Definitive Report - Report No 27, 1958

Case No 166 (Greece) - Complaint date: 15-MAY-57 - Closed

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 65. By a communication dated 15 May 1957 the Federation of Greek Maritime Unions (Cardiff) submitted both to the United Nations and to the International Labour Organisation a complaint containing allegations of infringements of the exercise of trade union rights by the Government of Greece.
2. 66. According to the complainants the Greek Government, making common cause with the Greek shipowners, is taking all possible measures to defeat the efforts of Greek seamen to achieve greater unity of trade union action and more effective defence of their rights and occupational interests, this anti-trade union activity on the part of the Greek authorities having manifested itself recently by the widespread distribution of a pamphlet among Greek seamen in foreign ports. This pamphlet warns seamen against the complaining organisation and denounces its alleged Communist tendency. The pamphlet also contains a number of photographs of leaders of the Federation of Greek Maritime Unions and a commentary in which those leaders are stigmatised as dangerous anarchists. In this way, it is alleged, the pamphlet constitutes a blacklist, because it calls upon the masters of ships not to embark the persons therein mentioned.
3. 67. The pamphlet, a copy of which was appended to the complaint, makes, more specifically, the following points. Firstly, it indicates that the complaining organisation is merely a camouflaged Communist organisation, which seeks not to defend the occupational interests of seamen but to persuade them to engage in subversive activities for the purpose of extending communism in Greece. It states that the leaders of the Federation whose photographs are reproduced are agents in the pay of the Greek Communist Party and certain foreign countries, that they pursue exclusively demagogic aims and that, in short, they are enemies of the Greek seamen and of the country as a whole. The pamphlet goes on to warn seamen against the activities of these persons, stating that only in New York are there representatives of the Pan-Hellenic Seamen's Federation and that all agents who may pose as such in other ports can only be usurpers seeking to abuse the good faith of Greek seamen. It concludes by indicating to Greek seamen that they may contact not only their trade union organisations but also the consular authorities and the Greek Ministry for Merchant Shipping.
4. 68. The complainants declare that, while the Greek authorities do not have the courage to sign the pamphlet complained against, there is nevertheless no doubt as to its origin, the fact that it has been distributed to all the masters of ships by the Greek port authorities and Greek consulates abroad being sufficient to prove the official origin of the document, if such proof were necessary. The complainants state further that the Greek press itself has published information to the effect that a document relating to the activities of the Federation of Greek Maritime Unions was distributed to Greek seamen through and under the auspices of the Ministry for Merchant Shipping. They attach to their communication a press cutting containing this information. The information in question made it clear that the document was propaganda material directed against the Federation.
5. 69. According to the complainants the Government has adopted this attitude in order to serve the interests of the shipowners as they exploit Greek seamen to an ever-increasing degree. It is alleged that it constitutes a violation of universally recognised human rights and of trade union and democratic freedom.
6. 70. By a letter dated 6 June 1957 the Director-General of the I.L.O informed the complaining organisation of its right to furnish, within a period of one month, further information in substantiation of its complaint. The organisation has not availed itself of this facility.
7. 71. The complaint was communicated to the Greek Government for its observations by a letter dated 6 June 1957.
   • ANALYSIS OF THE REPLY
8. 72. The Greek Government presented its observations on the complaint of the Federation of Greek Maritime Unions in a communication dated 17 September 1957.
9. 73. The Government begins by stating that, in connection with earlier cases, it has already had occasion to furnish information as to the political tendencies of the complaining organisation and as to the real nature of its activities. It also recalls that the Federation of Greek Maritime Unions, as a trade union organisation, has been dissolved and outlawed. Finally, the Government declares, it was after these measures had been taken that the complaining organisation found itself obliged to go abroad to carry on its seditious activities.
10. 74. With regard to the specific allegations contained in the complaint which is before the Committee in the present case, the Government states that there is nothing in the pamphlets complained against which would permit of the conclusion that they emanate from the Greek public authorities. The Government declares that organisations do exist, both in Greece and abroad, which have assumed the task of enlightening Greek seamen concerning the illegal aims of the Federation of Greek Maritime Unions, and implies that the publication and distribution of the pamphlets in question are probably the work of one of those organisations. The Government states that there is no merit in the argument of the complainants with respect to the fact that the Greek press has published information which corresponds with their allegations because the information in question was in no way official and merely reflected the opinions of the newspaper editors who referred to the subject in their columns.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 75. As the Government points out, the Committee has already had before it in the past complaints presented by the Federation of Greek Maritime Unions. In connection with these previous cases the Greek Government declared that the complaining organisation was directed by Communists and, under the cloak of trade unionism, sought to create " red nuclei " among the crews of Greek ships, and engaged in illegal or wrongful activities most usually outside the scope of normal trade union activities. It was due to these circumstances that the Federation of Greek Maritime Unions was prohibited in Greece and established its headquarters in Cardiff, from where it now directs its activities.
2. 76. In the earlier cases referred to above, the trade union status of the complaining organisation was not questioned by the Committee and the present case contains no new information which would justify a change in its attitude from this point of view. The only question now before the Committee, therefore, is to decide whether the specific allegations formulated by the complainant appear to have any foundation or not.
3. 77. The essence of the allegations may be summarised as follows : that propaganda pamphlets directed against the complaining organisation have been distributed among Greek seamen, and that the pamphlets warn the seamen not to trust the Federation of Greek Maritime Unions and slander the organisation in violent terms. It is alleged further that the pamphlets emanate from the Greek public authorities and that, by influencing seamen with regard to their choice of trade union, the Government has rendered itself guilty of a violation of freedom of association.
4. 78. Although it does not conceal its hostility towards the complaining organisation, the Government denies having been concerned in the publication or distribution of the pamphlets against which complaint is made. It points out that, as the complainants themselves admit, the pamphlets in question contain nothing to cause it to be supposed that they emanate from the public authorities, and concludes that the complainants' deductions are arbitrary and their statements entirely gratuitous.
5. 79. On considering, firstly, the question of principle raised by the complaint submitted to the Committee, it is to be observed that it bears certain analogies to cases which have come before the Committee in the past. The question at issue is connected with the problem of freedom of speech and its limits. The Committee has already had occasion to point out that " the right to express opinions through the press or otherwise is clearly one of the essential elements of trade union rights ". While freedom of expression must therefore be accorded to trade union organisations, it is evident that the same freedom cannot be denied to governments. In other words, for example, if a government has been the subject of attack or criticism by trade unions, it would be normal for it to have the right to reply and to make known its point of view and for such reply to receive the same publicity as did the attacks made on the government. The government should not, however, exercise such freedom of expression in such terms and by such means-in particular, by utilisation of the machinery of State-as to assume a coercive character and infringe the right of workers to belong to organisations of their own choosing.
6. 80. Thus, in an earlier case in which a complaint was presented against the Government of India, and in which it was alleged that a circular had been distributed which was of such a nature as to influence workers in their choice of a trade union, the Committee expressed the view that the issue of such documents, even though not intended to interfere with trade union rights, might not unnaturally be regarded as such an interference. In another case, relating to the United States, in which it was alleged that, in the course of a speech made at a meeting of workers, the Secretary of Labor urged the workers in a plant to vote for one trade union to the detriment of another, the Committee took the view that the allegation made by the complainant could not be dismissed out of hand on the plea that, even if proved, it would not constitute an infringement of the exercise of trade union rights, and indicated that the crux of the matter was whether the participation of the Secretary of Labor was or could reasonably have been regarded by the workers as being a threat which limited the complete freedom of the employees to vote by secret ballot for the union of their choice. The Committee considered that the answer to this question would depend on the circumstances and traditions of the country concerned and upon the safeguards existing there for civil liberties and political freedom.
7. 81. As it appeared in the case last-mentioned, the question as to how far the attitude publicly adopted by a government towards a trade union organisation constitutes an infringement of the workers' right to belong to organisations of their own choosing would seem to depend essentially on factual circumstances ; it might depend, for example, on the terms in which the government complained against expressed its point of view, on the conditions in which this view was brought to the notice of the public or of the workers concerned (press, utilisation of the machinery of State, etc.) and on any other elements which might make it possible to judge whether the position taken up by the government did or did not assume a coercive character or might probably have exercised pressure on the workers concerned.
8. 82. In the present case the only element before the Committee is the content of the pamphlet complained against, which has been furnished by the complainants. This pamphlet contains, firstly, accusations based on the character and activities of the Federation of Greek Maritime Unions and, secondly, a warning to seamen against the agents of the said organisation, which has been prohibited in Greece since 1947.
9. 83. Further, it has not been established that the distribution of the pamphlets was ensured by the Greek port authorities and Greek consulates in foreign ports, as the complaining organisation maintains. The Federation adduces no conclusive proof in support of this contention. It states, certainly-and furnishes a press cutting for this purpose-that Greek newspapers published information to the effect that the public authorities were really responsible for the distribution of the pamphlet in question. The Government replies, however, that information published in the press, which is free, is published on the responsibility only of those who publish it, and thus implicitly denies the " news " which may have been published.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 84. In these circumstances, bearing in mind that the specific facts relating to the distribution of the pamphlets complained against have not been established, the Committee considers that, in the present case, the complainants have not offered sufficient proof to show that there has been any infringement of trade union rights by the Government, and, therefore, recommends the Governing Body to decide that the case does not call for further examination.