Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2023, Publication: 111st ILC session (2023)

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Philippines (Ratification: 1953)

Written information provided by the Government

The Government has provided the following written information as well as copies of Executive Order No. 23; the organizational structure and tentative identification of focal persons and offices from each of the concerned agencies; and the framework for the evolving draft of the road map.

This report, submitted by the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) on behalf of the Government, pertains to the report of the high­level tripartite mission (HLTM) which visited the Philippines from 23 to 26 January 2023 to inquire into allegations and reports arising from the implementation of the Convention.

The HLTM report substantially reiterates the findings and recommendations in previous reports of the ILO’s supervisory mechanisms, particularly of the Conference Committee, the Committee on Freedom of Association, and the Committee of Experts, as well as the premises on which the ILO Governing Body and the International Labour Conference (ILC) created the HLTM. The issues raised date back from those inquired into during the first high-level ILO mission to the Philippines in 2009, the direct contacts mission in 2017, and the tripartite high-level virtual meeting in 2021.

The HLTM report expresses concerns on the Government’s perceived slow action in carrying out previous ILO recommendations. It appears to put much reliance on the views expressed in a report submitted to the HLTM by a group of unions.

Even prior to the HLTM, the Government took several actions in response to the outstanding issues, in some cases acting jointly with the social partners. These actions are anchored on past ILO reports and missions and have been previously reported to the ILO and its supervisory bodies.

For the record, the Government reiterates some of these major actions: (i) creation of national and regional mechanisms to monitor compliance with Conventions Nos. 87 and 98; (ii) issuance of operational guidelines of tripartite monitoring bodies; (iii} designation of focal persons to facilitate reporting and immediate intervention in cases of violations; (iv) adoption of two guidelines governing the conduct of stakeholders in relation to the exercise of workers’ rights and concerted activities; (v) legislation of laws strengthening alternative dispute resolution and further institutionalizing tripartism; (vi) inclusion of DOLE as an observer in the Inter-Agency Committee created under Administrative Order No. 135 [2012]; and (vii) dialogue with the Supreme Court resulting in the issuance of Administrative Matter No. 21-06-08-SC which stopped the alleged “wholesale” issuance of cross-border search and arrest warrants that led to most of the reported incidents of arrest of trade unionists. After the tripartite high-level virtual exchange in September 2021 and before the HLTM in January 2023, the Government has also: (i) initiated consultations with labour and employer representatives on developing a tripartite time-bound road map and plan of action; (ii) initiated review of the two guidelines governing the conduct of stakeholders relative to the exercise of workers’ rights and concerted activities; and (iii) conducted capacity-building activities for Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies (RTMBs) and partner agencies.

The Government believes that the HLTM report should have given due attention to these actions for a fuller and more objective context in appreciating the efforts toward implementing the recommendations. This would have allowed the HLTM to appreciate more fully the significance of the view expressed by the Government during the debriefing session on 26 January 2023 that resolving and bringing closure to the issues raised requires commitments not only from the Government but from the social partners as well. Be that as it may, the Government nevertheless welcomes the report. Within the framework of the Philippine Constitution and the laws, and as a sovereign and equal member in the community of nations, it has seriously considered all the recommendations with a view to using these as constructive guidance in ensuring the country’s continuing progress to promote freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining as instruments of social justice.

Actions taken on the HLTM recommendations

The HLTM report has six recommendations:

(i) greater coordination and consistency across varying arms of government to better guard against serious threats to freedom of association;

(ii) engagement with the social partners to make genuine progress on the concerns raised by the CEACR and the CAS to prevent future violations of freedom of association, including through the finalization before the June 2023 ILC of a road map on the way forward to address the identified concerns, with agreed timelines;

(iii) establishment of a single presidentially mandated body to comprehensively identify and address all outstanding cases of alleged labour-related extrajudicial killings and abductions with priority emphasis on criminal investigation and prompt prosecution and accountability;

(iv) establishment of a specialized, eminent, independent non-judicial body to review cases referred by the presidential commission with a view to receiving and documenting testimony and making proposals for compensation;

(v) strengthening of the role of NTIPC-MB and incorporation of improvements recommended by the presidential body to identify and ensure rapid and effective protection measures with regard to imminent and/or emerging threats to the life, security or safety of trade unionists;

(vi) full implementation of all previous recommendations.

On strengthening coordination and consistency across various arms of the Government and establishment of a presidentially mandated body

The administration and enforcement of laws and investigation and prosecution of cases in the Philippines, as in every modern government structure, is allocated to various executive agencies with specific legal mandates. Efficient and effective inter-agency coordination among these agencies is indispensable for the structure to function. To ensure such coordination in the country’s presidential system of government, the executive agencies all fall under the control and supervision of the President of the Republic.

Recognizing the mandates of the relevant agencies involved, the Government has acted swiftly and decisively on the recommendation to strengthen inter-agency coordination and to set up a presidentially driven body that will monitor the status of cases arising from the exercise of freedom of association. On 30 April 2023, the President signed Executive Order No. 23 constituting an Inter-Agency Committee (EO 23-IAC), copy of which is Annex A, to strengthen coordination, develop a road map, monitor actions taken, and expedite the investigation, prosecution and resolution of cases involving violations of freedom of association and the right to organize. Its salient features are:

EO 23-IAC is chaired by the Executive Secretary with DOLE as Vice-Chairperson, and the following members: the Departments of Justice (DOJ), Interior and Local Government (DILG), National Defense (DND), Trade and Industry (DTI), National Security Council (NSC) and the Philippine National Police (PNP). The Civil Service Commission (CSC) and the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) may be invited whenever necessary.

EO 23-IAC is tasked to: (i) consolidate and evaluate reports of concerned agencies and submit to the President a comprehensive report on its findings and recommendations; (ii) develop a road map consistent with the HLTM recommendations; and (iii) monitor the progress of implementation of action plans and the close coordination among concerned agencies.

Member agencies are required to submit to EO 23-IAC: (i) an inventory of cases and incidents within their jurisdiction involving trade unionists whose rights to freedom of association, to organize, and to collectively bargain have been allegedly violated; (ii) an inventory of community-based programmes affecting trade unions, employers and workers; (iii) an inventory of cases related to freedom of association involving agency personnel and state agents arising from the exercise of their official functions; (iv) measures being undertaken or proposals to strengthen agency programmes to address outstanding issues and promote and protect freedom of association; and (v) a comprehensive education and capacity-building programme and a communication plan to promote common understanding within and among agencies of the principles, policies, laws, and regulations on freedom of association.

Directly under the Office of the President, all the substantive functions of EO 23- IAC relate to the performance of governmental powers lodged with specific agencies that cannot be shared with or delegated to non­government organizations. Utilizing existing structures, expertise and resources, EO 23-IAC is immediately functional. It convened its first organizational meeting on 22 May 2023 where it was agreed that priority would be given to the inventory and facilitated action on pending cases, and to the adoption of a road map consistent with the recommendations in the HLTM report. It also agreed on its working structure and arrangements, including the setting up of a secretariat and adoption of reporting forms.

With the establishment of EO 23-IAC, the Government now has a functional mechanism to address all the issues raised and carry out the relevant recommendations in the HLTM report.

On development of the tripartite road map

The main aim of the road map is to create or provide an enabling environment for the free and responsible exercise of freedom of association and right to organize. As presently being drafted, the road map is structured along the four areas of action identified at the 2019 Conference, namely:

- prevention of violence in relation to legitimate activities of workers’ and employers’ organizations;

- immediate and effective investigation into allegations of violence against members of workers’ organizations;

- operationalization of monitoring bodies, including the provision of adequate resources;

- ensuring that all workers are able to form and join unions of their own choosing.

Prior to the HLTM, DOLE called three tripartite and two bilateral meetings with the labour and employer sectors at the national level. In February 2023, post-HLTM, DOLE primarily engaged the Leaders’ Forum toward developing the road map. With support from ILO Manila, DOLE also conducted three area-wide consultations in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao involving the Regional Tripartite Industrial Peace Councils (RTIPCs) and the RTMBs. On 20 April 2023, the Leaders’ Forum agreed to create a technical working group (TWG) that will seek to incorporate further specific inputs from the social partners to the evolving road map.

In the meantime, within the framework of Executive Order No. 23, the Government is proceeding to implement activities that will eventually form part of the road map, particularly the following:

- completion of an inventory of cases and agency programmes relating to freedom of association;

- institutionalization of information-sharing arrangements;

- operationalization of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between DOLE, the DTI, and the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA), signed on 30 April 2023, to pave the way for the establishment of tripartite committees in special economic zones;

- completion of the review of the Joint Guidelines between DOLE, DILG, DND, DOJ, and PNP, and the Joint Guidelines between DOLE, PEZA and PNP on terms of engagement between uniformed personnel and workers engaged in trade union activities, such as strikes;

- adoption of implementing mechanics on the requirement of DOLE clearance before DOJ prosecutors can file cases for acts arising from the exercise of trade union rights;

- setting up of regional counterparts of EO 23-IAC;

- provision of paralegal and related training and other assistance for trade unionists and workers, especially on the legal remedies, case build-up, and evidence gathering;

- holding of sharing sessions among civilian and uniformed personnel, at national and regional levels, to promote common understanding on freedom of association;

- incorporation of the road map with the Labor and Employment Plan 2023–2028 which DOLE aims to launch by July 2023.

On other matters arising from the recommendations

On the establishment of a specialized, eminent, independent non-judicial body to review cases, the Government has seriously considered this recommendation. But with the issuance of Executive Order No. 23 and the existence of agencies already mandated to perform the same functions, such a body may simply be a superfluity.

On the establishment of a compensation fund for victims, there is already a board of claims under the DOJ for victims of unjust imprisonment or detention. This was established by Republic Act No. 7309, enacted in 1992. Further, remedies and claims for compensation based on proven human rights violations are already within the purview of the Commission on Human Rights.

Discussion by the Committee

Chairperson – We will now proceed to the second case on our agenda, which is the Philippines on Convention No. 87. I wish to inform the Committee members and delegates that we have more than 17 speakers registered. Therefore, the reduction of time from 5 to 3 minutes will apply to the delegates concerned. I invite the Government representative of the Philippines, to take the floor.

Government representative – Before the Committee is Case No. 3185 on the application and implementation of the Philippines of the Convention. This case involves several reported incidents of alleged acts of harassment, interference, labelling, intimidation, coercion and judicial killings committed against trade unionists, allegedly by reason of, in connection with, or arising from the legitimate exercise of the rights to freedom of association and to organize. The main thrust of the complaint is the alleged inaction, or lack of effective action, by the Philippine Government in investigating these incidents and in prosecuting and bringing to justice the alleged perpetrators.

These reported incidents took place over a period spanning different political administrations. The Conference had previously decided to send three missions to the Philippines: a high-level mission in 2009, a direct contacts mission in 2016 and a high-level tripartite mission (HLTM) in 2019, which eventually took place in Manila in January 2023.

Each of these missions resulted in reports and recommendations aimed at addressing the concerns that were raised. Certain actions were taken by the Philippine Government on these recommendations, all of which have been duly reported to the ILO supervisory bodies, including to the Committee. In this regard, the Philippine Government expresses its appreciation to the ILO for its ongoing technical assistance and guidance on addressing the concerns that were raised.

It appears, however, that these actions have not fully satisfied the expectations of the Committee. The picture being presented, not only to the Committee, but unfairly to the rest of the world, is that the Philippine Government, through its policies and agents has perpetrated a culture of repression, violence and impunity specifically directed at trade unionists. Allegedly there is a prevailing climate of fear in the country that discourages the effective and meaningful exercise of freedom of association and the right to organize.

This year, the Philippines marks its 75th year of membership, in good standing, to the ILO. The Philippine Government deeply regrets that the unfavourable picture of the country’s situation in relation to the implementation of the Convention has led to the inclusion of the Philippines in the agenda of this year’s session of the Committee, with potential repercussions on the country’s standing in the larger international order. Nevertheless, giving full respect to the ILO’s supervisory mechanism and affirming the principle of multilateralism which it embodies, the Philippine Government now comes to the Committee with the conviction that open, reasonable and constructive discussion will lead to full appreciation of the facts and of the real situation of freedom of association and the right to organize in the Philippines.

As mentioned earlier, the reported incidents constituting the case before the Committee took place over a period spanning different political administrations. The present political administration of President of Ferdinand Romualdez Marcos Jr, which assumed office on 30 June 2022, is firmly committed to taking action on these incidents and to bringing justice to all concerned parties. It will continue to build upon and enhance previous actions initiated by the Philippine Government in relation to the ILO’s earlier recommendations, as previously reported, including the following: (i) continuous capacity-building for national and regional tripartite monitoring bodies; (ii) continuing implementation of the two joint guidelines relating to the terms of engagement between uniformed personnel and workers exercising their legitimate collective rights; (iii) continuing implementation of the law institutionalizing and strengthening tripartism; (iv) continuing improvement in operationalizing the Inter-Agency Committee created to address extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances, torture and other grave violations; and (v) effective observance of the Supreme Court’s order to stop the alleged wholesale issuance of cross-border search and arrest warrants that led to most of the reported incidents of arrest of trade unionists in the past.

I will now focus on actions and developments that have taken place since June 2022. When the administration of President Marcos took office on 30 June 2022, the Philippine Government promptly expressed its readiness to accept the HLTM authorized during the 2019 Conference. While awaiting the HLTM, the Philippine Government took the following actions: (i) it resumed consultations with labour and employer representatives on developing a tripartite time-bound road map and plan of action consistent with the recommendations of the 2019 Conference; (ii) it initiated the review, with possible integration, of the two guidelines governing the conduct of stakeholders related to the exercise of the workers’ rights to organize and to other concerted activities, as mentioned earlier; (iii) it conducted capacity-building activities for national and regional tripartite monitoring bodies and agencies with technical assistance from the ILO; (iv) it conducted consultations leading to the development of a Philippine Labor and Employment Plan, which will include protection and promotion of the fundamental principles and rights at work, including freedom of association and the right to organize, as one of the priority outcomes; and (v) it reconstituted the various tripartite bodies, including the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council and the tripartite wage boards, to ensure genuine sectoral representation. From August 2022 to present, 42 worker and 37 employer representatives have been appointed by the President of the Philippines to various tripartite bodies, all of whom have been nominated by their respective sectors. The Philippines also conducted dialogues with labour and employer groups on their priority areas of concern, including but not limited to concerns related to the exercise of freedom of association, security at work, training and retraining, among others.

The HLTM took place in the Philippines from 23 to 26 January 2023. The members of the HLTM can confirm that the government agencies which were invited to participate were represented by their agency heads and top-level senior officials, indicating the level of importance that the Philippine Government gave to the objectives of the HLTM. The HLTM report was received by the Philippine Government on 30 March 2023. It contained six recommendations for the Philippine Government. Within the framework of the Constitution and existing administrative structures, institutions, laws and jurisprudence, the Philippine Government has responded to these recommendations with concrete and specific actions.

On 30 April 2023, President Marcos signed Executive Order No. 23 creating an Inter-Agency Committee to protect and promote the rights of workers to freedom of association and to organize. The order seeks to strengthen coordination among concerned agencies, develop a road map in consultation with the social partners, monitor actions taken and expedite the investigation, prosecution and resolution of cases involving violations of freedom of association and the right to organize. The Inter-Agency Committee is under the office of the President and is chaired by the Executive Secretary with the Secretary of Labour as Vice-Chairperson. It includes other departments of concern, such as the Department of Justice, the Department of Interior and Local Government, the Department of National Defence, the Department of Trade and Industry, the National Security Council and the Philippine National Police. The Civil Service Commission and the Commission on Human Rights may be invited whenever necessary. The Inter-Agency Committee is tasked with consolidating and evaluating reports of concerned agencies and submitting to the President a comprehensive report on its findings and recommendations, including the development of a road map consistent with the HLTM recommendations. Its member agencies are required to submit an inventory of cases and incidents, an inventory of community-based programmes, an inventory of cases related to freedom of association involving agency personnel and state agents, measures being undertaken or proposals to strengthen agency programmes to address outstanding issues and promote freedom of association, and a comprehensive education and capacity-building programme and communication plan to promote common understanding within and among the agencies of the principles, policies, laws and regulations on freedom of association.

The Inter-Agency Committee is now fully functioning. It held its first meeting on 22 May 2023 with the designation of agency focal questions and DOLE as its secretariat. The Inter-Agency Committee aims to have its second meeting this month, at which it hopes to invite and engage the worker and employer sectors for their inputs in moving forward.

The action of the Philippine Government in issuing Executive Order No. 23 fully implements the HLTM’s first recommendation, which is to strengthen coordination between various government agencies on matters relating to the protection and promotion of freedom of association and the right to organize, and also the HLTM’s third recommendation to set up a presidentially driven body that will monitor the status of cases arising from the exercise of freedom of association.

Even more important is that Executive Order No. 23 provides the foundation and enabling mechanism for the Government to carry out three other recommendations of the HLTM, namely, the second recommendation to engage the social partners to make genuine progress on the concerns raised by the Committee of Experts and the Committee, the fifth recommendation to strengthen the role of the national tripartite monitoring councils and to incorporate improvements recommended by the Inter-Agency Committee, and the sixth recommendation to fully implement all previous recommendations.

In relation to the road map, there is currently a tripartite technical working group that is drafting the road map. In his ministerial statement delivered in the plenary session of the Conference on 6 June 2023, the Philippines Secretary of Labor and Employment, Bienvenido Laguesma, emphasized that the Government, as the duty bearer, is predominately responsible for addressing the concerns raised, but that the social partners also have a shared responsibility in helping resolve these concerns, not only in words, but more importantly through their own concrete actions. The challenge now lies in the concrete time-bound actions that each sector is willing to commit and be responsible for as part of the road map.

While the tripartite partners are formulating the road map, the Philippine Government is clear on what it will pursue. In the meeting of the Inter-Agency Committee of 22 May 2023, the latter agreed to pursue the following: (i) to continuously strengthen implementation and to review and amend as necessary the Joint Guidelines on terms of engagement in the event of strikes and other mass actions of workers and their unions; (ii) to emphasize that there is no Government policy of extrajudicial killing, terrorist-tagging or red-tagging; (iii) to effectively operationalize the clearance requirement from DOLE before the Department of Justice prosecutors in file cases arising from trade union related activities, to immediately and effectively operationalize the DOLE-DTI-PEZA Memorandum of Agreement to promote industrial peace in the economic zones; (iv) to set up regional counterparts of the Inter-Agency Committee to conduct paralegal and related training and other assistance for trade unionists and workers, especially on the legal remedies, case build-up and evidence gathering; (v) to conduct sharing sessions among civilian and uniformed personnel at national and regional levels to promote common understanding on freedom of association; and (vi) to incorporate the road map with the Labor and Employment Plan 2023-2028, which DOLE aims to announce by July 2023.

The HLTM has one remaining recommendation, which establishes a specialized, eminent, independent non-judicial body to review cases referred by the Presidential Commission with a view to receiving and documenting testimony and making proposals for compensation. The Philippine Government urges the Committee and the HLTM to rethink this recommendation on the following grounds. First, it will be superfluous with the creation of the Inter-Agency Committee under Executive Order No. 23. Second, there are existing laws and institutions where compensation claims may be filed and determined. The Republic Act No. 7309, established a board of claims under the Department of Justice. The Republic Act No. 9851 defines and penalizes crimes under humanitarian law and provides rules of reparations for victims. Remedies and claims for compensation based on proven human rights violations are also within the purview of the Commission on Human Rights, which is a body created under the Constitution. Third, the setting up of such an independent body has to take into account existing jurisprudence that interprets the Philippine Constitution. The Committee may not be aware that a similar body, albeit for a different purpose, was established in 2010, also through an executive order, but this was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court for being violative of the equal protection clause of the Constitution. And lastly, the concept of an independent body as proposed by the HLTM appears to be lifted from the recommendation of some Philippine trade unions for the establishment of a truth commission. From international experience, truth commissions have been established in countries recovering from widespread and systemic internal conflicts that have severely damaged political and social institutions to the point where these are no longer functioning. The Philippines is currently far from such a situation.

The Government is following a whole-of-government approach that incorporates the values of social dialogue and democratic consultation in continuously enhancing the enabling environment for the promotion and exercise of the workers’ freedom of association and right to organize. The Government gives its assurance to the Committee that it will exert all possible efforts and use all legal mechanisms within the bounds of its Constitution and the laws as well as within the bounds of international laws to see to it that the issues before the Committee are resolved quickly, reasonably and with justice to all. The Government holds this not only as an obligation to being a Member of the ILO, but more importantly as an obligation to all Filipinos.

Employer members – The Employer members would like to thank the Government for its very full statement and the information it has provided.

Just by way of context, the Convention is a fundamental Convention; the Philippines ratified it in 1953. This case has also been submitted previously to the Committee on Freedom of Association on a number of occasions. It has been examined in this Committee six times; the last time was in 2019, which was when the HLTM was first established. It has been the subject of 18 observations by the Committee of Experts since 2000, so this is not a new situation. This is a long-standing case with multiple features. It is also a case involving the Convention which, as we all know, the Employers’ group has expressed concerns about over the years.

On its face, this case is a case of systemic discrimination by the State against workers’ organizations and their members. I say “on its face” advisedly, because on closer examination, it suggests that the case of the Philippines is actually not one story, but two. The first is the specifics of the complaints of the workers and unions, and the second is the Government’s responses, and the context of those responses. I will take each of those stories, if you will, in turn.

Before I turn to these stories, I would like to speak about the recent development since our last examination in 2019.

First, we note that the new Government has been in power since June 2022.

Second, the Government accepted and received a HLTM, as recommended by the Committee in 2019.

This mission took place in January this year, due to a delay caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. We have been informed that the HLTM was extremely fruitful and the mission provided six recommendations in its report, namely:

- greater coordination and consistency across the varying arms of the Government to better guard against serious threats to freedom of association;

- engagement with the social partners to make genuine progress on the concerns raised by the Committee of Experts and the Committee to prevent future violations of freedom of association, including through the finalization before the June 2023 Conference of a road map on the way forward to address the identified concerns, with agreed timeframes;

- establishment of a single presidentially mandated body to comprehensively identify and address all outstanding cases of alleged labour-related issues and abductions with the priority emphasis being on criminal investigation and prompt prosecution and accountability;

- establishment of a specialized, eminent, independent non-judicial body to review cases referred by the presidential commission with a view to receiving and documenting testimony and making proposals for compensation;

- strengthening of the role of the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council-Monitoring Body (NTIPC-MB) and incorporation of improvements recommended by the presidential body in order to identify and ensure rapid and effective protection measures with regard to imminent and/or emerging threats to the life, security or safety of trade unionists;

- full implementation of all previous recommendations.

Since then, we have seen some promising developments in the country. In particular, on 12 May, the Government created a tripartite advisory council between the Department of Trade and Industry and the Philippines Economic Zone Authority to address labour-related issues.

Furthermore, the President has signed an executive order to create an Inter-Agency Committee to examine the violations of freedom of association and to develop a tripartite road map focusing on the four areas identified.

We welcome this progress and the efforts made by the new Government. We also consider that this road map should be regularly reviewed to take into account recommendations from the concerned agencies and inputs from other relevant stakeholders, including the most representative organizations. However, we note that the Inter-Agency Commission itself does not include worker and employer representation. We consider this to be a deficiency, as social partnership and freedom of association are indicative of the need to have a fully cooperative dialogue between these groups, and the establishment of a commission that is purely government agencies stops short of that ideal. We would urge, in that respect, that full participation be granted to the workers’ and employers’ organizations of the Philippines in that process.

For many years, the Committee has received complaints of violations of trade union rights and worse, including the alleged killing of trade union leaders, arrests and false criminal charges filed against trade union leaders and physical assaults of striking workers. There are far too many to detail, due to the history, to discuss here today.

Once again, observations concern serious allegations of human rights violations, including:

- the killings and attempted assassination of trade union officials;

- violent suppression of strikes and other collective actions by the police and the armed forces;

- harassment of unionists and prevention of people from joining trade unions in export processing zones.

Let me be clear: the Employer members in no way denigrate the seriousness of the issues brought to the attention of the Committee. However, it is important to note that these are not just issues of freedom of association, which is the subject of this case. They also include issues of human rights. By definition, they are also issues of law and order.

Cases such as these cannot go unchallenged, but we have to be careful that we challenge them here in the context of freedom of association. We have no jurisdiction in this Committee in the matters of law and order in particular, nor arguably human rights, although there are inevitable overlaps.

Many of the details of this case are unfortunately the same as we have heard in the past. The murders referred to occurred in 2016 and have been discussed before, so we need to examine not just the details, but also whether the situation is getting better or worse, and which parts are better or worse. This year, it seems that there are just as many issues, but also that the Government is even further behind in dealing with them. We urge the Government to step up and strengthen its efforts. Despite what we have heard about the progress that they are trying to make, what we want to see is progress that we can “see”.

We regret to note the new allegations of violence and intimidation against workers and their representatives in two particular incidents. While the investigations into the alleged acts against union members and officials are serious issues in their own right, so is the context in which the Government must investigate these allegations. This makes the Philippines’ Human Security Act perhaps the heart of the second story. This Act reflects the Government’s commitment to preserving the security of its citizens against a long-standing background of political and civil instability, including armed insurrection. It is this background that the Employers believe has not been given sufficient weight in the consideration of this case, both now and in the past.

This is important because the Inter-Agency Committee’s operational guidelines define extrajudicial killings so as to include cases where the victim was a member of or was affiliated with a labour organization, or was apparently mistaken or identified to be so, and the victim was targeted and killed because of the actual or perceived membership.

Not every human rights violation is a breach of labour rights. This is especially true if the person against whom the violation was committed was committing an unlawful or criminal act at the time. It is therefore vital to the consideration of cases that it be made clear that the law was being transgressed and how, and whether that law conforms to international standards. This is not always clear, and any lack of clarity can only inhibit a fair consideration of the case. In the context of freedom of association, it is important to distinguish between cases where union members were specific targets because of their union membership or activities or simply became victims, alongside other citizens, of more generally directed violence. We have a mandate in the first respect, but not the second.

Unions have expressed concerns that the Human Security Act can be misused. For its part, the Government has stated that this Act cannot be used against the exercise of trade union rights, and that guidelines exist to ensure that the armed forces and the police may only intervene in trade union activities if expressly requested to do so by the authorities.

In terms of monitoring and investigation, the Employers welcomed the establishment of the Inter-Agency Committee. The trouble is that, while initially active, it seems to have fallen into disuse. We hope that the Government’s assurances have been reactivated and that they are realized. We urge the Government to address these issues as soon as possible.

As previously indicated, the Government has engaged with ILO Manila in a Technical Cooperation Programme. With respect, we uphold and support that. We request the Government to provide an update on the status of this work.

With respect to the Labor Code changes, we note the Government’s proposals. They are welcome, but once again, they need to be fully implemented, and the Employers urge the Government to do just that.

I want to conclude with the observation that the report of the HLTM essentially confirmed the reality of everything we have discussed in the past. It reinforces the need to, as we say in New Zealand, to “get a move on”. We accept that the Government is relatively new, but it is now June 2023 and the honeymoon is over.

So, in conclusion, what we want to see from the Employers’ perspective is the Government of the Philippines doing the following:

- implement all of the recommendations of the HLTM report;

- amend the Labor Code to bring it into full conformity with the Convention, including with respect to the right of all workers and employers without distinction to form and operate organizations of their own choosing;

- ensure that workers are not penalized for exercising lawful rights, provide information on any developments on the outstanding issues before the next meeting of the Committee of Experts, which means providing that information by 1 September this year; and

- ensure that the Inter-Agency Committee is established in such a way that it involves full participation by the social partners.

Worker members – Over the last 15 years, the Philippines has been under regular supervision of the Committee, and its failure to comply with the Convention has already been mentioned by the Employer members. Indeed, in January this year, a long-delayed HLTM to the Philippines, requested by the Committee in 2019, took place to follow up on reports of extremely serious violations of freedom of association and civil liberties in the country, including threats and harassment, surveillance, arbitrary arrests and detention and extrajudicial killings of union members for their legitimate union activity. The mission met government, labour and employer representatives and made six recommendations, including calling on the Government to finally comply with the previous recommendations of the Committee.

Among the recommendations was the finalization before this Conference of a time-bound road map on the way forward to address the identified concerns. I understand that such a road map is now being finalized, which is a positive step, but we are concerned that in line with previous practice, the Government will not fully implement the recommendations, as was the case with respect to the 2019 conclusions of the Committee. Our concerns of continued violations are well-founded. Indeed, not long after the mission concluded, so this year, Alex Dolorosa, a paralegal officer of the BPO Industry Employees Network (BIEN) in Bacolod City was murdered. Mr Dolorosa joins a long list of trade unionists who have been murdered.

I will now briefly touch upon the major issues for the Workers’ group, which will be developed in greater detail by my Worker colleagues later on. Since the last discussion on the Philippines in the Committee in 2019, our Philippines trade union colleagues have documented 16 killings of trade unionists, 2 cases of enforced disappearances, 68 cases of arrests and detention, 90 cases of forced disaffiliation, state interference with the right to self-organization through threats, harassment and intimidation, 58 cases of red-tagging or terrorist-tagging, 127 cases of intimidation, threats, harassment of union leaders and members, and 19 cases of other anti-union activities. These numbers are shocking and underscore a prevailing culture of anti-unionism in the country. Few cases are investigated and even fewer result in any one being held responsible for these crimes. The so-called red-tagging continues. This is when state actors make baseless accusations and stigmatize specifically the unions and union activists as members of so-called communist, terrorist organizations. This accusation is enough to be detained and questioned by the military and police. Red-tagging serves to discourage workers from supporting legitimate unions or to encourage them to withdraw from one out of fear. It also creates a potent weapon by employers to rid their workplaces of trade unions they do not like. Red-tagging is also done by high-level government officials with disastrous consequences. This cannot continue. Mechanisms put in place to address these serious violations, such as the NTIPC-MB and the Regional Tripartite Monitoring Bodies (RTMBs), have also failed. The NTIPC-MB is supposed to have oversight on the RTMBs’ profiling and monitoring work, and the Bureau of Labour Relations is tasked with monitoring the freedom of association of trade union rights violation cases; but without independent funding, or without human resource allocations, the lack of full-time sectoral representatives and regional technical staff devoted to monitoring and promotion work and the lack of fully funded programmes on promotion of human rights and trade union rights have hampered the RTMBs’ monitoring work. The NTIPC-MB has stopped meeting on a regular basis since 2016. The Inter-Agency Committee on extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture and other grave violations of the right to life, liberty and security of persons created under Administrative Order No. 35 was supposed to address the grave human rights violations, including labour-related killings. However, unions have little understanding of its workings and despite its resources, few cases have progressed or have been resolved, and the 9 resolved cases out of 65 extrajudicial killings were all prior to its establishment. An ILO-commissioned review of the mechanisms found that the characterization of cases was among the major obstacles in the prosecution of cases.

On May Day 2023, Executive Order No. 23 was enacted in an apparent effort to address one of the recommendations of the HLTM to establish a presidentially mandated body to address violations of the Convention. However, it fell short in several fundamental aspects. The Inter-Agency Committee does not include representation from social partners, and they were not consulted in its drafting. Trade unions had a legitimate expectation that they would be consulted, and indeed had also called for such consultation and had submitted proposals well in advance. The Executive Order also fails to connect the Committee’s work or output with that of a specialized, eminent, independent, non-judicial body or to provide dedicated funding. We fully agree with the Committee of Experts and echo the expectation that the Government takes measures to ensure that all allegations of killings, red-tagging, harassment and other serious forms of violence against trade unionists previously reported and so on are properly investigated and lead to concrete results so as to establish the facts, including any links between the violence and trade union activities, determine culpability, punish the perpetrators and continue to prevent and combat impunity.

In addition to acts of violence in a climate of impunity, we must highlight that the freedom to organize, protected by the Convention, is also undermined by a variety of insecure employment arrangements which undermine stability and empower employers to easily dismiss workers for their union activity.

Finally, I note that the Committee of Experts has raised a number of legislative issues over the years. While previous governments have introduced legislation, no amendments have been enacted to address these long-standing concerns. Also, in Belgium, we have a saying “that the Government must move on” just like in New Zealand. The Worker members expect the Government to take concrete measures to revise the Labor Code to finally bring it into conformity with the Convention.

Employer member, Philippines – Let me just state that in our legislature, we have about 20 per cent of congressmen who represent specific concerns. These are called Party List congressmen. Out of the 20 per cent, there are about 24 who are identified with, or sympathetic to, the labour sector. We therefore implore those congressmen to speed up the judicial process to the best of their ability. In fact, they have a mandate to do so. We believe that tripartism and bipartism at the national, sectoral and enterprise levels is robust. Dialogue mechanisms to engage with social partners exist in practice. Stable industrial relations are operational and, more importantly, the new Government has veered away from the policy of the previous administration that was blamed for the occurrence of the essentially drug-related extrajudicial killings, from which some of the complaints on the exercise of freedom of association have been linked. We are here today to express our satisfaction over efforts toward the protection and promotion of freedom of association in our country. The Government of the Philippines, through DOLE, is cognizant of the challenges faced by labour and is actively working towards addressing issues to the best of its ability.

On the part of employers, the Employers’ Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP), has been taking concrete steps since 2018 to institutionalize the establishment of a buffer-type dialogue mechanism, called the Leaders Forum, where the country’s largest business employers’ organizations and labour federations are represented, so that any matter affecting social and industrial relations may be addressed. We reiterate our commitment to the joint statement issued by the Leaders Forum during the visit of the HLTM on the Convention in the Philippines, early this year. This addresses two main issues: respect of workers’ rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining; and to continue the investigation, prosecution and disposition of all true labour-related cases affecting freedom of association and collective bargaining without delay.

In the interests of justice, the employers and their affiliated organizations and sectors do not condone any attempt to undermine the exercise of freedom of association and collective bargaining. The Government has taken decisive actions since the official report of the HLTM, was received on 30 March 2023. The tripartite bodies have been established within economic zones, providing a platform for meaningful dialogue and collaboration between the Government, employers and workers. In the commission that was recently established, however, we at least hope that the labour and employer sectors would be invited as observers, at the very least. Furthermore, in this field, the Government has recognized the importance of strengthening investigations by empowering labour organizations through paralegal training, as mentioned by the good undersecretary. This capacity-building initiative will undoubtedly enhance the ability of labour organizations to effectively advocate for the rights and interests of workers. The Government should be given an opportunity to complete the process of consultation with the social partners. Along this line, the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council (NTIPC) and other tripartite bodies have been reconstituted towards genuine representation with sectoral members directly nominated by the social partners. This collaborative approach allows all stakeholders to collectively address the observations made by the HLTM.

All these recent actions taken by the Government demonstrate its willingness to work towards creating an environment that enables workers to freely associate and collectively bargain. Such an environment is essential for the protection of workers’ rights and the advancement of their interests. We, in the employers’ sector, will remain vigilant in ensuring respect among our constituents in the business sector of these fundamental rights of workers based on ILO Conventions, the Philippine Constitution and, more importantly and more recently, our national laws and regulations related to the Labor Code.

In conclusion, I wholeheartedly support the Philippines’ efforts to protect and promote freedom of association. The Government’s proactive approach, exemplified by the creation of tripartite bodies, the strengthening of the investigations and the ongoing consultation process, deserves recognition and your encouragement and active support.

Let us acknowledge the progress made thus far and provide the necessary space and support for the Government and social partners to collaboratively address the recommendations of the HLTM, the formulation of a tripartite roadmap on freedom of association, which is a work in progress admittedly, and the Labor and Employment Programme for the period 2023–2028. These are steps in the right direction. Together, we can achieve a brighter future for the workers of the Philippines, built on the principles of freedom, fairness and justice, which are essential to business, viability and sustainability.

Worker member, Philippines – Within the Workers’ group of the Philippines, our stand is unified on the issue at hand with that of all Philippine trade unions, including the affiliates of the ITUC in the Philippines: the Federation of Free Workers (FFW), the Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU), the Sentro ng mga Nagkakaisa at Progresibong Manggagawa (SENTRO), and Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (TUCP). Our country is under examination for compliance with the Convention. The Philippines received a HTML in January 2023. The ILO mission had submitted recommendations, and our good undersecretary acknowledged receipt of that on 30 March 2023. We note the action undertaken by the Government to address freedom of association violations. We are willing to engage in the constructive discussion as suggested by the good undersecretary. With all due respect, however, the Government, it seems, is “cherry-picking” among the recent recommendations. The Government has yet to adopt a joint implementation road map with the social partners, which falls short of compliance with the recommendations. We do not have a joint implementation report before the Committee at this 111th Session of the Conference.

We note the recent issuance of Executive Order No. 23, intended to reinforce and protect freedom of association and the right of workers to organize by constituting an Executive Department Inter-Agency Committee to coordinate and expedite investigations and prosecutions of violations related to the Convention. On its face, Executive Order No. 23 would seemingly respond to the HLTM’s recommendation to establish a presidentially mandated body to address violations related to the Convention. A closer reading, however, reveals that it falls short in several fundamental aspects.

The Inter-Agency Committee does not include representation from trade unions and even from employers’ organizations. Neither workers’ nor employers’ organizations were consulted in the drafting. It is silent on any intent to relate the Inter-Agency Committee’s work with that of the specialized, eminent, independent non-judicial body to be established for reviewing cases that the Inter-Agency Committee refers to that body, for testimonial documentation and potential compensation. We disagree with the inaugural undersecretary that the creation of these bodies is unconstitutional because a number of bodies created by the President in the Philippines have been found unconstitutional, like the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission and the Philippines Employees Labour Union Commission, among others.

It falls silent or does not specifically provide a mechanism or road map for resolving with finality all outstanding 68 documented cases of labour-related extra-judicial killings that have since been submitted to authorities that were included in the report. It does not specifically provide the Inter-Agency Committee and its secretariat with a dedicated operating budget. It is dependent on the budget of DOLE, effectively setting it up for potential failure. Existing compensation scheme under the law that the Government mentioned is severely inadequate, with those being wrongly incarcerated getting only PHP1,000 pesos a month, which is equivalent to US$19. When those killed can get no more than PHP10,000 pesos, or US$181, is that the value of life? Now, we look at the realities on the ground: a number of us have experienced our union organizing work being equated with criminal activity, insurgency or terrorism. On the eve of the visit of the HLTM, the Department of Justice threw out a case filed against 17 police officers involved in the killing of labour leader Mr Manuel Asuncion. The Department of Justice said Asuncion’s wife failed to directly identify the killers and the police operation was legitimate. Asuncion was killed in his office at the Workers’ Assistance Centre during a police operation in Cavite.

In the same month, the abduction of union organizers Armand Dayoha and Dyan Gumanao in Cebu was captured on video. Dayoha is an organizer for the Alliance of Health Workers (AHW), while Gumanao is a coordinator for the Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT). The two survived their harrowing experience and are now given the runaround in their quest to bring the culprits to justice.

Criminalizing union activities in practice is contrary to the Convention. Regarding the 68 reported killings, we disagree with the employers from the Philippines. There is no drug-related case in those reported killings. The killings of trade union organizers, along with approximately 400 cases of trade union rights violations since President Rodrigo Duterte assumed office in 2016 were submitted to the ILO mission.

This pattern of violence continues into the first year of the Marcos administration, with the recent murder of union organizer Alex Dolorosa marking the 69th case. Of the 69 cases that have occurred since 2016, nobody has been prosecuted or penalized by the court.

Despite the Philippine Government’s portrayal of a human rights and union-friendly nation which upholds freedom of association and tripartism, the realities we experience contradict this narrative. Abductions, murders and an intimidating police presence during union events, among others, during the first year of the Marcos administration illustrate a persistent culture of impunity that puts every labour organization at risk. As a result, the persistent violence has reduced union density to about 7 per cent of the workforce, and fewer are covered by collective bargaining agreements. The widespread layoffs and termination of regular employment across numerous companies are resulting in a significant reduction in union membership. This phenomenon, which is particularly evident in organizations or companies like the De Los Santos Medical Centres, Wyeth-Nestle and Duty-Free Philippines, affects hundreds of regular employees because of their union membership.

The public sector unions are not spared. An essential issue in the public sector is the forced disaffiliation of members due to ongoing pressure from their public employers. A significant example is the non-uniformed personnel union affiliated with the Public Services Labor Independent Confederation (PSLINK) in the bargaining unit of the Philippine National Police, which weakens the union and infringes on the rights of our members. In order to further demonstrate the scale of freedom of association violations, let us consider the following examples: the surveillance of a SENTRO leader in Davao from February to May 2023; the public red-tagging of the ACT by the Secretary of the Department of Education; the red-tagging of migrant workers abroad; the harassment of a female trade union secretary of the FFW by charging her with criminal offence after she won her illegal dismissal case and was reinstated back to work in a garments factory in Clark Ecozones; and most recently, in the middle of a certification campaign against a union created in a multinational company, the red-tagging of a leader of the Associated Labour Unions (ALU). The new Defence Chief has said that there was nothing wrong with red-tagging, but being red-tagged makes you a target for murder, abduction or a serious threat to your life and your family. Nothing wrong indeed!

We reiterate again the urgency for the Government to consult social partners to: (i) revise Executive Order No. 23, as it is not compliant with the ILO recommendation to include workers’ and employers’ representatives; (ii) form an independent, non-judicial body to document testimonies, review cases and propose compensation measures for affected parties; (iii) strengthen the National Tripartite Monitoring Council establishing tripartite validation teams that will act on reported killings of trade unionists and other blatant freedom of association violations with dispatch; and (iv) adopt the Presidential Executive Order outlining joint guidelines on the conduct of state security forces, thereby ensuring proper observance of trade union rights. These are among the recommendations of the trade unions. Lastly, we are willing to cooperate with the Government and the Employers’ group to improve freedom of association and the situation regarding the killings and impunity, as organizing a union is not a crime. We insist that the time for action is now.

Government member, Sweden – I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States. The candidate countries – Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia, Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries Iceland and Norway, members of the European Economic Area, align themselves with this statement. We actively promote the universal ratification of ILO fundamental Conventions. We call on all countries to protect, promote and respect all human rights, including labour rights. We attach great importance to freedom of association and the right to organize. The Philippines is an important partner, including in support of multilateralism and the international rules-based order. Within the framework of the Generalized Scheme of Preferences Plus, and the Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation with the EU, the Philippines committed to ratifying and effectively implementing international conventions on human rights, labour rights included. The case discussed today is a long-standing and serious case. At its 29th Session, the Committee noted with concern the many allegations of murders of trade unionists and anti-union violence, as well as the lack of investigation in relation to these allegations. The Conference Committee also called on the Government to accept a HLTM mission before the 2020 Conference, and to elaborate, in consultation with the representative workers’ and employers’ organizations, a report on progress to the Committee of Experts by 29 September. An exchange in September 2021 with the ILO, the Government and the social partners was held virtually due to the COVID-19 pandemic. One of the recommendations of this exchange was that the Government should adopt a time-bound plan of action in consultation with the social partners and with support from the ITUC and the International Organisation of Employers (IOE). This addressed the four areas of concern.

We welcome the fact that the Philippines received the HLTM in January 2023. The mission made a number of recommendations, and while it observed some progress, it remains largely insufficient in view of the very serious nature of the issues. We very much regret that the Government did not make available a joint implementation report by the tripartite partners to the ILO prior to the 2023 Committee in order to show tangible actions towards implementing these recommendations. We wish to underline that tripartite actions are crucial for progress. We nevertheless welcome the joint statement of the Leaders Forum, which could serve as a strong and positive foundation to pursue discussions on the tripartite road map.

Under the new administration, we see an improvement in the human rights area. We hope that this trend will continue. The dialogue with the EU is open, even on the most sensitive issues. However, areas of concern remain, including the allegation of serious violence and intimidation against trade unionists. Serious violations against workers and their representatives regarding civil liberties and freedom of association where authorities, in some cases, are preventing the lawful activities of trade unions. We are also worried about the pending cases of alleged killings of trade union leaders and members, where despite the efforts by the Government, no apparent progress has been made. We want to highlight the need for investigations into the killings of trade unionists to shed full light on the facts and circumstances in which such actions occurred. We wish to determine responsibility, punish the perpetrators and prevent the repetition of similar events in order to combat impunity.

We are concerned about the practice of red-tagging of trade union representatives and members, and allegations of links to terrorist organizations by security forces to create a climate of fear so that workers are impeded from exercising their rights. We welcome the intentions of the Government to combat impunity and secure the application of the Convention. However, we regret that very little policy or legislative action has been taken effectively to address the significant and long-standing concerns of the Committee of Experts and the Committee. We note with concern the lack of progress regarding the adoption of several legislative proposals to bring national legislation into conformity with the commitments and assurances made in recent years to do so. The absence of effective action to address areas of concern due to the lack of resources and incoordination in different areas, such as the effective functioning of monitoring mechanisms and Administrative Order No. 35, is of particular concern; this, despite the EU-funded ILO technical assistance since 2016, in view of the institutional strengthening of the tripartite partners.

While we welcome the President’s Executive Order to create an Inter-Agency Committee to examine the violation of freedom of association and develop a road map, we regret that the Executive Order falls short of the HLTM recommendation, and that it appears that it was not consulted with the social partners. On the economic zones, we understand that the programmes of the Joint Industrial Peace and Concerned Office and the Alliance for Industrial Peace and Program Office have been put on hold, and we welcome that. We have, however, urged the Government to secure the trade unions’ rights by continuing to promote comprehensive training activities on freedom of association and collective bargaining, and revising guidelines on the conduct of stakeholders relating to the exercise of trade union rights. We furthermore stress our comments from previous years to urge the Government to adopt legislative amendments to pursue the revision of the Labor Code without additional delay. We agree with the HLTM report that the serious and pressing concerns could only be addressed by genuine social dialogue. We encourage the Government to constructively engage social partners in order to finalize a tripartite road map with clear deliverables and timelines, and to incorporate it in the Labor and Employment Plan 2023–2028, as indicated by the Government. We hope that the effective implementation of the road map will be reflected in a joint employment report. We encourage the Government to continue to collaborate with the ILO on this issue.

Government member, Brunei Darussalam, speaking on behalf of the members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The ASEAN acknowledges the numerous endeavours and initiatives undertaken by the Philippines to adhere to the Convention. We welcome the continuing efforts and concrete measures taken by the Government since July of last year to address the issues raised in a proactive and comprehensive manner.

The Government of the Philippines has demonstrated its responsiveness to the concerns raised by various stakeholders, including the labour sector, by taking significant steps towards implementing the recommendations put forth by the HLTM in January 2023. We recognize the notable progress made thus far in compliance with these recommendations. The issuance of Executive Order No. 23 creating the Inter-Agency Committee to protect freedom of association is a clear indicator of the seriousness of the Government to fulfil its obligations.

We firmly believe in the importance of giving the Government an opportunity to complete the process of consultation in collaboration with the social partners. This inclusive approach ensures that all relevant stakeholders, including the worker, employer and government representatives, collectively address the observations highlighted by the HLTM. By engaging in a comprehensive and collaborative dialogue, the Government can build trust and work towards mutually beneficial solutions that advance the interests of all stakeholders.

We encourage the Government to continue its efforts to uphold the principles of freedom of association and ensure that the voices of workers and their representatives are heard and respected. It is a non-negotiable fact that we need to protect trade union rights. It is vital to understand that instances pertaining to acts solely of a criminal nature should be entrusted to appropriate law enforcement agencies and judicial systems. The classification of such cases should be determined through a thorough evaluation of alleged actions, taking into account both the rights of the individuals and the need for societal order and security. This approach guarantees that only matters genuinely linked to the exercise of freedom of association and the right to organize are brought under the scrutiny of the Committee.

ASEAN acknowledges that the Philippines, just like the other ASEAN states, should continue to benefit from the technical assistance of the ILO. In this regard, we express our unwavering support for the continuous technical assistance provided to the Philippines in order to resolve to these long-standing issues.

In conclusion, we reiterate our strong support for the Philippines’ commitment to protecting and promoting freedom of association. We believe in the Government’s dedication to addressing labour-related challenges and its sincere efforts to comply with the recommendations of the HLTM. We urge all stakeholders to engage in a constructive dialogue, embracing the principles of inclusivity, cooperation and respect, to collectively address the observations made and ensure the effective protection of the rights of workers.

Employer member, Thailand – The Employers’ Confederation of Thailand is making this statement on behalf of the ASEAN Confederation of Employers. It associates itself with the position of ECOP in respect of the case of the Philippines in the Committee. This is in line with its thrust to promote stable, harmonious and productive industrial relations, and generation of employment in pursuit of national development across all the countries it represents. It recognizes that ECOP’s commitment to social development through tripartism and bipartism in resolving issues and challenges in industrial and labour relations is cognizant of ECOP’s passion in promoting freedom of association and collective bargaining in the Philippines. The underlying principle behind ECOP’s advocacies and services is founded on respect for workers’ rights and protection of welfare. It hopes that the governments, employers and workers in the Philippines will continue working together to address the recommendations of the HLTM.

Worker member, Guatemala – I am speaking on behalf of the workers of Guatemala and the National Union of Workers (UNT) of Mexico.

The violation of civil liberties and trade union rights in the Philippines is long-standing. Since 2006, Philippine trade unions have alleged murders and serious threats. The most recent fatal incidents involved Mr Alex Dolorosa, Mr Marlon Ornido and his wife Ms Fe Ornido, with no progress having been made in the investigation, bringing the total number of murdered trade unionists to 69. Such unfortunate events also occur in my country, Guatemala.

A climate of violence that results in the murder and disappearance of union leaders and acts of aggression against workers’ organizations is a serious obstacle to the exercise of trade union rights. Such acts require severe measures from the authorities.

The Committee on Freedom of Association has called on the Philippine Government to ensure that killings of trade unionists are investigated and has observed with regret that “despite continued monitoring and investigation reported by the Government, no substantial progress appears to have been achieved in bringing the perpetrators to justice or clarifying the circumstances of these incidents”.

The existing climate of pressure, fear and extreme physical violence undermines the ability of workers to exercise their rights under the Convention. Although the Convention was ratified by the Philippines 70 years ago, the Government has struggled to comply with it.

Various actions to overcome these serious obstacles to the exercise of trade union freedoms have been taken, including high-level missions, a direct contacts mission, as well as a high-level virtual tripartite meeting. In January of this year, an HLTM visited the country to investigate trade union allegations and government reports on the application of the Convention.

The report of the tripartite mission expressed concern over the perceived slow implementation by the Philippine Government of the recommendations made by the ILO, and reiterated the conclusions and recommendations contained in previous reports of the supervisory bodies on the application of standards.

Furthermore, the Government of the Philippines reported the creation of national and regional mechanisms regarding compliance with the Convention and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), as well as other actions. However, in every case, there is evidence of dilatory behaviour, and it persists in simulating advances to maintain that progress has been made that only appear in the official discourse.

The assassination of trade unionists calls for judicial investigations that must be conducted independently to fully clarify, as quickly as possible, the facts and circumstances surrounding these assassinations, determine responsibilities, punish the perpetrators and prevent their repetition.

The Committee should urge the Government to take the necessary actions and put an end to the practices that violate freedom of association, which have been taking place in the Philippines for years.

Government member, United States of America – We thank the Government of the Philippines for providing additional information to the Committee in response to the report of the HLTM which visited the Philippines in January this year.

The Government reports on various measures it has taken to address long-standing concerns expressed by ILO supervisory bodies regarding its implementation of the Convention and actions it is now taking in response to recommendations in this report. We welcome these measures as initial, partial steps. We, however, remain concerned about the Government’s response to continued alleged violations of workers’ civil liberties and right to freedom of association.

To that end, the United States urges the Philippine Government to immediately accept the report of the tripartite mission in full and implement all its recommendations, including establishing a presidentially mandated body to address all cases of alleged labour-related extrajudicial killings and abductions, as well as implementing rapid and effective protection measures to address imminent and/or emerging threats to the life, security, or safety of trade unionists.

The Committee of Experts noted with concern new allegations of violence and intimidation against workers and their representatives and observed with regret that no substantial progress appeared to have been achieved in bringing the perpetrators to justice.

The United States remains focused on the April murder of Alex Dolorosa, a trade union leader and LGBTQI+ activist with BIEN, an organization that helps call centre workers exercise their rights and organize to improve their job conditions. We welcome the Philippine Government’s condemnation of his murder and its commitment to thoroughly investigate and to hold the perpetrators accountable.

We note the HLTM’s call for any suspicion of criminal acts and/or suspected illegal links to the communist insurgency to be brought before appropriate judicial bodies with assurances of due process and respect for the presumption of innocence.

We reaffirm the importance of the HLTM’s recommendation of engagement with the social partners to make genuine progress on the concerns raised by the Committee of Experts and the Committee to prevent future violations of freedom of association. The United States emphasizes that democratic and independent trade unions are essential to healthy, inclusive democracies and thriving economies.

The United States remains committed to engaging with the Government to advance workers’ rights in the Philippines.

Employer member, United States of America– We note that in June 2019, the Committee requested a HLTM to the country, which was completed in early in 2023. This Mission, along with an intervening virtual exchange, reflects steps that presaged a plan of action to detail – relevant here – how the Philippines can effectively implement the Convention.

In this spirit, we view this case as forward-looking and, by extension, aspirational. It is an opportunity to revisit the essence of the Convention, and the full concept of freedom of association under international law. We note that freedom of association is one of the most fundamental principles of international labour law. Article 2 of the Convention provides that “[w]orkers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, shall have the right to establish and, subject only to the rules of the organisation concerned, to join organisations of their own choosing without previous authorisation”. The language here is critical, as the Convention applies in equal parts to “workers” and “employers” – “without distinction” – to associate and, by extension, not associate or disassociate, consistent with their own wishes. We recall that workers and employers, and their informed wishes, are at the very heart of the Convention, and that governments are obliged to create legislation and to foster practices that help workers and employers to make free and informed choices about their working lives.

Governments must not enable or authorize, and this cannot be understated, any conduct that interferes with these rights. That would include, of course, at least some of the examples of the legitimate concerns referenced by the Committee in this case. In this case, we recall that determining the underlying facts and context of alleged events and concerns is of the utmost importance and express our sincere hope that the Government take steps, along with the ILO and social partners, to conduct all necessary and appropriate inquiries most thoroughly. We should not craft policy, nor prejudge whether actions are consistent with the Convention, until meaningful inquiries have been completed. If obstacles exist or if they arise, the Government, along with the social partners, should nonetheless patiently persist.

We also recall that governments should not take any position or provide any measure of favouritism towards any particular group and recall that this is also a fundamental concept within international labour law.

Governments are meant, at the most fundamental level, to be unbiased and a facilitative partner to enable workers and employers to make free and informed choices about their working lives. We wish for the Philippine Government, as it moves forward through its plan of action, to keep these maxims well in mind.

Worker member, Norway – Trade unions in the Nordic countries, France, Germany, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, and Spain, and the Confederation of Christian Trade Unions of Belgium (ACV/CSC), deplore the interference of the Philippine police and armed forces in the workplace. We have not seen positive signs that the Philippines’ national security agents have withdrawn from industrial relations.

On 2 June, the police entered the workplace of a container company in Meycauyan, Bulacan, on the day when DOLE Region 3 was conducting the certification of the trade union election. Workers were made to cast their vote under the presence of the military.

Until today, the Philippine’s police and the armed forces in Governor Generoso of Davaos continue to smear and label the trade union, which was created a year ago to provide labour rights education and organize workers in a plantation company. The armed officers call the trade union “a communist and terrorist organization connected to the communist party and ISIS.” The company has been notorious for wage exploitation, discrimination and unfair dismissals.

These are just two examples of military interference reported in the past months since the HLTM conducted a visit to the Philippines. It is just the tip of the iceberg of the militarization of industrial relations. For a decade, it has been justified under the banner of the National Task Force to End Local Communist Conflicts.

The same national security agencies form the majority in the Inter-Agency Committee under the Presidential Office. The Inter-Agency Committee was announced to lead the protection of freedom of association and the right to organize workers. Trade unions have not been informed about the formation of this Inter-Agency Committee.

We cannot be convinced that the same agencies which have been actively red-tagging, profiling and intimidating trade unionists and alleging infiltrations of the workplace by communism could assume independence and protect the right to freedom of association. It cannot be an adequate response to implement the recommendations of the HLTM to end the culture of impunity.

Organizing trade unions is not a direct threat to national security. The Government must engage with trade unions and social partners to adopt a joint implementation road map of the HLTM’s recommendations.

Worker member, the United States of America – The Worker delegates from Australia, Japan, Republic of Korea and the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) align themselves with this statement. Once again, this body is discussing the case of the Philippines’ non-compliance with the Convention.

We welcome the findings of the January 2023 HLTM, which found that very little was done by the Government to implement the recommendations of the Committee and the Committee of Experts from 2009, 2017 and 2019 regarding the extrajudicial killings of trade unionists and other violations of freedom of association in the country. Unfortunately, despite the attention from the HLTM, threats, attacks, and even murder of trade union activists continue in the Philippines.

We are saddened and outraged by the cruel and violent murder of Alex Dolorosa, a union organizer and a paralegal with BIEN who worked tirelessly to improve the working conditions in the call centre industry. Unfortunately, his murder only reinforces the reason that the Philippines is repeatedly ranked as one of the world’s deadliest countries for trade unionists. Alex’s tragic murder follows years of being surveilled and “red-tagged” by the Government of the Philippines. It has become common in the Philippines for the military and the Government to target unions, union leaders and workers attempting to organize with red-tagging – falsely labelling union activists and organizers as communist insurgents and enemies of the State, resulting in aggressive surveillance, imprisonment, and even murder.

We strongly regret that Government has not sent, before the Committee, a joint implementation report, by tripartite partners to carry out the recommendations of the HLTM.

We urge the Government of Philippines to consult with social partners without further delay to:

- Revise Executive Order No. 23 and include workers’ and employers’ representatives’ perspectives.

- Establish an independent, non-judicial body to document testimonies, review cases, and propose compensation measures for affected parties.

- Adopt a time-bound road map in consultation with social partners to fully realize all the recommendations of the HLTM.

Once again, we are demanding that President Marcos and his administration take immediate action in full consultation with the social partners to end the practice of red-tagging and the broader culture of impunity for cases of threats and violence against trade unionists in the Philippines.

Government member, Islamic Republic of Iran – My delegation supports the commendable efforts made by the Government of the Philippines to address the recommendations put forth by the HLTM, which they received in January of this year. We must acknowledge the concrete outcomes already achieved by the Philippine Government. True to the spirit of tripartism, extensive consultations were conducted for the realization of a tripartite workable plan that is realistic and achievable.

In recognition of the complexity of the issues at hand, the Philippine Government should be given a fair opportunity to complete the process of consultation with the social partners.

We understand that for cases to be resolved, acknowledging achievements is of the utmost importance. Thus, we recognize the need to support the strengthening of the RTMBs, with technical assistance from the ILO, as may be necessary.

In conclusion, we acknowledge the efforts made by the Philippine Government and understand that time is need to complete their plan of action towards resolving issues related to freedom of association.

Worker member, Indonesia – I am speaking on behalf of Indonesian workers. My statement is supported by the workers of Malaysia, Singapore and Cambodia, and Education International (EI). We stand in solidarity with workers and the teachers in the Philippines. Teachers should not be labelled as insurgents or subjected to violence and discrimination because they are members of trade unions. This is still happening in the Philippines. In March, Vice President Sara Duterte, who also serves as the Secretary of Education, publicly labelled the ACT as a communist terrorist organization due its support for a transport workers’ strike. At that time, the ACT was advocating for increased government investment in the construction of 50,000 additional classrooms and the hiring of more teachers. National security agents under the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict target and interfere in schools where teachers are unionized and affiliated with the ACT. The national security agents organize so-called peace and order forums in these schools with the aim of identifying the unionized teachers and members of the ACT.

In regions where the ACT’s regional unions are accredited, the Department of Education uses “postpone and delay” tactics to block a collective agreement from being reached. In region 11, for instance, the Regional Director of the Department of Education has made it clear that negotiation on a collective agreement could resume if the union shares the full list of its members.

In region 5, where trade unions managed to reach a collective agreement after a two-year delay, union members’ pictures were displayed in front of schools and they were falsely associated with the New People’s Army. In the province of Camarines Sur, the police even visited schools and pressured teachers to remove their signatures endorsing the collective agreement.

Teachers in the Philippines cannot freely choose the unions with which they wish to associate to defend their occupational interests. Instead, they are forced by national security agents to disaffiliate and withdraw from the collective agreement their union has negotiated. This is unacceptable and it must be stopped. We urge the Government to engage with social partners to develop a joint implementation road map of the HLTM’s report under the oversight of a presidential commission with trade union participation.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Morocco – First of all, I would like to thank the Government of the Philippines for the information and clarifications provided. We also welcome the efforts made to address the challenges and respond to the various observations of the Committee of Experts, which we would like to commend on its efforts to implement international labour standards and monitor implementation.

We also welcome the tripartite road map to implement the 2019 conclusions of the Committee and to achieve full compliance with the Convention through the HLTM.

We have taken note of the Philippine Government’s responses to the various observations. We also welcome all the measures that have been taken in response to the Committee’s recommendations, including the tripartite road map to promote freedom of association, civil liberties and the revision of the guidelines on trade union action.

We also strongly commend the Government of the Philippines for its consultation with the social partners to promote tripartite social dialogue to find solutions to fundamental rights at work in an inclusive manner for workers in economic zones.

Lastly, we would like to recommend that the Government continue its efforts to find the right national solutions for the implementation of international labour standards and conclude the national vision on comprehensive reform as soon as possible, taking into account the observations of the Committee of Experts.

Government member, China – China thanks the representative of the Philippines for the information provided. We carefully read the report of the Committee of Experts as well as the updated information submitted by the Philippine Government. The Government of the Philippines is working closely with the ILO to submit information on time, actively promote tripartite dialogue and show a constructive dialogue. China appreciates that effort. We note that the Government, working towards the promotion and protection of freedom of association, places importance on the concerns of stakeholders and tries to work for sustainable solutions to labour issues. The Government is taking effective measures to implement the recommendations of the HLTM which took place in January this year, establish national and regional monitoring mechanisms on the Convention and Convention No. 98, issue guidelines for the tripartite monitoring bodies, and resolve issues through legislative frameworks. We think this should be valued by the Committee. We think that only through extensive collaboration and dialogue can we help the Government to better improve its capacity to implement the Convention and promote trust. We encourage the Philippine Government to continue to implement the recommendations of the HLTM and avail itself of the technical assistance of the ILO, and further resolve disputes and solve problems. We hope the stakeholders can reach consensus and make constructive decisions in a pragmatic and cooperative spirit to jointly protect workers’ rights.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Saudi Arabia – My delegation has taken note of the Committee’s report and we welcome the efforts that have been undertaken by the Philippines to strengthen its legislation, bring it into line with international labour standards and guarantee labour rights. We also welcome the actions of the country to enter into dialogue with stakeholders. There is no doubt that all dialogue requires a constructive approach with the country concerned in order to build its capacities. That is why we reaffirm the importance of continuing the efforts of the Philippines to strengthen the provisions relating to the Convention and the protection of rights and to pursue dialogue.

Observer, Building and Wood Workers International (BWI) – This statement is also supported by the IndustriALL Global Union. I would like to state today the tremendous difficulties for workers in the Philippines to exercise their rights to self-organization and collective bargaining and, in particular, how labour-only contractualization undermines the right to association and collective bargaining.

Philippine labour law has an explicit requirement for an employer-employee relationship before workers can organize unions. Section 243 of the Philippine Labor Code limits its coverage to persons employed in commercial, industrial and agricultural enterprises and in religious, charitable, medical or educational institutions, whether operating for profit or not.

In addition, there are several institutional causes of the systemic violations of freedom of association. Apart from trade union repression, one of the biggest barriers to the exercise of freedom of association is the precariousness of work. This prevents the vast majority of workers from accessing their constitutional rights to organize, bargain collectively and strike. Compounding the problem is the fact that there is no official data on the number of contractual workers in the private sector. Estimates would range anywhere from 6.7 million to as many as 20 million contractual workers.

Philippine labour law explicitly provides that all workers have the right to join unions after working for one day. But if you are a contractual worker or employee, you will not dare exercise this right for fear of having your contract rescinded or no longer renewed. This is why there are millions of workers who have been working for several years at the same company but are not yet considered regular employees and therefore not able to join unions. However, the biggest culprit is the Government itself. It is the biggest employer of non-regular workers. As of June 2022, there were 642,000 non-permanent government workers out of 2.5 million.

In 2019, despite the passage in both Houses of Congress of a Security of Tenure Bill that would have addressed contractualization, former President Duterte vetoed this legislation. This problem on contractualization must stop. We call on the Philippine Government to earnestly address the issue of contractualization and the precarity of work. We urge President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to certify as urgent the passage of the Security of Tenure Bill, which would finally plug the loopholes in the Labor Code that permit these problems.

Observer, Public Services International (PSI) – I am speaking on behalf of PSI and the nine organizations in the Philippines affiliated with us. PSI echoes the very serious concerns raised by the HLTM, the ILO supervisory mechanisms, and others relating to the extrajudicial killings of trade unionists, as well as a failure to bring any cases to justice or to provide any other remedies to victims and their families.

The Government continues to deny that the police and military are engaged in the practice of “red-tagging”, despite the findings of the HLTM and of the National Commission on Human Rights. The latter has found that “red-tagging” has been normalized and continues with impunity. The experience of PSI-affiliated organizations is that this sustained climate of intimidation and fear makes it impossible for workers in general to enjoy the rights afforded under the Convention. Workers are fearful of joining unions and becoming delegates speaking in support of other unions. Employers are emboldened to attack unions and can easily dissuade workers from joining unions by insinuating that they are linked to communism. This is particularly clear in the public service, where workers risk their careers if they are “red-tagged”. In addition, as previously noted by the Committee, the Government has made many commitments to adopt and amend industrial laws to improve compliance with labour standards. Yet, the proposed bills have failed to be transposed into law. This is, for instance, the case of the Public Sector Labor Relations Bill, which aims to address labour rights in the delivery of public services and was tabled for a second time, having languished under the previous administration. This bill addresses several omissions that impact public sector workers under the existing laws, such as the formation of a public sector labour relations board, freedom of association, collective bargaining, dispute resolution and the right to strike. Without these amendments, many Philippine workers continue to be denied their fundamental labour rights.

Therefore, we urge the Government of the Philippines to consult with social partners to revise Executive Order No. 23 and include the workers’ and employers’ representatives, establish an independent non-judicial body to commend testimonies, review cases and propose compensation measures for affected parties, adopt a time-bound road map in consultation with social partners, fully realize all the recommendations of the HLTM, and make sure that the Public Sector Labor Relations Bill is adopted without further delay.

Government representative – First of all, I thank all the speakers from the Government, Employers’ and the Workers’ groups for their comments on the updates that were given by the Philippines – not only today, but also on the updates that were submitted to the supervisory bodies of the ILO in the previous months.

There are five points that I would like to talk about in response to the various issues raised. The first is on Executive Order No. 23. The second is the road map. The third is the distinction, or the need to properly categorize, where there is a violation or where a criminal act is related to the exercise of the right to self-organization. The fourth is the strengthening of the monitoring bodies. The fifth is the legislative measures that were put forward by the various speakers. I think that these five areas summarize the various substantial comments of the various speakers.

If I may go back to Executive Order No. 23, the main concerns that we have heard from the labour sector are that: (i) there was a lack of consultation prior to the issuance of Executive Order No. 23; and (ii) there is lack of sectoral representation, particularly of the employer and the labour sectors, in the Committee.

With respect to the first observation, let me put on record that right after the HLTM was completed, we had already convened the leaders of the forum, as mentioned earlier by the Employers’ and Workers’ groups from the Philippines, to discuss the possible ways to move forward. One of the inputs of the labour sector was a draft presidential directive or seeking to implement the recommendation of the HLTM of a presidentially driven body. We note that the recommendation does not provide for the inclusion of sectoral representatives. The nature of that body is that it is a combination of prosecutorial, enforcement and investigative authorities, which are purely governmental functions. We would be very happy to see a model from anywhere in which prosecutorial bodies or investigative authorities have sectoral representation and we would be thus guided if such a model exists.

With respect to the lack of consultation, it is not necessarily the case that all consultations have to be held face to face. We, DOLE, met with the Leaders Forum. We were in touch with the Leaders Forum right after the HLTM was concluded, as I have mentioned earlier, and asked for directions to move forward. As I have said earlier, the labour sector – and I must acknowledge this – submitted a draft presidential directive to set up a presidential commission. That draft was taken into account in the drafting of what became Executive Order No. 23. As a matter of fact, the Executive Order, if we compare it to the draft submitted by the labour sector, is much more detailed and contains specific functions and areas of action that the original draft by the labour sector did not contain.

This is one of the circumstances that has to be taken into account in appreciating the context under which the Executive Order was issued. As I said, we are open to looking for ways to improve the Inter-Agency Committee, especially with the guidance of the international community if there is indeed such a committee anywhere that is mandated to undertake investigative and prosecutorial activities that includes sectoral representation. In relation to the Inter-Agency Committee, as I have mentioned earlier, it is setting a second meeting with the idea of inviting the sectoral representatives to a dialogue in order to receive more input on, among others, ways to improve prosecution and ways to move forward with the formulation of a time-bound tripartite road map.

With respect to the tripartite road map that the Conference and the Committee have recommended that the Philippines formulate, we take note of the recommendation of the two sectors, and also the government sector, about the formulation of a joint implementation plan, but first, we need to have the road map. As I said earlier, there is a technical working group composed of tripartite representatives that is formulating the road map even as we speak. The difficulty that has been confronted by the tripartite working group is the matter of identifying what are the time-bound commitments that each sector might include in the road map. The other challenge would be the scope. On one hand, it would be good to have a very broad scope for the road map, but on the other hand, it might also be equally good to have a focused scope so that the tripartite road map can be better monitored and can be more efficiently implemented. These are matters that the technical working group will have to thrash out.

Insofar as the NTIPC is concerned, the draft road map will have to be submitted to that Council for approval or for adoption. In this regard, I would like to request the patience of the Committee, particularly in giving the tripartite sectors more time to come up with a really specific and doable road map that is agreeable to everybody. Incidentally, it was actually the labour sector who asked for an extension to look at the detailed inputs to the road map, which we feel is a very reasonable request. Even so, we realize the importance of having a road map as soon as possible. We feel that there is no need to have another mechanism to monitor the joint implementation of this road map because right now we have the NTIP, which is already specifically mandated to do that.

Now the third item is the distinction between criminal acts that are to be processed through the regular courts and criminal acts that are directly related or arise from the exercise of the right to self-organization and freedom of association. This point has been made clear by several of the speakers. Let it be clear that the Philippine Government does not condone any criminal act one way or the other. No criminal act can be condoned and must be acted upon immediately, at the soonest possible time. The point that we wish to stress, however, is that there must be a clear distinction between criminal acts that involve directly, or that arise out of, the exercise of freedom of association and the right to self-organization and what we call regular or ordinary crimes. A case in point, as it was mentioned earlier, is the case of Alex Dolorosa. It has been spread over the media that Alex Dolorosa was a trade union organizer, but that is only a description of what he did when he was still alive. It appears that the current investigation of the police into the killing has nothing to do with trade union organizing. According to police reports, a suspect has been identified and evidence has been gathered pointing to the motive of the killing, something that is not related to trade union organizing but to robbery. While we commiserate and sympathize with the family of Alex Dolorosa, we would also like to state that his case should not be used unless there is clear and convincing evidence that the killing was trade union related. His case should not be used in the Committee or elsewhere as an example that in the Philippines there is impunity against trade union organizers. Indeed, he may have been one when he was alive, but according to the investigation thus far, it would appear that this killing was not union related. We would be happy to provide updates on this as we go along but with the caveat that, again, as the previous speakers have recalled, we ought to be careful not to immediately associate the killings with trade union organizing. The important point is the strengthening of regional tripartite mechanisms which is ongoing, and as I mentioned earlier, there is a good opportunity for the Philippines and for the tripartite partners to be involved in this because, in DOLE, we are actually allocating a programme called the Workers’ Organization and Development Program (WODP), which is funded to be used for the purpose of supporting the strengthening of these mechanisms, with of course the continuing assistance of the ILO.

Lastly, with respect to legislative measures, we are aware that there are legislative measures that have been filed and refiled in previous congresses and these legislative measures have not progressed. DOLE and the Executive Branch defer to the wisdom of Congress on the adoption of legislative measures, but, having said that, they will always insist that any mandatory legislation ought to conform with international labour standards that the Philippines has ratified. We are aware that one of the proposals pending in Congress with a view to facilitating the growth of unions is to have an amendment that will allow, or that will authorize, a union to be formed without regard to any minimum membership. That is one of the proposals in Congress. You can evaluate that proposal for yourselves: a union without any minimum membership requirement.

Second, there is also a bill that proposes abolishing all forms of short-term employment. We are not aware of any country in the world that does not have short-term employment, even in the most advanced economies. Therefore, we ought to be realistic about what to expect with the bills that are being filed. Also, with regard to the limitation on the right to organize, as mentioned earlier, there is no limitation on the provision in the Labor Code: workers, without distinction whatsoever, whether they are working for a non-profit religious charitable institution or not, are all allowed to organize. This is not an exclusionary provision in the Labor Code; it is an inclusionary provision. Let it be clear that there is no such limitation.

With respect to the public sector, the Philippines has just ratified the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151), and we are aware that there have been many suggestions or many proposals to legislate and put into law and practice the principles under that Convention. We do have an existing Executive Order that regulates the right of public sector workers to join associations. We recognize the fact, insofar as economic terms and conditions of employment are concerned, that there is a limitation on the right to negotiate or to bargain, but then again, the legislative framework needs to be amended in order for the rapid expansion of the rights of public sector unions to organize, and we will be willing to participate in the debates in Congress in relation to the proposed measures.

Worker members – I thank the Government for the information provided and everyone who has contributed to the discussion today. What remains clear is that there remain serious and systemic violations of the right to freedom of association in the Philippines. We need to draw to the Government’s attention that the HLTM is tripartite, and that a mission into any country, by the way, involves extensive tripartite consultations and takes recommendations from social partners, regarding how best to address the concerns raised. Extremely serious violations of freedom of association have been highlighted today. We must recall that labour rights are human rights, and the Committee is within its mandate to supervise violations of these labour-related murders and violence. It is up to a court to decide if there is any relation or not. The Government is clearly responsible. Whether it has directly perpetrated these violations through state security forces, or because it has created an environment of impunity by its failure to prevent violence against trade unions or to investigate and prosecute those ultimately responsible when it occurs. In addition to this, we must also reiterate the serious impacts of the proliferation of insecure forms of employment, which are being used without limitation, despite their clear disabling impact on the exercise of the rights protected by the Convention. To this we add, of course, several aspects of the Labor Code, which have been identified by the Committee of Experts for years as needing reform in order to comply with the Convention, without any action. Indeed, it is this inaction in the face of repeated supervisions, which is why we are here today. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, the HLTM has issued six recommendations, which include the incorporation of all previous recommendations from supervisory bodies, including the recommendations of this Committee in 2019. The HLTM report also recommends that a joint implementation report by the tripartite partners should be made available to the ILO prior to the 2023 sitting of the Committee. This has not been done. We fully expect the Government to comply with these recommendations and to do so in full consultation with the social partners. We take note of the proposed road map and urge the Government to finalize this road map, in consultation with social partners and with the support of the ILO, so that it fully addresses the HLTM’s recommendations and also sets specific deadlines for its implementation. This is the only way forward.

In closing, we must concur with the conclusion of the HLTM that while some progress may be observed in recent years, this remains largely insufficient in view of the very serious issues which have been raised with and by the ILO supervisory bodies over an extended period. We urge the Government to waste no more time and to finalize and fully implement the road map on priority areas of action, and in accordance with agreed time frames, and we would urge the Government to accept the technical assistance of the Office with the implementation of legal and institutional reforms necessary to give full effect to the road map on time. This is, in our view, the surest way to avoid the case returning to the Committee.

Employer members – I will make just two points. Regarding the HLTM’s recommendation for the establishment of a single presidentially mandated body, having spoken to members of the mission, I can say that there was no expectation, either express or implied, that this was going to be a Government-only body. There was simply a request, or a recommendation, for a presidentially mandated body and, to that end, I would echo the views expressed by many on ensuring that there is tripartite participation in that process because it is that process which will effectively be the oversight of all other aspects of progress.

With that, I am just turning to the basic conclusions. The things we want to see from the Government are, as the workers have said, early and quick progress on all the recommendations from the tripartite mission, amending the Labor Code to bring it into full conformity with the Convention, ensuring that workers are not penalized for exercising their lawful rights to associate and to form organizations, providing the information requested on any developments on the outstanding issues before the next session of the Committee of Experts, and, lastly, ensuring that the Inter-Agency Committee is in fact tripartite in nature so that full and open dialogue can occur on all these issues.

Chairperson – I want to thank the Government of the Philippines, the delegation here, once again for participating in the work of this Committee and for sharing this information.

Conclusions by the Committee

The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the Government and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted the long-standing nature and the prior discussion of this case in the Committee, most recently in 2019.

The Committee noted with deep concern the numerous allegations of murders of trade unionists and anti-union violence, allegations of serious and systemic violations of the right to freedom of association as well as of lack of investigation in relation to these allegations.

The Committee noted the concerns raised by the social partners regarding the failure of the Government to submit a joint implementation report with them as recommended by the high-level tripartite mission that took place on 23–26 January 2023.

The Committee noted that the Government has taken some steps to implement the recommendations set out in the report of the high-level tripartite mission but regretted that many recommendations remain unaddressed.

Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government, in consultation with the social partners, to:

- put an immediate end to any act of violence and intimidation against union members for the legitimate exercise of their rights under the Convention as well as violations of freedom of association, in line with the recommendations of the ILO high-level tripartite mission;

- immediately and effectively undertake investigations into the allegations of violence in relation to members of workers’ organizations with a view to establishing the facts, determining culpability and punishing the perpetrators;

- operationalize the monitoring bodies, including by providing adequate resources, and provide regular information on these mechanisms and on progress on the cases assigned to them; and

- ensure that all workers without distinction are able to form and join organizations of their choosing in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention.

The Committee urges the Government to take decisive and effective measures to promote a climate of non-violence, as well as constructive social dialogue and labour relations at all levels in the country.

The Committee requests the Government to finalize, with ILO technical assistance and in consultation with the social partners, the roadmap on effectively addressing all outstanding issues and transmit a report on progress made to the Committee of Experts by 1 September 2023.

Government representative – The Philippine Government expresses its appreciation for this opportunity to make a statement on the proposed conclusions of this Committee in relation to the case of the Philippines arising from the application and implementation of the Convention.

The Government draws attention to the statement in the conclusion noting that the Government has taken some steps to implement the recommendations set out in the report of the high-level tripartite mission (HLTM) but that regrettably many of the recommendations remain unaddressed.

To put into context the actions taken by the Government, the HLTM came to the Philippines on 23–26 January 2023. Its final report and recommendations were made available to the Philippine Government on 30 March 2023. Within this short period of time the Government was able to set up an Inter-Agency Committee composed of the major agencies of the Government that are directly involved in the investigation, prosecution and resolution of the cases that have been reported to this Committee, with the view of promoting and protecting the principles under Convention No. 87. The Inter-Agency Committee, as the Government stated in its opening statement, is a necessary enabling mechanism to ensure that the cases in question are finally resolved.

The Government expresses deep concern that the formulation of the proposed conclusion tends to devalue, rather than encourage, the Inter-Agency Committee to do its work. Nevertheless, the Government, through the Inter-Agency Committee and the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council, assures this Committee of its continued commitment to bringing a just resolution enclosure to all pertinent issues raised. The proposed conclusions also note the concerns raised by the social partners regarding the failure of the Government to submit a joint implementation report with them, as recommended by the HLTM. To call this a failure on the part of the Government is false and has no factual basis. The Government has earlier stated its commitment to formulating a tripartite road map to resolve the issues raised. The road map will necessarily contain a joint implementation strategy of an action plan consistent with the recommendations of the HLTM. The Tripartite Working Group agreed upon by the tripartite partnership themselves is currently completing the road map. Recognizing the inherent challenges in working out the details of the road map, the social partners in the Philippines, some of whom are in this Committee, have themselves requested more time to provide input. The Government finds this request reasonable. Allowing more time for tripartite consensus on such critical matters can never be characterized as a failure. On these specific cases, particularly allegations of murder, violence and so on, the Government reiterates that it does not condone any murder or violence committed against any person. We reiterate the need to ensure proper categorization of these cases so that only cases that arise out of or have causal connection with trade union activity should be placed under the scrutiny of the Committee.

The Government gives assurance that it remains committed to promoting respect for international labour standards and will continue to work with the ILO in this regard.

Lastly, on behalf of the Philippine Government and the social partners of the Philippines, as well as on my personal behalf, let me take this opportunity to thank you, for the discipline, leadership and statesmanship that you have shown in ensuring the full conclusion of these proceedings. As we conclude this session let me wish all the distinguished delegates continuing inspiration in leading their sectors in the individual and collective pursuit of advancing social justice. May you all have safe travels back home.