Report in which the committee requests to be kept informed of development - Report No 204, November 1980

Case No 930 (Türkiye) - Complaint date: 30-APR-79 - Closed

231. The Committee already examined Case No. 930 at several of its sessions, most recently in May 1980, when it submitted an interim report to the Governing Body. Since then, observations have been received from the Government in a communication dated 25 August 1980.

1. 231. The Committee already examined Case No. 930 at several of its sessions, most recently in May 1980, when it submitted an interim report to the Governing Body. Since then, observations have been received from the Government in a communication dated 25 August 1980.
2. 232. Case No. 962 relates to complaints which have not yet been examined by the Committee. These, together with additional information supplied by the complainants, are contained in two communications dated 5 and 7 lay 1980, respectively, presented by the World Confederation of Labour (WCL) and the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU). The complaints relate to measures taken against the Confederation of Progressive Trade Unions of Turkey (DISK). Additional information was supplied by the WCL in a letter dated 6 May 1980. The Government, in turn, supplied its observations in a letter dated 20 August 1980.
3. 233. Also, new complaints after the change of Government in Turkey relating to the dissolution of DISK and the arrest of trade union leaders were received on 17 and 22 September 1980 (Cases Nos. 997 and 999). These complaints have been transmitted to the new Government, which has net yet communicated its observations, The Committee intends to examine these cases at its next session.
4. 234. Turkey has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Eight to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), but has ratified the Right to organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

Case No. 930

1. A. Previous examination of the case
2. 235. The allegations remaining outstanding after the examination of the case by the Committee in May 1980 relate to the search and closure of regional or local premises of union federations and the situation of a number of trade union leaders and militants liable to judicial proceedings and others still under arrest for having participated in trade union meetings or having sung in December 1979 the Internationale regarded by the Government as "the hymn of the communist countries", or because the forces of order had found "prohibited publications" on the trade union premises, or because the trade unionists had protested against the arrest of their leaders.
3. 236. The trade unionists in question are Metin Denismen, President of the Union of Bank Employees (BANKSEN), Fehmi Tsiklar, Secretary-General of DISK, Gultakin Gazioglu and ten other militants of the Association of Turkish Teachers (TOEBDER), Cevat Ozhasirci, President of tee Union of construction workers (BAYSEN), and leaders of the Union of Metallurgical Workers (MADEN-IS), namely Kemal Turkler, President, Mehmet Karaca, Secretary-General, and Bahtiyar Erkul, Kemal Laysal, Necdet Onaram and Abdullab Yilmaz, the latter being President of the Regional Union of Ankara (MADEN-IS).
4. 237. At its May 1980 session, the Governing Body, on the recommendation of the Committee, had requested the Government to supply its observations on the allegations of the complainants respecting the search and closure of regional or local premises of union federations as well as detailed information on the situation of the above-mentioned trade unionists and the results of the legal proceedings instituted against them, in particular the judgements in the case of Mr. Gultekin Gazioglu and his companions.
5. B. Reply of the Government
6. 238. In its communication dated 25 August 1980, the Government replied, in general terms, that section 3 of Act No. 1402 concerning the state of emergency in force in 20 provinces out of 67 authorised the military commander of the state of emergency to resort to emergency measures when so required to safeguard public order.
7. 239. Regarding the search and closure of regional or local premises of union federations, the Government stated that, in regions where the state of emergency is not in force, search and closure can, only be made after a search warrant has been issued or a court decision delivered. In regions where the state of emergency is in, force, and when the cases in question come within the jurisdiction of the authorities of the state of emergency, the military commander of the state of emergency may, pursuant to the powers conferred upon him under section 3 of Act No. 1402, order the search or closure of premises of associations of all kinds. The Government stated that no judicial or administrative appeal had been lodged to the effect that the local civil or military authorities had infringed these provisions.
8. 240. Regarding the trade unionists whose names were mentioned by the complainants, the Government stated they continued to exercise their trade union activities in complete freedom and that no trade unionist had been arrested or detained on account of strictly trade union activities.
9. Case No. 962
10. A. Allegations of the complainants
11. 243. In further communications dated 5 and 7 May 1980, WCL and WFTU alleged that the Government was pursuing a policy designed to repress and intimidate DISK.
12. 244. According to the complainant organisations, the Government had banned the celebration of May Day. Two days before, the printing shop belonging to the union of public utility workers had been broker into by members of the armed forces, and May Day propaganda material seized. On 30 April, the armed forces had stormed the DISK headquarters and 23 of its leaders were arrested.
13. 245. Further, again according to the complainants, on 5 May the armed forces had again broken into the DISK headquarters and arrested another 16 trade union leaders, including F. Isiklar, Secretary-General of DISK (already mentioned in Case No. 930 above), Mr. Nebioglu, Vice-President, H. Ekinci, Deputy Secretary-General, T. Kocamanoglu, member of the executive Committee, and K. Akar, Chairman of the board of DISK. The complainants claim that all of these officers were tortured and placed in solitary confinement by the authorities of the state of emergency.
14. 246. The complainants allege that A Bastürk, R. Guven and M. Aktalgali and all the other members of the executive Committee of DISK - except for one, who has gone abroad - are now in prison. In all, 367 leaders or militants of that union have, moreover, been arrested.
15. 247. For its part, WFTU adds that the banning of may Day celebrations led to protest strikes and marches which were suppressed in Istanbul, Izmir, Ankara and especially Antalya where the police allegedly intervened, killing a 10 year old boy and wounding several demonstrators. In addition, 700 workers and trade union militants are said to have been arrested in various towns in the country. WFTU states that during a demonstration at Mersin, however, trade unionists manifested their determination to combat the wave of repression directed against the working class and to defend its freedoms and rights.
16. B. Reply of the Government
17. 248. In its reply of 20 August 1980, the Government explains that Turkey is going through a difficult period marked by terrorist acts perpetrated by underground extremist groups. The Government recognises that in the present case the military commander of the state of emergency had to ban all public gatherings at Istanbul on 1 May. The Government adds that this decision was taken pursuant to the State of Emergency Act (No. 1402) and was intended to safeguard public order and prevent a loss of human life, since the armed forces were uncertain whether they would be able to ensure the safety of the participants and organisers. Accordingly, the DISK demonstration was banned at Istanbul. On the other hand, the Government states that May Day demonstrations were freely organised in other towns, including a demonstration held by DISK at Mersin with the participation of workers from all over the country.
18. 249. Nevertheless, continues the Government, the DISK leaders called a strike to protest against the ban, thus breaking the law and rendering themselves liable to a sentence of up to six months' imprisonment under section 55 of Act No. 275 concerning strikes. Those leaders were therefore arrested and brought before the court of first instance at Bakirköy (Istanbul) on 29 April 1980. After holding some in custody for six days, and others less, the court decided to release all the leaders while retaining the charges against them.
19. 250. Meanwhile, the Government adds, other legal proceedings were instituted by the public prosecutor of the Istanbul state of emergency tribunal against the President of DISK, who had again been arrested, this time by the military authorities of the state of emergency. Following the preliminary investigation, however, the President of DISK was again released. According to the Government, all of the administrative and judicial proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and existing legal procedures. It adds that it will inform the Committee of the results of the Bakirköy trial as soon as they are known.

Case No. 930

1. C. Conclusions of the Committee
2. 241. As regards the allegations relating to the search and closure of trade union premises, the Committee takes note of the explanations supplied by the Government on the matter. Since similar allegations are examined in connection with case No. 962, the Committee refers to the conclusions it has reached on this point in the new case.
3. 242. As regards the trade unionists whose names were mentioned by the complainants, in its reply of 25 August 1980 the Government stated, in very general terms, that they continued to exercise their activities in complete freedom without however specifying whether or not they were liable to legal proceedings. In this connection, the Committee regrets that the Government has not supplied more precise information on the situation of the trade union leaders mentioned by the complainants, as the Committee had requested, and in particular that it has still not communicated the text of the judgement was allegedly delivered in the case of Gultekin Gazioglu of the TOEBDER Association of Teachers.
4. Case No. 962
5. C. Conclusions of the Committee
6. 251. The Committee notes that, in this case and to some extent in the preceding one, the questions raised relate to the banning of May Day demonstrations, the occupation of trade union premises and the confiscation of trade union literature, and the arrest of trade union leaders and militants during ensuing protest strikes as well as acts of violence directed against them.
7. (a) Allegation concerning the banning of May Day demonstrations
8. 252. In connection with this aspect of the case, the Committee notes that the information supplied by the Government differs from that supplied by the complainants in that the Government states that May Day demonstrations were banned only in Istanbul under the state of emergency, whereas the complainants assert that marches protesting against the ban were also suppressed in other towns of the country. In support of its statement, the Government specifies that a May Day demonstration, attended by workers from all over the country, was held at Mesin, as the complainants acknowledge themselves. At all events, it is clear from the information available teat May Day celebrations were banned by the military commander of Istanbul under the state of emergency.
9. 253. In this respect, the Committee recalls, first of all, that the right to organise public meetings and marches on the occasion of ray is, as it has stated on numerous occasions, an important aspect of trade union rights.
10. 254. The Committee also considers that it rests with the Government, which is responsible for the maintenance of public order, to decide whether meetings or demonstrations, including those of a trade union character, may in certain circumstances endanger public order and security and to take adequate preventive measures.
11. 255. However, if tile authorities decide to ban a demonstration in order to avoid disturbances, they should, in the Committee's opinion, strive to reach an agreement with the organisers of the demonstration in order to allow it to be held in some other place where there would be no fear of disturbances. Although such a demonstration was in fact held at Mersin, on this point the Committee notes that protest marches were apparently put down in several Turkish towns.
12. (b) Allegations concerning the occupation of premises and the confiscation of May Day propaganda material
13. 256. The complainants also allege that the DISK premises were occupied twice and that trade union propaganda material was seized by the authorities. On this point, the Government has not commented on the measures denounced by the complainants in connection with case No. 962, but has, in connection with case No. 930, stated that the military commander of the state of emergency may, under the State of Emergency Act, order premises of associations of all kinds to be searched or closed.
14. 257. In this respect, the Committee considers that the occupation of trade union premises and the confiscation of May Day propaganda material or other trade union publications may constitute a serious interference by the authorities in trade union activities, as it has stated in the past, and consequently may run counter to the principle that trade unions have the right to organise their activities and to the legal exercise thereof without hindrance by the public authorities. Furthermore, the International Labour Conference, in its 1970 resolution concerning trade union rights and their relation to civil liberties, placed special emphasis on freedom of opinion and expression, the right to receive and impart information and ideas through any media, and the right to protection of trade union, property.
15. (c) Allegations concerning the arrest of DISK leaders
16. 258. In this respect, the Committee notes that the persons concerned have been released pending trial for violation of Act No. 275 concerning strikes in these circumstances, it considers that it would be useful for it to be informed of the outcome of the judicial proceedings under way.
17. (d) Allegations concerning acts of violence during demonstrations protesting against the banning of May Day celebrations
18. 259. The Government has not supplied any observations about the acts of violence which resulted in the death of a child and the wounding of several demonstrators at Antalya.
19. 260. The Committee therefore does not have sufficient information available on this aspect of the case to reach conclusions based on a full knowledge of the facts. Speaking more generally, however, the Committee wishes to remind the Government that the right to strike is generally recognised as a fundamental means available to workers and their organisations for protecting their economic and social interests. The Committee calls attention to the gravity of certain allegations made by the complainants concerning the death and wounding of demonstrators. In cases where the dispersal of demonstrations for reasons of public order has resulted in the loss of human life and injury, the Committee has always' attached special importance to the need to proceed immediately to an impartial and full inquiry to determine responsibility for the action.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 261. In these circumstances, the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
   • (a) to note that at the time of the Government's replies of 20 and 25 August 1980 some trade union leaders or militants had been released;
   • (b) to request the Government to keep the Committee informed of the results of any judicial proceedings instituted against the trade unionists mentioned by the complainants in Case No. 930 (see paragraph 236 above) and to supply the text of any judgement delivered as a result of those proceedings, together with the reasons adduced therefore;
   • (c) to draw the Government's attention to:
   • (i) the principles and considerations set forth in paragraphs 253 to 255 above concerning the banning of May Day demonstrations, in particular the principle that the right to organise public meetings and marches on 1 Lay is an important aspect of trade union rights;
   • (ii) the principles and considerations set forth in paragraphs 255 and 257 concerning the occupation of trade union premises and the confiscation of May Day propaganda material or other trade union publications, while reminding it in particular that the International Labour Conference, in its 1970 resolution concerning trade union rights and their relation to civil liberties, placed special emphasis on freedom of opinion and expression, the right to receive and impart information and ideas through any media, and the right to protection of trade union property;
   • (d) to request the Government to communicate the text of the judgements delivered by the court of Bakirköy in the case of the DISK leaders together with the reasons adduced therefore, as soon as the judgements have been delivered, as well as information on the proceedings instituted by the public prosecutor of the state of emergency tribunal against the President of DISK;
   • (e) to note that, subsequent to the change of Government in Turkey, new complaints, relating to the dissolution of DISK and the arrest of trade union leaders were received on 17 and 20 September 1980 (Cases Nos. 997 and 999), that they have been transmitted to the new Government, which has not yet communicated its observations, and that the Committee intends to examine these cases at its next session.