Suites données aux recommandations du comité et du Conseil d’administration - Rapport No. 334, Juin 2004

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 75. The Committee last examined this case at its meeting in March 2002 [see 327th Report, paras. 848-867]. The Committee recalls that the allegations concerned the non-renewal of the contract of Mr. Mehmet Akyüz, the branch president of the Samsun section of the Turkish Teachers’ Union, for anti-union reasons. More specifically, the complainant alleged that the non-renewal of contract was due to public statements made within the framework of discussions concerning the draft law on public servants’ trade unions. For its part, the Government asserted that this was one of the reasons for the dismissal but that Mr. Akyüz had also been rebuked on an earlier occasion. Both the Government and the complainant agreed that the public statements were made in Mr. Akyüz’s capacity as president of the local branch union; the Government added that these statements were insulting towards the university.
2. 76. Considering that the non-renewal of a contract for anti-union reasons constituted a prejudicial act within the meaning of Article 1 of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), the Committee requested the Government to institute an inquiry into the motivations for the non-renewal of Mr. Mehmet Akyüz’s contract and to review this decision in the light of the principle of freedom of expression in respect of trade union matters recalled by the Committee [see 327th Report, para. 865].
3. 77. The Government sent two communications dated, respectively, 10 September 2003 and 9 March 2004. In the latter communication, the Government indicated that it was not possible to institute the inquiry requested by the Committee since the matter had been submitted to the competent courts by Mr. Mehmet Akyüz. The Government underlined that final decisions have been handed down and that therefore Mr. Mehmet Akyüz exhausted all the legal recourses opened to him. More specifically, from some of the documents provided by the Government (one of the documents is illegible), it seems that Mr. Mehmet Akyüz submitted two claims. The first claim related to the loss of fees sustained because of the university’s decision to assign classes he was originally due to give to another lecturer. This claim was rejected by the Samsun Administrative Court in a decision of 13 September 2001, upheld by the eight court of the Council of State in a decision dated 6 November 2002. The second claim related to the non-renewal of contract. This claim was also rejected by the Samsun Administrative Court in a decision of 25 December 2001 which was confirmed by the Council of State in a decision of 20 November 2002. Underlining that the administration must comply with court decisions under the national Constitution, the Government indicated that the only recourse left is an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.
4. 78. The Committee takes note of the information submitted by the Government and in particular that, since the Committee’s last examination of the case, actions were lodged in the courts and decisions were duly taken in accordance with the usual and appropriate judicial mechanisms.