OEA/Ser.L/V/II.43 REPORT ON THE SITUATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN URUGUAY CHAPTER VII RIGHT OF ASSEMBLY AND OF ASSOCIATION
American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man – Article
XXI. Every person has the right to assemble peaceably with others in a formal
public meeting or an informal gathering, in connection with matters of common
interest of any nature.
Article XXII. Every person has the right to associate with others to
promote, exercise and protect his legitimate interests of a political, economic,
religious, social, cultural, professional, labor union or other nature.1
1.
Decree Nº 466/973, of June 27, 1973, ordered that the right of assembly
in public or private places for “political” purposes may only be exercised
with prior authorization. The Commission notes in this regard that a number of
denunciations have been received indicating that Government authorities have
abruptly interrupted gatherings held to celebrate family birthdays, under the
pretext that such meetings have not been authorized beforehand. Furthermore,
Decree Nº 1.207/973, of November 30, 1975, states that students may not hold
meetings “in open or closed places, be they public or private” without first
obtaining prior authorization.
2.
Resolution 1.473 of August 24, 1973, a simple administrative act,
prohibited inter-union meetings for an unspecified period of time. According to
communications received by the Commission, this resolution is still in effect.
3.
It has been repeatedly denounced to the Commission that in application of
the norms cited above, the Government of Uruguay has conducted massive roundups
of workers and has detained them, accusing them of suspected subversive
activities.
4.
With regard to the right of association, a religious association
denounced that:
There are countless cases of arbitrary interference on the part of the
Government in the life of private institutions and associations. A number of
professional guilds and associations (for example, the Bar Association, the
Architecture Society, the Association of Odontology, the Writer's Guild, and so
on) are unable to conduct their elections freely because the Government
interferes by vetoing certain candidates.
5.
The Committee on Freedom of Association of the International Labour
Office recently received denunciations from Uruguay on the situation of trade
unions in that country. In response to the Committee's request that the
Government provide information, the latter communicated the following
information:
National Union of Metal and Allied Unions (UNTMRA): its premises remain
closed and unoccupied because it has been proved that the activities carried on
there were illicit, had nothing to do with trade unionism and were contrary to
the legal provisions in force;
State Electricity and Telecommunications Workers Union (AUTE): the same
applies.
Union of Workers in the Timber and Allied Industries (SOIMA): closed by
military court order because the activities carried on there were in support of
subversive organizations and a cache of clandestine material had been found;
Single Union of the National Ports Administration (SUANP): no trade union
activity is carried out on the premises mentioned; for some three years they
have been occupied by a worker of the National Ports Administration in pursuance
of a resolution of the union executive;
Federation of State Water Service Officials (OSE): its premises have been
closed and their furniture and effects transferred to the union affiliated to
the General Confederation of Workers of Uruguay;
Association of Uruguayan Bank Employees (AEBU): no action was taken by
the authorities regarding its premises, where cultural, social and sporting
activities are still carried out normally;
Union of Workers in the Catering Trade: this union has no premises of its
own and its members meet at the headquarters of the Cosmopolitan Union of
Waiters and Allied Professions, which has not been subject to any intervention
by the authorities;
Montevideo Primary Teachers' Co-ordination Movement: this organization
has no premises of its own and carries out its activities on the premises of the
Uruguayan Primary Teachers' Federation;
Uruguayan Medical Association: as regards the placing of the union under
official supervision, the Government refers to its earlier statements, according
to which this measure was taken only with respect to the medical care centre of
the organization, was taken for economic reasons and to assist the centre, and
did not affect the professional activities of the Association.2
*
6.
For its part, the Governing Body of the Committee on Freedom of
Association of the ILO, at its 201st meeting held in November 1976,
adopted a report from that Committee, whose conclusions include the following:
To express its concern that no progress had been made regarding the trade
union situation;
To draw the attention of the Government to the need to create a normal
trade union situation in Uruguay as quickly as possible, and to adopt trade
union legislation in conformity with the Convention ratified by Uruguay and
taking into account the comments made by the ILO supervisory bodies; to request
the Government to forward detailed information concerning the action taken to
this effect;
To note the release of trade unionists and the details supplied by the
Government concerning the reasons for arresting certain detained persons, but to
urge the Government to supply more detailed information on the specific actions
with which numerous other trade unionists still being detailed were charged,
together with copies of any judgment rendered and the reasons adduced therefor;
To draw the attention of the Government once more to the principle that
in all cases, including those in which trade unionists are charged with offences
of a political nature or under common law, which the Government considers to
have no bearing on their trade union functions or activities, the persons
concerned should be tried as rapidly as possible by an impartial and independent
judicial authority.3
* 7. The impossibility of conducting an observation “in loco” deprived the Commission of the most direct means to determine whether (or not) the facts contained in that Resolution are true. [ Table of Contents |
Previous | Next ] 1
American Convention on Human Rights. Article 15. The
right of peaceful assembly, without arms, is recognized. No restrictions may
be placed on the exercise of this right other than those imposed in
conformity with the law and necessary in a democratic society in the
interest of national security, public safety or public order, or to protect
public health or morals or the rights or freedom of others. Article
16. 1.
Everyone has the right to associate freely for ideological,
religious, political, economic, labor, social, cultural, sports, or other
purposes. 2.
The exercise of this right shall be subject only to such restrictions
established by law as may be necessary in a democratic society, in the
interest of national security, public safety or public order, or to protect
public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others. 3.
The provisions of this article do not bar the imposition of legal
restrictions, including even deprivation of the exercise of the right of
association, on members of the armed forces and the police. 2
Governing body of the ILO, 167th Report of the Committee
on Freedom of Association, G.B. 202/8/13, March 1-4, 1977, p. 3. *
Free-unofficial translation by the ILO. 3
Ibid, p. 2 *
Free-unofficial translation by the ILO. |