Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 147, 1975

Cas no 608 (Inde) - Date de la plainte: 06-AOÛT -69 - Clos

1. 31. The Committee examined this case at its 56th Session (November 1970), when it submitted to the Governing Body interim conclusions contained in paragraphs 207-234 of its 120th Report. It re-examined the case at its 62nd Session (November 1972), when it submitted to the Governing Body a further report contained in paragraphs 197-203 of its 133rd Report.
2. 32. India has not ratified either the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 33. The case consists essentially of the following allegations: workers are said to have been arrested while on strike, and a fire was alleged to have been started by the employers themselves to provide a pretext on which to arrest the leader of the union; it was asserted that workers had been arrested and tortured and that some of those arrested were still in custody without ever having been formally charged; the sole purpose behind all these anti-union measures was allegedly to crush the union.
2. 34. At its 56th Session the Committee recommended the Governing Body to draw the attention of the Government to the importance which the Committee attaches to the principle according to which trade unionists who are arrested for political offences or common law crimes should receive a fair trial at the earliest possible moment by an impartial and independent judicial authority, and to request the Government to be good enough to furnish the texts of any judgments which had been or might be delivered in any of the cases referred to by the complainants, together with the reasons for them.
3. 35. On 8 May 1972 the Government forwarded the text of a judgment pronounced by a Bangalore court on 24 January 1972. It emerges from this judgment that the case against two workers who had been charged, together with seven other persons, with setting fire to stables at the Bangalore Turf Club, injuring horses and damaging a polo ground was not proceeded with owing to lack of evidence. According to the information supplied by the Government, the other accused persons failed to put in an appearance. The charges against some of them were dropped, while the cases against the others have been transferred to the long pending register. It thus appeared that none of the accused was any longer in custody.
4. 36. In these circumstances the Committee considered at its 62nd Session that no useful purpose would be served by pursuing the matter further and recommended the Governing Body to decide that the case did not call for further examination.
5. 37. In a communication dated 5 July 1973 the complainant union forwarded further observations on the case. In particular, it states that its General Secretary, Mr. Roy (who signed the communication), was arrested on 21 June 1973 and released on bail the next day by the competent magistrate. It also states that three workers, Mr. Md. Ismile, Mr. Kolvian and Mr. Chandra Paul Singh, have been missing since 26 July 1969, the date on which the fire occurred in the stables at Bangalore. The complainant also goes in detail over the ground covered in his previous letters.
6. 38. The Government replied on 10 July 1974. It points out that a number of the matters raised in the complainants' communication had already been referred to in the original complaint and examined by the Committee. It confirms that Mr. Roy was arrested and subsequently released on bail. It also states that subsequently the accused did not present himself before the competent court on the different occasions on which the latter examined the case and that finally the magistrate, deeming the case an old one, refused to allow the police further time to bring the accused before him and decided to drop the proceedings. A copy of the order delivered by the court is attached to the Government's reply.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 39. The Committee notes that Mr. Roy is free and that the charges against him have been dropped.
2. 40. As for the other three workers referred to by the complainants, the Committee notes that, according to information previously provided by the Government and confirmed by the complainant union in its most recent communication, they belong to the group of persons who did not appear in court to answer to the criminal charges made against them after the fire in the stables at Bangalore. The Government had stated at the time (see paragraph 36) that the charges against some of those persons had been dropped, while the cases against the others had been transferred to the long pending register. The date of the disappearance of these three workers given by the complainants falls before these more recent events. According to the information available, the persons concerned are not being held at the disposal of the authorities, and no evidence that the Government is in any way responsible for their disappearance has been offered.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 41. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to decide that the case does not call for further examination.