceeded to elect their trade union management on 28 June 1981. However, after members of the POED sent written communications contesting the validity of the elections in four out of the seven branches of the POED, the Registrar, before registering the new management, carried out, in accordance with section 16 of the Trade Union Regulations, an investigation into whether the elections had been carried out in conformity with the constitution of the organisation.
5. 383. The Registrar's investigation revealed several violations of provisions of the constitution in the elections in five of the branches;
   • (a) persons who were not members of the trade union organisation voted, in violation of article 3 of the constitution;
   • (b) more representatives were elected than the number provided for in the constitution, in violation of article 18(a);
   • (c) ballots which were invalid because the number of candidates exceeded the number provided for by the constitution were counted as valid, in violation of article 18(b) and (c).
6. 384. In view of these violations, the Registrar could not register the change of officers and ordered that the previous management should hold new elections. In addition, he informed the General Secretary of POED that the new management could not be registered on the grounds that it had been elected by representatives who had themselves not been properly elected.
7. 385. In November 1982, the Governing Body, on the Committee's recommendation, took note that the case was pending before the Supreme Constitutional Court, and that the Supreme Court was to rule on the substance of the case, namely whether the trade union elections in question were valid. In order to enable it to make recommendations in full knowledge of the case, the Committee requested the Government to send it a copy of the final decision of the Supreme Court as soon as possible.

B. Further developments

1. 386. Since then, both the complainant and the Government sent a copy of the decision of the Supreme Court dated 3 May 1983 which declared the decision of the Registrar of Trade Unions null and void on the ground of the Registrar's incompetence in the matter and the absence of legal grounds.
2. 387. In its communication of 15 June 1983, the Government states that the Attorney-General, acting on behalf of the Registrar, has filed an appeal to the Full Bench of the Supreme Court, and that the appeal is expected to be heard before the end of this year. In the meantime, the Registrar of Trade Unions has been advised by the Attorney-General to abide by the judgement of the Supreme Court.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 388. The Committee notes the Government's comments on the outstanding issues of this case, in particular the information that the Supreme Court declared the decision of the Registrar of Trade Unions null and void. The Committee notes, however, that the Court only considered the issue of the competence of the Registrar, but not the substance of the case, that is, whether the elections were valid or not. The Committee also notes that the Attorney-General has asked the Registrar to abide by the judgement, but acting on behalf of the Registrar he has filed an appeal to the Full Bench of the Supreme Court.
2. 389. In this connection, the Committee would recall that, in order to avoid the danger of serious limitations on the right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom, cases brought before courts by an administrative authority challenging the results of trade union elections should not - pending the final outcome of the judicial proceedings - have the effect of suspending the validity of such elections.' The Committee accordingly trusts that the elected workers' representatives can fulfil their duties in full freedom until the Full Bench of the Supreme Court decides the issue. It requests the Government to inform it of the outcome of this further appeal as soon as a decision has been handed down.