Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 284, Novembre 1992

1. 972. The complaint is contained in a communication of 10 April 1992, submitted jointly by the Peruvian General Confederation of Workers (CGTP), the Peruvian Confederation of Workers (CTP), the Peruvian Confederation of Revolutionary Workers (CTRP), the Peruvian National Confederation of Workers (CNT), the Peruvian Autonomous Confederation of Workers (CATP), the Peruvian Intersectoral Confederation of State Workers (CITE), the Confederation of Power and Light Workers, the Peruvian National Federation of Petroleum and Allied Workers (FENPETROL), the Peruvian National Federation of Water and Sewage Workers (FENTAP), the National Federation of the National Port Enterprise Workers (FENTENAPU), the Peruvian National Federation of Mining, Metal, Iron and Steel Workers (FNTMMSP), the Peruvian National Federation of Textile Workers (FNTTP), the Peruvian Federation of Pharmacy and Laboratory Workers, the Peruvian National Coalition of State Enterprise Trade Unions (CONSIDEP), the Peruvian Single Trade Union of Education Workers (SUTEP), the Peruvian Telephone Company Workers' Trade Union (STCTP), the National Airport Enterprise Workers' Trade Union (SITRACOR), the National Bank Workers' Trade Union (SINATBAN), the SEDAPAL Trade Union, the Bata Enterprise Workers' Trade Union, the Medical Association of the Peruvian Social Security Institute, the National Front for the Defence of Social Security, the Callao Cultural Centre of Workers, the Peruvian National Central of Retired Workers, and the Peruvian Graphics Federation. Subsequently, the complainant organisations sent additional information in communications of 6 June and 6 July 1992.
2. 973. The Government sent its observations in communications dated 11 May and 24 June 1992.
3. 974. Peru has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) as well as the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainants' allegations

1. 975. In their communication of 10 April 1992 the complainants allege that, on 5 April 1992, the Executive decided unilaterally and unconstitutionally to dissolve the National Parliament, to intervene in the Judiciary, the Constitutional Guarantees Court, the National Council of Judges, the Auditor General of the Republic, the National Electoral College and, in general, to restructure the State's entire apparatus. The Executive then concentrated all legislative authority in the Cabinet of Ministers and suspended all provisions of the National Constitution that might interfere with the intentions of the new Emergency and National Reconstruction Government, which was set up on 5 April 1992. The complainants add that on the same day the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the Peruvian Armed Forces, the chiefs of the army, navy and air force, and the General Director of the Peruvian National Police issued communication No. 001, in which they expressed their full support for the decision taken by the Executive, and at the same time intervened militarily in all state administrations, and took over the headquarters of political parties, trade unions and the media. That same night marked the beginning of the persecution and the detention of public authorities, members of Parliament, journalists, political and trade union leaders, some of whom were detained in military security facilities; a number of other people were later arrested and have disappeared. The complainants report that the detained trade union leaders include: Members of Parlaiment Luis Negreiros Criado (member of the national executive committee of the National Federation of the National Port Enterprise Workers) and César Barrera Bazán and Mrs. Soledad Lozano (officials of the Peruvian Single Trade Union of Education Workers); Mr. Olmedo Auris (trade union leader of the Single Trade Union of Education Workers) was likewise detained and subsequently disappeared. According to the complainants, Senator Hugo Blanco Galdos (Secretary of the Peruvian Confederation of Peasants) has found asylum in the Mexican Embassy. In addition, there have been military interventions in the premises of national, departmental and provincial trade unions of the Peruvian General Confederation of Workers (CGTP) and the Peruvian Confederation of Workers (CTP).
2. 976. The complainants add that, under the "state of emergency" declared by the Government and renewed every 60 days for a number of years now, the Government has suspended throughout the national territory all constitutional guarantees concerning the inviolability of the person and of the home, freedom of movement, the right of assembly, etc.
3. 977. The complainants note that the breakdown in the constitutional order is the culmination of a serious political, economic and institutional crisis, and that this situation can be traced back to the structural reform policies which have been applied unilaterally and in an authoritarian fashion, in response to the requirements imposed by international financial organisations. The current Government began the implementation of the most severe stabilisation and structural adjustment programme in the country's history, systematically violating the right of workers to engage in collective bargaining and to strike. The complainants also report that the Government promulgated Legislative Decree No. 757, recently ratified by Supreme Decree No. 040-92-PCM, concerning the substitution of the system of wage indexation using the consumer price index, by a system which sets remuneration by reference to productivity increases. Likewise, the Government has issued Legislative Decree No. 25.593, which limits trade union rights, including the right to collective bargaining and to strike. (All of these questions are described in greater detail by the complainants in Cases Nos. 1648 and 1650, and will be examined by the Committee in the framework of those cases once the Government's reply has been received.)
4. 978. Lastly, given the seriousness of the issues they have raised, the complainants request that a direct contacts mission be sent to Peru.

B. The Government's reply

1. 979. In its communication of 11 May 1992, the Government reports that at no time were the SUTEP premises taken over, but that security forces entered the premises briefly with the exclusive purpose of temporarily detaining Mr. Olmedo Auris Melgar, General Secretary of that organisation, in order to prevent a disturbance of the peace and damage to state property. He was subsequently released, and the presence of security forces outside the above-mentioned premises was purely temporary.
2. 980. In its communication of 2 June 1992, the Government states that on 5 April 1992 the President of the Republic ordered the dissolution of the National Parliament and the total reorganisation of the Judiciary owing to widespread corruption in the administration of justice and paralysis in the Parliament. Parliament was hindering the action of the Executive and had virtually abandoned its legislative function to concentrate instead on an excessive, and in many cases unwarranted, monitoring of the Executive (it had in fact delegated to the Executive the constitutional power to legislate by decree, a power which was exercised in full compliance with the legal requirements).
3. 981. As regards the allegations according to which some trade union leaders have been detained, the Government reports that Messrs. Luis Negreiros, César Barrera and other trade union leaders mentioned by the complainants, are currently free. As regards Mr. Hugo Blanco, there was never any judicial or police warrant for his arrest, and his decision to seek asylum in a foreign embassy was a voluntary action. Moreover, the Government adds that (with the exception of what has been stated above regarding the SUTEP premises), it is not true that trade union premises have been taken over or are occupied by the military; it explains that, with a view to guaranteeing the safety of individuals, property and public and private institutions, military units were ordered to patrol the city to prevent social disturbances, mainly due to the phenomenon of terrorism and subversion which afflicts the country. The Government states that it has begun formulating a timetable for democracy aimed at re-establishing the rule of law, with the participation of the state powers prescribed by the Constitution and by democratic principles.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 982. The Committee notes that the allegations presented by the complainant organisations concern several measures taken by the Government within the framework of a restructuring of the State's entire apparatus. As regards the specifically trade union aspects of the case, the complainants refer to the intervention by military forces in the headquarters of trade union organisations, the state of emergency decreed by the Government, which is renewed every 60 days and which suspends constitutional guarantees, and the detention and disappearance of trade union leaders following the events of 5 April 1992.
2. 983. In general, the Committee takes note of the Government's statements according to which the measures adopted on 5 April 1992 (dissolution of the Parliament, the reorganisation of the Judiciary), were due to widespread corruption in the administration of justice and paralysis in the Parliament, which had hobbled the action of the Executive and virtually renounced its legislative function. The Committee also notes that, according to the Government, the detained trade union leaders are currently free, and that the Government denies any military intervention in trade union headquarters, stating instead that, with a view to guaranteeing the safety of individuals, property and public and private institutions, it ordered military units to patrol the city to prevent social disturbances, mainly due to the terrorism and subversion afflicting the country.
3. 984. The Committee recalls that it is not competent to consider allegations of a purely political nature. It can, however, examine measures of a political character taken by governments in so far as these may affect the exercise of trade union rights (Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 3rd edition, 1985, para. 199). In this connection, the Committee wishes to refer to the conclusions it adopted at its May 1992 meeting in connection with Cases Nos. 1478 and 1484 concerning Peru, in which it deplored "the tragic situation prevailing in the country which is characterised by an institutional, economic and social crisis" (see 283rd Report of the Committee, para. 72). Although it is aware that the scourge of terrorism is striking the country, the Committee must deplore the serious repercussions which the political measures adopted by the Executive have had on the exercise of trade union rights, and specifically the restrictions of fundamental rights by virtue of the repeated renewals of the state of emergency, the detention of four trade union leaders and the search of the SUTEP headquarters.
4. 985. As regards the renewal of the state of emergency every 60 days and the parallel suspension of constitutional guarantees, the Committee, faced with the Government's failure to provide specific replies in this connection, and given the repeated renewals of the state of emergency, draws the attention of the Government to the resolution concerning trade union rights and their relation to civil liberties, adopted by the International Labour Conference in 1970, according to which "the rights conferred upon workers' and employers' organisations must be based on respect for (...) civil liberties (...) and that the absence of these civil liberties removes all meaning from the concept of trade union rights". The Committee therefore expresses the hope that the fundamental rights enshrined in the National Constitution, which are essential for the exercise of trade union rights, will be restored as soon as possible.
5. 986. As regards the detention of trade union leaders, the Committee notes that these trade unionists are currently free and notes that the Government has failed to explain, on a case-by-case basis, the reasons for their detention. In these circumstances, the Committee must deplore such detentions and draw the Government's attention to the fact that the arrest and detention of trade unionists without any charges being laid, or court warrants being issued, or their participation in terrorist acts being proved constitutes a serious violation of trade union rights. As regards the trade union leader Olmedo Auris (who, according to the Government, was temporarily detained by military forces, and whom the complainants allege has disappeared), the Committee requests the Government to state clearly whether this person has disappeared or is currently at liberty, and, in the event he has disappeared, to undertake a judicial investigation into his whereabouts and to keep the Committee informed in this regard.
6. 987. As regards the alleged search of trade union premises by the public authorities, the Committee notes that the Government only acknowledges the entry of security forces into one trade union office for the purposes of making an arrest. In this respect, the Committee must point out to the Government that the entry by police or military forces into trade union premises without a judicial warrant constitutes a serious and unjustifiable interference in trade union activities.