Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Belarus (Ratification: 1956)

Follow-up to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry
(complaint made under article 26 of the Constitution of the ILO)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on and the discussion that took place in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2010. The Committee further notes the comments made by the Congress of Democratic Trade Unions (CDTU) on the application of the Convention in law and in practice in a communication dated 30 August 2010.

Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee recalls that in its previous observation it had encouraged the Government to continue its close cooperation with the social partners in addressing the difficulties with registration of trade union organizations in law and in practice. In this respect, the Committee urged the Government to take the necessary measures to amend without delay Presidential Decree No. 2, its rules and regulations, so as to eliminate the obstacles to trade union registration (legal address and 10 per cent minimum membership requirements). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that at its sitting of 14 May 2010, the Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere (“the Council”) discussed the issue of the legislation and prospects of work aimed at fulfilment of the Plan of Action on implementation of the Commission’s recommendations. On that occasion, the Council established a working group of six members – which include two Government representatives, two worker representatives (one from the Federation of Trade Unions of Belarus (FPB) and one from the CDTU) and two employer organizations representatives – to examine the issues identified by the Council’s members and prepare suggestions regarding the Council’s decisions, taking into account positions of all parties. The Committee notes that in its communication, the CDTU points out that there have been no concrete proposals to amend Decree No. 2. The Committee is bound to note with regret the absence of any tangible measures taken by the Government to amend the Decree despite the numerous requests by the ILO supervisory bodies and once again urges the Government to take the necessary steps to that effect in consultation with the social partners so as to ensure that the right to organize is effectively guaranteed. The Committee requests the Government to indicate all measures taken in this respect.

The Committee had previously requested the Government to provide information on the number of registered organizations and those denied registration during the reporting period. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that 283 new organizational structures have been registered within the first six months of 2010. The Committee notes that while the Government provides no information on the number of denied registrations, the CDTU alleges that its proposals concerning registration of trade union organizations are ignored and not considered and refers to the refusal to register the “Razam” trade union, confirmed by the Supreme Court, and the primary trade union organization of the Belarus Independent Trade Union (BITU) at the “Delta Style” enterprise. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on the CDTU allegations and to provide a copy of the Supreme Court Decision on the “Razam” case. It strongly encourages the Government to continue cooperation with the social partners in addressing the issue of registration in practice and to indicate in its next report all progress made in this respect.

Articles 3, 5 and 6. The Committee recalls that it had previously expressed its concern at the allegations of repeated refusals to authorize the CDTU, the BITU and the Radio and Electronic Workers’ Union (REWU) to hold pickets and meetings and requested the Government to conduct independent investigations into these allegations and to bring the attention of the relevant authorities to the right of workers to participate in peaceful demonstrations to defend their occupational interests. The Committee once again notes with regret that no information has been provided by the Government in this respect. Recalling that protests are protected by the principles of freedom of association and that public meetings and demonstrations should not be arbitrarily refused, the Committee notes the conclusions of the Commission of Inquiry in this regard (see Trade Union Rights in Belarus, paragraphs 625–627) and once again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to investigate the alleged cases of refusals to authorize the holding of pickets and meetings and to bring the attention of the relevant authorities to the right of workers to participate in peaceful demonstrations to defend their occupational interests.

The Committee notes with concern from the CDTU’s communication that the chairperson of the Soligorsk BITU regional organization was detained by the police on 4 August 2010 and subsequently found guilty of committing administrative offence and fined. According to the CDTU, the court had decided that having met members of the union near the entrance gate of the company, the trade union leader had violated the Law on Mass Activities. The CDTU explains that following a refusal by the “Delta Style” company’s management to authorize a trade union meeting, the chairperson met with several women workers (on their way to their workplaces) near the entrance. Recalling that the right to meet with workers and trade union members is an essential aspect of trade union rights, that the exercise of legitimate trade union activities should not be dependent on registration, and that authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede its exercise, unless public order is disturbed or its maintenance seriously and imminently endangered thereby, the Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on the facts alleged by the CDTU. In this connection, the Committee recalls that for a number of years it has been requesting the Government to amend the Law on Mass Activities and regrets that no information has been provided by the Government on concrete measures taken in this respect.

The Committee further regrets that the Government has not provided any information in relation to the measures taken to amend Presidential Decree No. 24 concerning the use of foreign gratuitous aid and sections 388, 390, 392 and 399 of the Labour Code, regarding the exercise of the right to strike. The Committee also once again notes with regret that aside from the general statement to the effect that a meeting of the tripartite working group took place on 15 October 2010 to discuss the conclusions of the Conference Committee and questions of further work on the improvement of the legislation, and that members of the group were requested to provide their views on further steps in this regard, there was no indication of concrete proposals to amend the abovementioned pieces of legislation. Recalling that the abovementioned legislative texts (Law on Mass Activities, Decree No. 24 and sections 388, 390, 392 and 399 of the Labour Code) are not in conformity with the right of workers to organize their activities and programmes free from interference by the public authorities and their amendment had been requested by the Commission of Inquiry over six years ago, the Committee reiterates its previous requests and requests the Government to indicate all concrete measures taken in this respect.

The Committee also once again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that National Bank employees may have recourse to industrial action without penalty.

The Committee recalls that the Government had previously reduced by ten times the price of rent for trade unions irrespective of their affiliation. The Committee notes the CDTU’s allegation that the Government has cancelled its previous decision and resumed the practice of hindering trade union activities through financial pressure. The CDTU indicates in this respect that despite numerous promises of the Government, it is still not included in the list of public associations enjoying the right for 0.1 reduction factor in rent payment. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government, according to which, on 5 November 2010, Presidential Decree No. 569 “On making amendments and additions to Presidential Decrees Nos 148 of 24 March 2005 and 518 of 23 October 2009” was adopted to improve the renting mechanism and reduce rental fees for premises rented by trade unions. According to the Government, all trade unions, regardless of their affiliation, can now benefit from the tenfold reduction of rental fee.

The Committee notes with regret that no substantial progress has been made by the Government towards implementing the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and improving the application of this Convention in law and in practice during the reporting year. Indeed, the Government has not provided any information on steps taken to amend the legislative provisions in question, as previously requested by this Committee, the Conference Committee, the Commission of Inquiry and the Committee on Freedom of Association. The Committee notes that in 2010, it has only been informed of one meeting of the Council (14 May) and one meeting of its tripartite working group (15 October). It further notes that the only indicated outcome of the 15 October meeting was a proposal for its members to submit their views on further steps to take with a view to improving the legislation in light of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, something that the Council has been said to be considering for a number of years already. The Committee therefore urges the Government to intensify its efforts to ensure that freedom of association is fully and effectively guaranteed in law and in practice and expresses the firm hope that the Government will intensify its cooperation with all the social partners in this regard.