Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 259, Novembre 1988

1. 83. In a communication dated 10 June 1987 the National Seamen, Ports and
   • General Workers' Union of Liberia (NSP-GWU) presented a complaint of
   • violations of trade union rights against the Government of Liberia. The
   • Government sent its observations on the case in a communication dated 4 May
2. 1988 and received in the ILO on 19 July 1988.
3. 84. Liberia has ratified both the Freedom of Association and Protection of
   • the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and
   • Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainant's allegations

1. 85. In its letter of 10 June 1987 signed by Mr. T.P. Mooney, Vice-President
   • for Administration, the NSP-GWU alleges interference by the Labour Ministry
   • authorities in its internal affairs, namely in the outcome of the election of
   • its president.
2. 86. The complainant states that, in accordance with its by-laws and
   • constitution, the union's general convention was held on 29 August 1986. The
   • Director of Trade Union Affairs of the Ministry of Labour supervised the
   • convention in accordance with the Labour Practices Law of Liberia. Recognition
   • and other relevant documents were then handed over to the legitimate
   • leadership of the union. Indeed, from copies of letters appended to the
   • complaint, it appears that, on 1 September 1986, the union's president elect
   • submitted to the Labour Ministry authorities the documents required for
   • recognition (list of names of elected officers and minutes of the meeting). On
3. 11 September, the Minister in turn informed the President of Liberia that the
   • results of the union's election clearly showed that the union members did not
   • want a certain Mr. G.T. Tarbah as president (who received zero votes) and
   • preferred Mr. N. Gibson (who received all the votes of the 30 delegates
   • attending the convention). The Minister pointed out that under the legislation
   • in force, any candidate to the election proceedings may file with the Ministry
   • of Labour written objections to the conduct of the election within 24 hours
   • after receiving the tally of votes; any person or organisation not a party to
   • the election proceedings may file written objections to the conduct of the
   • election within five calendar days after the tally of votes has been received
   • by the parties to the election. In addition, he indicated that if no
   • objections is filed within the allowed time, or after all objections have been
   • finally determined, the Ministry of Labour shall certify the party receiving
   • the valid votes of the majority of members voting in the election, said
   • certification being final and conclusive and not subject to further
   • objections. Since the Ministry of Labour had not received any written
   • objections from any party, the Minister stated that Mr. N. Gibson was
   • recognised as the legitimate president of the union, in keeping with the
   • decision of its members.
4. 87. The complainant states that it therefore came as a surprise when, on 13
   • October 1986, the President of Liberia replied to the Minister of Labour,
   • noting with concern that, while an NSP-GWU complaint to the President's Office
   • was still being investigated by his legal adviser, a handful of union members
   • had been able to hold an election. The President's reply, a copy of which is
   • supplied by the complainant, states that, on the basis of the report resulting
   • from this investigation and the agreement of merger between the two factions
   • that were before the Liberian Supreme Court, the legitimate president of the
     • NSP-GWU is Mr. G. Tarbah. The President directed the Minister to recognise Mr.

G. Tarbah as the union's president and the Minister, by letter of 20 October,

• accordingly did so.
  88. 88 The complainant points out that the original recognition of Mr. N.
• Gibson's presidency has still not been revoked. Lastly, it provides a copy of
• a Supreme Court Certificate, dated 19 December 1984 and signed by the Acting
• Clerk of Court, to the effect that George T. Tarbah had been convicted of
• theft of property and was sentenced on that date to three years' imprisonment
• with hard labour.
• B. The Government's reply
  89. 89 In its reply of 4 May 1988, the Government denies the allegations
• concerning the results of the NSP-GWU convention of 29 August 1986 and the
• granting of a letter of recognition from the Ministry. It states that, while
• it is true that a convention was held on that date with the Ministry of Labour
• being invited to monitor it, the meeting was not held in accordance with the
• union's by-laws and constitution because, as the minutes of the convention
• show, representatives from only three of the NSP-GWU's 13 membership regions
• (the counties of Nimba, Grand Bassa and Montserrado) were present and only 30
• delegates from the three counties in fact voted at the election. Moreover,
• certain members of the union had filed a complaint against Mr. Mooney (who was
• later elected Vice-President for Administration) and others, and this
• complaint was under investigation when he held the convention in question.
• Therefore, states the Government, the meeting was void from the beginning.
  90. 90 As regards the allegation that the President of the Republic ordered the
• Ministry of Labour to recognise Mr. Tarbah as president of the union contrary
• to the election results, the Government denies this, stressing that there was
• no valid election since the convention was invalid. Moreover, it claims that
• the Ministry of Labour only received a letter calling its attention to the
• fact that a complaint had been filed by certain union members against Mr.
• Mooney and others and the investigation into the complaint should have been
• completed before any election took place.
  91. 91 As for the allegation that the Ministry's letter of recognition had not
• been revoked by the authorities, the Government states that, since the
• convention was void from the beginning, the letter of recognition reflecting
• the election results was also null and void. According to the Government, the
• legitimate leaders of the union were duly informed after it was discovered
• that the convention had not respected the required quorum.
  92. 92 In conclusion, the Government points out that it has ratified
• Conventions Nos. 87 and 98 and has given effect to the provisions of these
• Conventions through its laws and national practice.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 93. The Committee notes that the allegations in this case centre on
2. government interference in the internal affairs of the complainant union by
3. refusing to accept the results of the union's 1986 election of officers. The
4. Committee takes note of the Government's denial of interference, based on the
5. fact that the elections in question were void on two grounds: (1) a complaint
6. was being investigated by the presidential legal adviser into one group of the
7. union's members headed by Mr. Mooney, so he ought not to have convened a
8. meeting; and (2) under the union's by-laws a voting quorum had not been
9. obtained for the election. The Committee observes that an attachment to the
10. complaint refers vaguely to a merger agreement between "the two factions" but
11. that no mention is made of this in the Government's more recent observations,
12. inferring that no merger ever came about.
13. 94. In past cases when the Committee has been presented with situations in
14. which government authorities appear to have interfered in election results by
15. favouring or recognising one internal group over another, the Committee has
16. recalled (See, for example, 243rd Report, Case No. 1271 (Honduras), paras. 435
17. and 438.) that, in ratifying Convention No. 87, a government undertakes to
18. leave it to workers' organisations themselves to draw up their own
19. constitutions and rules and to elect their representatives in full freedom. In
20. the present case, an examination of the labour legislation in question shows
21. that section 4102 of the Labour Practices Law provides for the supervision by
22. the administrative authorities of trade union elections and the Committee
23. notes that the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and
24. Recommendations has criticised this discrepancy with Article 3 of Convention
25. No. 87 for many years. In its 1988 observation on Liberia's observance of that
26. Convention, the Committee of Experts noted that, according to the Government,
27. a new draft Labour Code had taken account of the Committee's comments and it
28. urged the Government to ensure the adoption of the necessary amendments in the
29. near future. To date, however, it appears that there has been no repeal or
30. amendment of section 4102 of the law.
31. 95. The facts of this case show, however, that the government reaction was
32. of a different kind: Mr. Mooney's group (which lodged this complaint) received
33. a letter of recognition from the Ministry of Labour, but the Ministry
34. subsequently reversed its position after receiving orders from a higher
35. authority. Since neither the complainant nor the Government supplied a copy of
36. the union's by-laws concerning the requirements for convening meetings or
37. election quorums, the Committee is not in a position to comment on the alleged
38. procedural irregularities. In any case, the Committee notes that, since 20
39. October 1986 when the Ministry executed the President's orders, Mr. G. Tarbah
40. has represented the workers of Liberia at the 75th (1988) Session of the
41. International Labour Conference.
42. 96. It is not for the Committee to decide which group should represent the
43. members of the NSP-GWU but to examine whether there was government
44. interference with the workers' free choice of union officers. The Committee
45. has stated in many cases that it is not competent to make recommendations on
46. internal dissensions within a trade union organisation so long as the
47. Government does not intervene in a manner which might affect the exercise of
48. trade union rights and the normal functioning of an organisation. (See, for
49. example, 217th Report, Case No. 1086 (Greece), para. 93.) Moreover, in cases
50. of internal conflict, the Committee has pointed out that judicial intervention
51. would permit a clarification of the situation from the legal point of view for
52. the purpose of settling questions concerning the representation of the union
53. concerned; another possible means of settlement would be to appoint an
54. independent jointly-agreed-upon arbitrator to seek a joint solution and, if
55. necessary, to hold new elections. (See, for example, 172nd Report, Case No.
56. 865 (Ecuador), para. 75.)
57. 97. In the present case, the Committee notes that procedures exist to settle
58. questionable election results: section 4103(2) and (3) of the Labour Practices
59. Law empower, respectively, any union member to challenge the election of a
60. person convicted of a crime and to complain of violation of the law or the
61. rules of the union concerned as regards the election of officers and that such
62. a complaint can then be submitted by the labour authorities to the ordinary
63. courts for an order to set aside the invalid election and to direct the
64. conduct of a new one. In this connection, the Committee further notes that Mr.
65. G. Tarbah had been convicted in 1984 of theft of property and that, likewise,
66. an unspecified complaint against Mr. Mooney and his group was before the
67. presidential legal adviser in August 1986. Yet, despite the availability of
68. this appeals procedure, no complaint was filed against the Ministry's
69. recognition of Mr. G. Tarbah in October 1986. It therefore appears that the
70. membership has accepted Mr. Tarbah's presidency of the union, even if Mr.
71. Mooney's group did not.
72. 98. In any event, taking a pragmatic approach to this case, the Committee
73. notes from the legislation that national labour organisation elections should
74. take place every three years, so that the next election of officers for the
75. NSP-GWU is due in the second half of 1989. In the next elections, both groups
76. will be able to present candidates and, hopefully, the new Labour Code will
77. then be in force to ensure that the union's elections will not be supervised
78. or interfered with by the authorities. In the meantime, if the internal
79. dissension within the NSP-GWU starts to affect the functioning and
80. effectiveness of the union, the general membership will no doubt seek a
81. settlement along the lines suggested by the Committee above.