Definitive Report - Report No 391, October 2019

Case No 3135 (Honduras) - Complaint date: 11-AUG-15 - Closed

Allegations: the complainant organization alleges the initiation of disciplinary proceedings for the imposition of penalties and dismissals, other anti-union acts, and the refusal by the state entity Executive Directorate of Revenues (DEI) to negotiate with the trade union

1. 318. The Committee last examined this case (submitted in August 2015) at its June 2016 session, when it submitted an interim report to the Governing Body [see 378th Report, approved by the Governing Body at its 327th Session (June 2016), paras 401–419].
2. 319. The Government sent its observations in communications dated 28 September 2016 and 28 February 2019.
3. 320. Honduras has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 321. At its June 2016 session, the Committee made the following recommendations [see 378th Report, para. 419]:
   • (a) The Committee requests the Government to inform it of the results of: (i) the appeal for the protection of constitutional rights (amparo) lodged with the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court in respect of the dismissal of Mr Jorge Alberto Argueta Romero and Mr Carlos Alberto Rodríguez; and (ii) the action of unconstitutionality lodged by the Workers’ Union of the Executive Directorate of Revenues (SITRADEI) against the use of polygraph tests.
   • (b) The Committee requests the complainant organization to provide more detail about the allegations concerning: (i) the initiation of disciplinary proceedings for the purpose of dismissing trade unionists who do not agree to a polygraph test; and (ii) the detention of trade unionists, as a result of the intervention of police and military officials at the country’s customs posts, claiming alleged acts of corruption.

B. The Government’s reply

1. 322. In its communications dated 28 September 2016 and 28 February 2019, the Government states the following:
   • (i) On 23 January 2015, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court ordered the dismissal of the appeal for amparo filed by the representative of Mr Jorge Alberto Argueta Romero in respect of the decision issued by the Labour Court of Appeal, finding that the decision of the competent judicial body was duly justified.
   • (ii) As to the dismissal of Mr Carlos Alberto Rodríguez Espinal, on 21 June 2016, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court denied the appeal for amparo for the union leader, thus confirming the decision of the Labour Court of Appeal.
   • (iii) With regard to the action of unconstitutionality lodged by SITRADEI against the use of polygraph tests, the Government reports that in its decision dated 30 March 2016, the Supreme Court ended the stay in proceedings by finding a previous judgment from the same chamber, on the same grounds, in which it had ruled that such tests did not violate constitutional rights and guarantees.
2. 323. Lastly, the Government indicates that the Executive Directorate of Revenues (DEI) was closed and liquidated through Executive Decree No. PCM 083 2015 of 26 November 2015 and that the Presidential Commissioner for Tax Administration now exercises tax-related powers and functions.

C. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 324. The Committee recalls that the present case refers to alleged actions or omissions by the DEI, which occurred between August 2011 and January 2015, consisting of: the intention to destroy SITRADEI through anti-union harassment of SITRADEI officials and members; the initiation of disciplinary proceedings, with the aim of dismissing trade unionists who would not agree to a polygraph test; and the arrest of trade union members following the intervention of police and military officials at the country’s customs posts, claiming alleged acts of corruption.
2. 325. With regard to the allegations concerning the anti-union dismissals of Mr Jorge Alberto Argueta Romero and Mr Carlos Alberto Rodríguez, the Committee duly notes that on 23 January 2015, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court ordered the dismissal of the appeal for amparo lodged by Mr Jorge Alberto Argueta Romero and that on 21 June 2016, it denied the appeal for amparo for Mr Carlos Alberto Rodríguez, thus upholding their dismissals.
3. 326. As to the action of unconstitutionality lodged by SITRADEI against the use of polygraph tests, the Committee duly notes that the Supreme Court ended the stay in proceedings by finding a previous judgment from the same chamber, in which it had ruled that such tests did not violate constitutional rights and guarantees. Recalling that in its previous examination of the case, the Committee recognized the workers’ fear that polygraph tests could be used for anti-union purposes, the Committee trusts that should the Government receive any complaints relating to the use of polygraph tests for anti-union purposes, it will ensure that the appropriate investigations are conducted as soon as possible.
4. 327. With respect to the allegations concerning the initiation of disciplinary proceedings and the arrest of trade union members, the Committee observes that the complainant organization does not provide the requested information. In these circumstances, in the absence of any additional information from the complainant, the Committee will not pursue the examination of these allegations.

The Committee’s recommendation

1. 328. In the light of its foregoing conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to decide that this case does not call for further examination.