Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 230, Novembre 1983

1. 592. The complaints are contained in communications from the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU), the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and the World Confederation of Labour (WCL) of 3, 6 and 19 May 1983. The WFTU sent additional information in a communication dated 27 May 1983; the ICFTU did likewise in communications dated 27 and 31 May 1983. The Government replied with two communications, dated 13 September and 12 October 1983.
2. 593. Chile has ratified neither the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), nor the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainants' allegations

1. 594. The complainants allege that on 30 April 1983, the headquarters of the National Trade Union of Independent Craftsmen in Santiago was broken into by seven armed civilians without a warrant, who proceeded to arrest 15 union members who were meeting to prepare the forthcoming International Labour Day; those arrested included María Lenina del Canto and Beatriz Salas, leaders of the Manual Workers' Union in the Metropolitan area, Luis Fuentealba, member of the Executive of the National Trade Union Co-ordinating Body (CNS), Ricardo Días, member of the CNS National Youth Department and Richard Molina Morgado, employee at the Workers' Church Movement (Vicariá Pastoral Obrera).
2. 595. The complainants allege that the authorities refused the Democratic Union of Workers permission to hold a public gathering to commemorate Labour Day in the Don Bosco hall; they also refused to grant permission to trade union organisations such as the National Trade Union Co-ordinating Council to hold a cultural event in the Plaza de los Artesanos in Santiago, although they had carried out the necessary formalities to obtain a permit.
3. 596. According to the complainants, there were many incidents throughout the country on 1 May, connected with the various events called by the Chilean Trade Union Movement, which were violently put down by the security forces and the police. For instance, the workers who had gathered peacefully in the Plaza de los Artesanos were violently repressed by police forces and para-military groups armed with blunt and sharp instruments, on the pretext that the meeting had been banned. In this particular case, the complainants point out that a group of between 30 and 50 civilians, armed with lassos with balls (bolas) and sharp instruments and working in co-operation with the uniformed police, proceeded to break up the peaceful meeting of workers by attacking them, as well as several journalists who were detained, beaten or assaulted. The complainants mention that this group had already intervened on 2 December of the previous year and that it was the object of an allegation contained in Case No. 11701 being examined at the moment.
4. 597. According to the ICFTU, 78 workers were arrested, whereas the WFTU claim that the number arrested reached 300. These included Ricardo Calderón, member of the CNS Youth Department, Raúl Areos, metallurgical trade union leader, who was also wounded, Reinaldo Vallejos and Arnaldo Collados, both theatre artists. Furthermore, many workers were wounded, including the doctor Manuel Almeyda - seriously injured - and the trade union leader and Vice-President of the Confederation of Metallurgical Workers, Manuel Arcos. The acting President of the Confederation of Building Workers, Sergio Troncoso, was also savagely attacked whilst he was giving a talk.
5. 598. Furthermore, the complainants allege that on 16 May, the Ministry of the Interior submitted a request to the Appeals Court that ten members of the Executive Committee of the Confederation of Copper Workers, accused of disturbing the public order, should be brought to trial for various violations of the State Security Act. The accused are: the President of the Confederation, Rodolfo Seguel Molina, and the trade union leaders Roberto Carvajal, Carolos Ogalde, Manuel Rodríguez, Luis Morgado, Raúl Montecinos, Roberto Guerra, Rubén Rivera, José Pérez and Luis Abarca Quinteros. The complainants claim that the charge was made because the Confederation of Copper Workers called a strike for 11 May 1983 and then renounced it in favour of a National Protest Day. In connection with the protest of 11 May, the Ministry of the Interior also summoned the trade union leaders Hernol Flores, Eduardo Ríos and Federico Mujica of the National Association of Employees of State Undertakings (ANEF), the Democratic Union of Workers (UDT) and the Confederation of Private Employees of Chile (CEPCH), respectively.
6. 599. The complainants point out that during the National Protest Day of 11 May, the Chilean security services caused the death of two people: Víctor René Rodríguez, 15 years of age, who died as a result of wounds received from a bullet fired from a car by several policemen who were confronting a group of demonstrators; Víctor Fuente Sepúlveda, 21 years of age, who died in the same way. Furthermore, the violent police repression ended in hundreds of arrests (more than 500 according to the WCL) and tens of wounded.
7. 600. Finally, the complainants allege that the State-run firm CODELCO lodged an appeal with the courts to remove trade union leaders working in various pits from office and to dismiss them. The complainants specifically refer to José Escobar, Raúl Montecino, Sergio Barriga, Nelson Rivera and Sabino Páez (from the El Salvador pit), Sergio Neira, José Pérez, Rafael Guitiérrez and Ricardo Opazo (from the Andina pit), Ramiro Vargas, Carlos Ogalde, Fredy Hinojosa and Nicanor Araya (from the Chuquicamata pit), and Armando Garrido, Manuel Rodríguez, Eugenio López and Rodolfo Seguel (from the El Teniente pit).

B. The Government's reply

1. 601. With respect to the events which occurred on 1 May 1983 in the Plaza de los Artesanos, the Government states that the public meeting had not been authorised by the administrative authorities, precisely to avoid disturbances in public law and order; furthermore, the self-proclaimed organisation, the National Trade Union Co-ordinating Body, had not wanted to set itself up in compliance with the law and therefore lacks the representativity to request permission to hold public meetings. If freedom of association is to be valid, it must respect legality; since the self-proclaimed co-ordinating council failed to do this, it is not an occupational workers' association and, as such, lacks the necessary representativity.
2. 602. Concerning the allegation that a group of civilians violently broke up an unauthorised public meeting on 1 May in the Plaza de los Artesanos, the Government states that the courts were notified of these events; after carrying out a full investigation, they were unable, unfortunately, to obtain the expected positive results. The Government condemns the aforementioned acts of violence' and declares that it will deal severely with those found responsible by the courts.
3. 603. The Government adds that Luis Fuentealba was arrested on 30 April 1983 as he had been caught in the process of planning to subvert public order on 1 May. After giving evidence, he was released on 3 May. On 7 July 1983, he was arrested for having infringed the State Security Act and brought before the court. The Appeals Court of Santiago appointed one of its members to set up an investigation, resulting in Lawsuit No. 42-83, which was finally stayed and he was released. The Government points out that Mr. Fuentealba's arrest and prosecution were in no way related to his trade union activities or to his involvement in the ceremony of 1 May 1983.
4. 604. With respect to the alleged arrest of 300 persons, the Government declares that this accusation is totally devoid of truth.
5. 605. Concerning the prosecution of four persons for their role in the events which occurred on 11 May 1983, the Government states that the members of the Executive Committee of the Confederation of Copper Workers organised a national protest movement against the Government which included bringing to a halt or suspending public services, as well as production, transport and trade. The above-mentioned protest ended with various acts of vandalism, resulting in considerable damage to private property, grave disturbances in law and order and paralysed national activities. The Ministry of the interior, exercising one of the powers conferred upon it by section 26 of the State Security Act, in force since 1958, requested the Appeals Court of Santiago to appoint one of its members to set up an investigation into these occurrences and penalise those allegedly responsible for having committed acts of violence aimed at disturbing public law and order and interfering with the normal running of national activities. The Court of Appeals of Santiago (a civil, ordinary court, independent of the Government), complied with this demand and appointed Hernán Cereceda Bravo as Public Prosecutor. The latter, after carrying out initial investigations, submitted the accused, Rodolfo Seguel Molina, Roberto Carvajal Mieres, Manuel Rodríguez Echeverri and José Pérez Ahumada, to trial for having allegedly committed offences. Later, acting upon the defence counsel's request, he freed them on bail, which was also confirmed by the Court of Appeals. Nevertheless, on 23 September 1983, as a proof of its good intentions, the Government waived the lawsuit brought against the leaders of the Confederation of Copper Workers. On the same day, the Substitute Magistrate of the Court of Appeals declared a general dismissal of the proceedings.
6. 606. With respect to the allegation that members of the Chilean security services had caused the death of two people, including that of a minor of 15 years of age, Víctor Rodríguez Célis, during the events which occurred on 11 May 1983, the Government states that the 14th Court of Criminal investigation is looking into the responsibility of the alleged offenders, as the mother of the deceased has submitted a complaint of homicidal offence. As a result, the ordinary system of justice will deliberate on this crime. The Government does not consider that this aspect of the case constitutes in any way an alleged violation of freedom of association.
7. 607. Concerning the dismissal of workers by the firm CODELCO, the Government points out that this firm had cancelled the labour contracts of various workers, including several trade union leaders, and that it had acted within the law. The Government declares that the persons concerned had brought an action against the firm, demanding that they be reinstated, and that the courts had not yet pronounced a sentence on the matter. However, the firm CODELCO, at the request of the Government and the trade union leaders, has agreed to set up committees to examine the reinstatement of the dismissed workers.
8. 608. The Government concludes by stating that the various aspects contained in this case do not constitute a violation of the freedom of association and that the various measures the authorities have been obliged to adopt are only intended to safeguard the peace and order within the country, in accordance with the Political Constitution of the Republic.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 609. The Committee notes that, in the present case, the allegations concern the breaking into a trade union's headquarters and the arrest of trade union leaders and trade unionists who were meeting there on the eve of 1 May 1983, as well as the refusal to grant permission, both to the Democratic Union of Workers and the National Trade Union Co-ordinating Body (CNS), to organise public events on 1 May; the allegations also concern the violent repressive measures taken against the workers who had congregated in the Place de los Artesanos to attend a public meeting of the CNS, measures which had been carried out by the police force in co-operation with the para-military group and which resulted in many persons being wounded and a considerable number of arrests, including also that of trade union leaders. The complainants also allege that the trade union leaders of the Confederation of Copper Workers had been brought to trial for having organised National Protest Day on 11 May 1983; furthermore, they allege the death of two persons as a result of shot wounds received from officers in the security services who were confronting a group of demonstrators during this day of protest.
2. (1) Allegations concerning 1 May
3. 610. With respect to the breaking in of the headquarters of the National Trade Union of Independent Craftsmen on 30 April 1983 by seven armed civilians without a warrant and the arrest of 15 members, including four trade union leaders, as they were meeting to prepare the International Labour Day, the Committee notes that the Government only referred to the arrest of the trade union leader Luis Fuentealba, who, it declared, had been caught on 30 April 1983 in the process of inciting the subversion of public law and order on 1 May and that, once he had made statements, he was released on 3 May.' In this respect, the Committee regrets that this trade union leader had been held in detention for four days only to make statements. The Committee also regrets that the Government has not replied either to the allegation concerning the breaking in of the headquarters of the trade union in question or to that concerning the arrest of 14 trade union leaders and trade unionists. The Committee therefore draws the Government's attention to the fact that the right of the inviolability of union premises also necessarily implies that the public authorities cannot enter such premises without having obtained a legal warrant to do so. It also draws the Government's attention to the fact that the detention of trade union leaders or trade unionists for trade union activities, even if this is only for a short period, constitutes an infringement of the principles of freedom of association. The Committee asks the Government to inform it if the trade union leaders and trade unionists in question have already been released.
4. 611. With respect to the allegation concerning the authorities' refusal to allow public trade union meetings to be held on 1 May, especially the meeting called by the CNS in the Plaza de los Artesanos, the Committee notes that permission was refused on the grounds that it might disturb public law and order and that the CNS lacked the representativity to hold public meetings. In this respect, the Committee considers that as the CNS is an organisation which aims at promoting and defending workers' interests, it should enjoy the right to organise public meetings and demonstrations. In this context, the Committee wishes to point out that it itself has recognised the CNS as a trade union organisation on several occasions and declared its complaints receivable. On previous occasions, the Committee has expressed the opinion that if the authorities decide to ban a demonstration in order to avoid disturbances, they should strive, to reach an agreement with the organisers of the demonstration in order to allow it to be held in some other place where there would be no fear of disturbances.' As there is no evidence that the authorities held a dialogue of this nature with the organisers of the public demonstration (which, according to the complainants, also included trade union organisations independent from the CNS), the Committee considers that by not allowing the public demonstration to be held in the Plaza de los Artesanos on 1 May, the Government restricted trade union rights. Bearing in mind that the Government did not reply to the allegation concerning the refusal to grant the Democratic Union of Workers permission to hold another public meeting on 1 May, the Committee reiterates the above-mentioned principles and considerations.
5. 612. Concerning the repression of the public demonstration on 1 May in the Plaza de los Artesanos, the Committee deplores the serious physical assaults on workers, trade union leaders and journalists, some of who were seriously injured.
6. 613. The Committee expresses its concern that the Government acknowledges that a group of civilians took part in the violent breaking up of a public meeting on 1 May in the Plaza de los Artesanos, even more so in view of the fact that, according to the complainants, this para-military group acted in co-operation with the police and that members of the same group had already acted in the same way and in the same place on 2 December 1982. The Committee notes that this case has been referred to the courts and requests the Government to send it the results of the trial held on this matter.
7. 614. Although the Committee notes that, according to the Government, the allegation that 300 persons had been arrested is totally devoid of truth, it observes that the Government gave no specific information on the number of arrested. In these circumstances, the Committee can only deplore that the exercise of the right to demonstrate, an essential component of trade union rights, was repressed by means of wide-scale arrests and serious physical assaults. The Committee requests the Government to inform it if the persons arrested for having taking part in the demonstrations on 1 May have already been released.
8. (2) Allegations concerning the National Protest Day of 11 May 1983
9. 615. With respect to the allegation concerning the trial of the leaders of the Confederation of Copper Workers for having organised and taken part in the National Protest Day on 11 May 1983, the Committee further notes the Government's statements and especially observes that it had released those concerned on bail. The Committee notes that on 23 September 1983, the Government withdrew the suit against them.
10. 616. The Committee deplores the death of two persons during the day of national protest as a result of shots fired by the Chilean security services. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the 14th Court of Criminal Investigation is looking into the responsibility of the presumed offenders and requests the Government to keep it informed on the results of the proceedings.
11. 617. The Committee regrets that the Government did not reply to the allegation that during the National Protest Day on 11 May 1983, police repression resulted in hundreds of arrests and dozens of wounded. The Committee requests the Government to send its comments on this matter.