CUT and CTC letter to the ILO

Mr. JUAN SOMAVIA

Director-General, ILO

Mr. GUY RYDER

Executive Director, ILO Standards and Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work Sector

Ms. CLEOPATRA DOUMBIA

Director, ILO International Labour Standards Department

Members of the

ILO Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations

Dear Sirs and Madams,

Colombia has been under observation of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (CEACR), through its reports, for over 20 years. These reports are the basis for the discussion of the 25 cases brought to the Conference Committee each year at the International Labour Conference held by the ILO to examine the state of compliance, both in law and in practice, with the conventions ratified by member States who have been called by the Committee.

Since 1990, the Committee has been closely monitoring severe acts of antiunion violence, impunity in trade union abuses, and widespread violations of the freedom of organization, the right to collective bargaining, and the right to strike committed in Colombia.

While it is true that every two years the CEACR routinely examines the implementation of the ILO’s fundamental conventions on union freedom (Nos. 87 and 98), there are some cases that are so severe that they are considered in the annual report, at the request of the Conference Committee or the Experts themselves, when a country’s laws and/or practices deviate significantly from the conventions, and when such deviations have been pointed out repeatedly by the Experts. For both reasons Colombia’s case has been examined year after year in the annual report.

For the 2010 examination, the Experts requested no information from the Government of Colombia on the fundamental conventions on union freedom and did not include observations on these conventions in the annual report issued on February 16, 2011, despite the fact that the Government of Colombia, the country’s labor federations, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), and the International Organization of Employers (IOE) all submitted information regarding Colombia’s compliance with said conventions.

It is inexplicable that the Committee of Experts would decide to exclude Colombia from its review, thus preventing the Conference Committee from discussing Colombia’s situation in the next ILO Conference. It is inexplicable for several reasons, including the following:

-   In the last 20 years the Committee of Experts has consistently examined the state of application of Convention No. 87, and most of the observations it has made have not been implemented by the country, with the ensuing persistence of major deviations from the convention in both legislation and practice.

-   Given the severity of the situation, the 99^th Session of the International Labour Conference decided to send a High Level Tripartite Mission to Colombia, which was accepted by the Government with the aim of precluding a discussion in the Conference Committee. It is illogical that the Conference Committee and the ILO Office would accept the Mission without foreseeing a report and discussion on the state of application of Convention No. 87 at the 100^th Session. Without a discussion at the ILO Conference, who will follow up on the results of the High Level Tripartite Mission and to what extent can these results be monitored? It is normal practice that when a State accepts a High Level Tripartite Mission the outcome of that mission is examined by the Conference Commission. So why was it not done in this case?

-   The situation of union freedoms is still very alarming both in terms of the violations of the rights to freedom of association, collective bargaining and strike, as well as in terms of the killing and physical abuse of unionists, where Colombia still holds a disgraceful first place, outranking by far all other nations. To mention only a few examples: there are 42 recommendations regarding legislative amendments that still have not been implemented; the government and the business community continue with their antiunion practices, violating the rights to freedom of association, collective bargaining, and strike, thus making it easier for them to undermine labor organizations; and, lastly, precarious work, which in many cases involves near-slave conditions, is practically the norm, and this denies workers the right to decent work and union rights in general. Moreover, in the last 25 years 2,860 unionists have been murdered, with 218 being forcefully disappeared. There are more than 11,000 other abuses committed against trade unionists, and the rate of impunity for all these crimes stands at 98%.

-   We cannot understand how Venezuela, Argentina, Paraguay, the Philippines, Bangladesh, and Guatemala were reviewed this year in these matters, as they have been for many years now, but Colombia was excluded, and how the Experts examined 75 countries in the year 2010, without including Colombia among them.

In paragraph 80 of its report, the CEACR set out the reasons for this exclusion, namely that it was based on the Government’s agreement to invite the High Level Tripartite Mission to Colombia, and that it hoped the Government would provide information in this sense during the mission. As noted above, these reasons lead us to the opposite conclusion: the ILO should have examined Colombia’s situation in the Experts’ Report, and it should have opened up the possibility for a public and tripartite debate on the outcome of the Mission through a discussion of Colombia’s case in the Conference Committee.

This situation leads us to conclude that the ILO and the Committee of Experts are no longer concerned about the situation in Colombia. Or, more alarmingly still, that this exclusion may mean that regulatory control mechanisms will become ineffectual, and in turn will weaken other measures available to supervise the situation in Colombia.

For the reasons expressed above, the United Workers Federation (CUT) and the Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CTC) hereby request that the ILO and the Committee of Experts explain this matter, as the explanation given in the report does not clarify the ILO’s position or where it stands in terms of finding solutions for Colombia’s case.

In view of this situation, we ask that the case of Colombia be discussed in the 100^th Session, following up on the outcome of the High Level Tripartite Mission, and that it specifically recommend that the Colombian State adopt and implement serious, effective and immediate measures to remedy these matters.