FREEDOM OF LABOUR AND ASSOCIATION

FINAL SUBMISSION IN FULFILLMENT OF THE COURSE

JURISPRUDENCE II, SEMESTER VI DURING THE ACADEMIC
YEAR 2020-21

SUBMITTED BY:-
SWATI KUMARI

Roll No-171571,B.A.LL.B(hons)

SUBMITTED TO:-
DR. Manoranjan Kumar

Faculty Of Jurisprudence II

MAY 2020

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

NYAYA NAGAR, MITHAPUR, PATNA

1|Page
 Table of Contents

Declaration 3

Acknowledgement 4

Research Methodology 5

Chapter 1 – Introduction 6

Chapter 2 –Freedom of labour and association 10

Chapter 3 – Freedom of association as a core labour right and the ILO 12

Chapter 4 - Freedom of association and human rights law 15

Chapter 5-Development of freedom of association outside ILO 18

Chapter 6- Freedom of association and Civil liberties 20

Chapter 7-Freedom of association and economic competetiveness 21

Conclusion

Bibliography

Bibliography

2|Page
 Declaration By the Candidate

I hereby declare that the work reported in the B.A. LL.B (Hons.) Project Report entitled “freedom of
labour and association ” carried out under the supervision of Dr. Manoranjan
Kumar,Jurisprudence II,Chanakya National law University. I have not submitted
this work elsewhere for any other degree or diploma. I am fully responsible for the contents of my
Project Report.

SWATI KUMARI

Chanakya National Law University, Patna

20/05/2020

3|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

It gives me immense pleasure to express my gratitude towards all those who have helped and
encouraged me for the completion of this project. They all rendered their valuable time and
services in making this project a success.

Firstly, I would like to thank the all mighty God for blessing and giving me support in
completing this project. I take this opportunity to express my deep regards to my guide, DR
Manoranjan Kumar for his exemplary guidance, monitoring and constant encouragement
throughout the course of this thesis.

At last, but not the least, I express my sincere thanks to my parents for their generous support
and cooperation throughout the project.

Swati Kumari

6th Semester

B.A. LL.B. (Hons) Chanakya National Law University

4|Page
AIMS & OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

The objective of the researcher is:

 To know the nature & scope of the concept of freedom of labour and association.
 To understand how Freedom of association a core labour right.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
 Doctrinal method :- Books, internet, journals, judgements etc.
 Researcher is mainly relying on library based study.

SOURCES OF DATA COLLECTION

Primary sources- Theories of Jurisprudence, statutes, precedent & other official documents.

Secondary sources- statement of judges, websites, articles, news paper, books, journals etc

LIMITATION & SCOPE OF THE STUDY

Due to lack of time and lack of resources my research work is wholly based on doctrinal
method of research, my research work doesn’t rely on non-doctrinal research or empirical
research.

5|Page
 Chapter -1

INTRODUCTION
Freedom of association is the individual right to come together with other individuals and
collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common interests. It is one of the most
basic rights enjoyed by humans. It ensures that every individual is free to organise and to
form and participate in groups, either formally or informally. The right to freedom of
association is core to any society. It is an indispensable right in enabling citizens to monitor
the human rights situation in a country and to support the implementation of human rights
policies. It is key for the work of human rights defenders. It is also a right that is at the very
heart of the Human Rights House concept. We advocate for the right to associate, and we live
by it, experience it, and know first hand how restrictions can affect associations.

The right to freedom of association covers organised and professional organisations such as

political parties, trade unions, public associations and non-governmental organisations with
employees. It also covers organisations based on volunteers, and covers groups and entities
with or without a legal personality.

States have an obligation to ensure that people are free to form and participate in associations
of any type and to engage independently in any legal and lawful activity. This includes being
able to seek and receive resources, to organise and to peacefully promote and protect human
rights.

The right of workers and employers to form and join organizations of their own choosing is
an integral part of a free and open society. In many cases, these organizations have played a
significant role in their countries’ democratic transformation. From advising governments on
labour legislation to providing education and training for trade unions and employer groups,
the ILO is regularly engaged in promoting freedom of association. The ILO’s Committee on
Freedom of Association was set up in 1951 to examine violations of workers’ and employers’
organizing rights. The committee is tripartite and handles complaints in ILO Member States
whether or not they have ratified freedom of association conventions. Through the
Committee on Freedom of Association and other supervisory mechanisms, the ILO has
frequently defended rights of trade unions and employers’ organizations.

6|Page
 Chapter -2

FREEDOM OF LABOUR AND ASSOCIATION

There were two striking developments in 1948 in the nascent field of international human
rights law. The first in time was the adoption by the ILO of the Freedom of Association and
Protection of the Right to Organise Convention (No. 87); the second was the adoption by the
United Nations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights a few months later. 1 The close
relation between some aspects of the two at the time has been maintained through the ILO’s
supervisory process ever since.

 What is Freedom of association?

It is the right of workers and employers to freely form and join Workers Organisations such
as trade unions, worker associations and worker councils or committees for the promotion
and defence of occupational interests.

It is the individual right to come together with other individuals and collectively express,
promote, pursue and defend common interests. The right to freedom of association has been
included in a number of national constitutions and human rights instruments, including the
United States Bill of Rights, European Convention on Human Rights and the Canadian
Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Freedom of association in the sense of workers' right to
organize is also recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International
Labor Organization Conventions, and the latter also protects collective bargaining in the
conventions on freedom of association. The right to freedom of association is sometimes used
interchangeably with the freedom of assembly. More specifically the freedom of assembly is
understood in a political context, although depending on the source (constitution, human
rights instrument, etc.) the right to freedom of association may be understood to include the
right to freedom of assembly.

Freedom of association is a cornerstone of the ILO’s approach to development through

decent work; namely, ensuring that all men and women have the ability to obtain decent and
productive work in conditions of freedom, equity, security and human dignity. In the ILO’s
2008 Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalisation, freedom of association and
effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining were described as important pre-
conditions for the attainment of decent work, which is now recognised as part of the

7|Page
Millennium Development Goals (MDG1), the international community’s blueprint for
development.

Freedom of association refers to the right of workers and employers to create and join
organisations of their choice freely and without fear of reprisal or interference. This includes
the right to establish and affiliate to confederations and international organisations. Linked to
freedom of association is the right to collective bargaining, which allows workers to negotiate
their working conditions freely with their employers. These rights are universal and apply
irrespective of race, creed, religion, gender, occupation, nationality or political opinion. They
apply to all workers and employers, including those in the informal economy who don’t
usually have formal contracts of employment. Freedom of association and the right to
collective bargaining are enshrined in the ILO’s Convention on Freedom of Association and
Protection of the Right to Organise, 1948 (No 87) and Convention on the Right to Organise
and Collective Bargaining (No 98). These rights are recognised as fundamental rights in the
ILO’s 1998 Declaration on the Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. The right to
freedom of association is also recognised as a basic human right in various international
instruments, most notably the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

 Why is freedom of association important for development?

Sustainable development and poverty reduction are complex and challenging processes that
require progress on many different fronts at the same time. It is widely accepted that
economic growth is essential to the development process. However, inclusive growth and
governance are needed to ensure that economic development contributes to the well-being of
the greatest number of people, particularly poorer segments of society.

There are a number of ways in which strong and independent trade unions and employer
organisations can contribute to development. For example:

i. Worker and employer organisations can help to ensure robust debate on economic and
social policy issues, facilitate consultation with a broad cross-section of different
interest groups and spur employment-rich growth;
ii. Where government reaches agreement with employers’ and workers’ organisations,
this can help to ensure broad-based support for policy and legal reforms across a
variety of social and economic areas;

8|Page
 iii. Trade unions and employers’ organisations can help to enable a more equitable
distribution of income through collective negotiations; and
iv. Workers’ ability to join together in organisations and collectively defend their
interests helps them to ensure that other labour standards – such as working time,
health and safety or wages – are put into practice.

Overall, as membership organisations, trade unions and employer organisations can provide
an effective and independent vehicle for voicing and representing the interests of their
members, who often represent a broad and diverse cross-section of the community.

Freedom of association is necessary to ensure that trade unions and employer organisations
can contribute fully to development processes: the ability of trade unions and employer
organisations to participate is only possible where their representatives can speak freely and
advocate on behalf of their members. This means that the right conditions must be provided
for their operation:

i. Trade unions and employer organisations must be free to conduct their activities
without interference or harassment;
ii. Workers must be free to sign up with the union of their choice;
iii. and Trade unionists must not fear dismissal, intimidation or persecution by virtue of
their trade union membership or activities.1

In addition to its status as a basic human right, freedom of association should be recognised
as an enabling right that underpins sustainable development and the decent work strategy.
Freedom of association empowers individuals to realise their potential and safeguard a whole
series of other rights at work; for example, by enabling collective negotiations to ensure fair
wages and working hours.2 Respect for rights at work and decent working conditions enable
individuals and communities to achieve their full human potential and claim their fair share
of economic and social development. 3 As such, freedom of association is not just a desired
outcome of development, but an integral part of the broader process of development and a
critical component of all free and open societies. Without it, there can be no genuine or

1
FNV Mondiaal, Trade unions, poverty eradication and development, 2008, p 13.
2
ILO, Freedom of association in practice: lessons learned, Global Report under the follow-up to the ILO
Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, 2008, p ix.
3
3 ILO, Organisation, bargaining and dialogue for development in a globalising world, report for the Governing
Body

9|Page
effective dialogue or cooperation between workers, employers and government on
development and labour issues.

 What are the Challenges?

Despite the fact that freedom of association represents a fundamental human right and the
benefits it can bring for development, this right is not universally recognised or uniformly
implemented in all countries. Some of the main challenges to freedom of association are:

i. Certain categories of workers face practical or legal barriers to achieving collective

representation. There may be laws that hinder the formation or recognition of unions,
for example in the public sector, export processing zones or agriculture. Additionally,
many workers, including migrants and those employed in the informal economy, may
face practical barriers to collective organisation. Women or young people in
developing countries may be disproportionately affected by these constraints, as they
often comprise the majority of workers in the above mentioned sectors.
ii. The exercise of freedom of association and collective bargaining is dependent on the
maintenance of fundamental civil liberties, in particular the right to freedom and
security of the person, freedom of opinion and expression and protection of the
property of trade unions and employers’ organizations. Although the ILO Committee
on Freedom of Association has noted a decrease in such complaints, violations of civil
liberties, including incidents of violence, arbitrary arrest and detention, continue to
take place in all parts of the world.
iii. The right to freedom of association is also violated by acts of anti-union
discrimination. This may include prejudice or discrimination in relations to hiring,
employment and dismissal. In recent years, the ILO supervisory bodies have
witnessed a surge in complaints concerning acts of anti-union discrimination.4
iv. Another major challenge is interference in the internal affairs of trade unions and
employer organisations. This can include infringements on the right to freely: draw up
constitutions and rules, elect representatives, organize and control internal and
financial administration.
v. Monopolies are another denial of the right to organize, where laws effectively
prescribe that workers or employers must belong to one particular organisation,
leading to the suppression of independent social partner movements.

4
ILO, Global Report, 2008, p 11.

10 | P a g e
 Chapter -3

Freedom of Association as a Core Labor Right and the ILO

Freedom of association and the right to organize and bargain collectively have long been
recognized as fundamental rights, improving both work and living conditions, as well as the
“development and progress of economic and social systems.” 5 Freedom of association, in
particular, operates as an organizational “meta-norm,” appreciated both as an independent
value and as a touchstone for the International Labour Organization’s (ILO) institutional
design. Despite the renewed interest of the ILO in various aspects of the norm, it lacks a
comprehensive normative framework for freedom of association. The central place freedom
of association assumes within the ILO and international labor law at large, contributes an
essential building block for the realization of Maupain’s statement that the ILO’s “golden age
of normative action” lies not in its past, but in its future. Indeed, one of the most celebrated,
albeit controversial,3 normative achievements of the ILO in recent years: the ILO’s
Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (the 1998
Declaration),6reaffirmed freedom of association as one of the four universal rights of
workers.5 Moreover, the right of freedom of association is not only an important value in
itself but a precondition to the effectiveness of the ILO; as Creighton aptly puts it:

[r]espect for the freedom of association is an essential precondition of the effectiveness of the
ILO as a tripartite organization. Meaningful tripartism necessarily depends upon the
existence of free and effective organizations of employers and workers. Self-evidently, such
organizations can develop and function only in an environment where there is proper respect
for the right of employers and workers to associate and to organize their activities.

The decline in union density worldwide in the last few decades has adversely affected the
ILO tripartite structure, impairing what has always been considered an invaluable source of
strength of the ILO. Reinvigorating organizational efforts worldwide through the articulation
and enforcement of freedom of association are therefore central to the ILO’s effective
operation and to international labor law at large.

5
ILO, Freedom of Association in Practice: Lessons Learned, Global Report under the Follow-up to the ILO
Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, Report of the Director-General

6
ILO, Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow Up

11 | P a g e
Moreover, the ILO increasingly recognizes the norm of freedom of association as a
touchstone for its internal governance. Decreasing membership in unions and employers’
organizations has exacerbated criticism of the ILO’s representativeness and legitimacy,
buttressing a process of reform in the ILO representation structure through a revised
credentialing process of ILO delegates.7 Freedom of association (at least its procedural
aspects), being closely related to tripartism, has played a crucial role in such reforms as well.

At the moment, however, these endeavors, while they are impressive, are hindered by the
lack of a comprehensive normative framework for the understanding of freedom of
association. Without such a framework, which would lay down a clear regulatory ideal of
freedom of association, related reforms to the ILO institutional design and its representative
structure, are bound to remain partial and inadequate. A clear normative understanding of
where the ILO is headed and what are the normative assumptions underlining reforms is a
pre-condition for success. Moreover, such a framework would ensure that ILO jurisprudence
on freedom of association, as elaborated by The Committee on Freedom of Association
(CFA, or the Committee) is consistent and will deliver a clear and comprehensible message
to ILO members worldwide on the particulars of this norm. It can further serve (as
exemplified below) as a foundation for critique of CFA jurisprudence, insuring continuous
reevaluation and improvement of the current understanding of the norm.

The concept of ED (equitable dialogue) is proposed as an all-encompassing framework that

can pave the way for an in-depth understanding of freedom of association. ED presents a
regulatory ideal, comprised of a mixture of descriptive and normative commitments. The
normative commitments include commitments to a particular democratic model (deliberative
democracy), and a particular understanding of the self as an embedded self.14 Furthermore,
ED endorses a general commitment to freedom, substantive equality and broad inclusion.15
The descriptive commitments arise from the doctrinal analysis of ILO jurisprudence of two
elements of freedom of association: the right of workers to freely organize and the right to
control their organization. This analysis of key doctrines within freedom of association
reveals a conceptual dichotomy consisting of competing visions of workers’ freedom of
association: a thinner and a thicker approach to this norm. ED captures, and further develops,
the thicker approach to freedom of association, latent in the ILO jurisprudence.

Chapter -4
7
See Virginia A. Leary, Lessons from the Experience of the International Labour Organization, in THE UNITED
NATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS, A CRITICAL APPRAISAL 580

12 | P a g e
Freedom of association and Human Rights Law: Development
through ILO supervision
There were two striking developments in 1948 in the nascent field of international human
rights law. The first in time was the adoption by the ILO of the Freedom of Association and
Protection of the Right to Organise Convention (No. 87); the second was the adoption by the
United Nations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights a few months later. 8 The close
relation between some aspects of the two at the time has been maintained through the ILO’s
supervisory process ever since. The Universal Declaration is, of course, of great importance
to the ILO in its work for the promotion and defence of human rights.

It is of particular interest to the ILO that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
proclaims in its Article 23, paragraph 4, that: “Everyone has the right to form and to join
trade unions for the protection of his interests.” This is a more specific manifestation of the
right laid down in article 20 of the Universal Declaration to “the right of freedom of peaceful
assembly and association”.

The inclusion of this principle in the Universal Declaration had been preceded by its
inclusion in three important ILO instruments. The first of these is the ILO’s Constitution,
which in its original version as Part XIII of the Treaty of Versailles proclaimed that the High
Contracting Parties considered that the right of association “for all lawful purposes” is of
“special and urgent importance”, both for workers and employers.9 The Preamble to the
Constitution explicitly cites trade union rights among the measures that could improve
working conditions and thus assure peace. When in 1944 the ILO adopted the Declaration of
Philadelphia, the second of these fundamental texts, and in 1946 incorporated it into the
Constitution, it reaffirmed freedom of association as one of the fundamental principles on
which the Organization was based, and characterized it as “essential to sustained progress”. It
also referred to “the effective recognition of the right of collective bargaining, the co-
operation of management and labour in the continuous improvement of productive efficiency,
and the collaboration of workers and employers in the preparation and application of social
and economic measures”.

8
The complete texts of both Convention No. 87 and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are appended
to this issue of the International Labour Review.
9
Following its amendment in 1946, the ILO’s Constitution no longer includes the phrase “for all lawful
purposes”.

13 | P a g e
The third of these fundamental texts was the Freedom of Association and Protection of the
Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87). The adoption of a specific Convention on this
subject in the ILO was not easy, as is outlined in Harold Dunning’s article in this issue of the
International Labour Review. It was put off many times as being too difficult to agree on, and
its lack began to be felt early. In 1921, the ILO adopted the Right of Association
(Agriculture) Convention (No. 11), which recognized in very general terms that workers in
agriculture have the same rights of association as workers in industry — but at the time the
ILO had not yet defined the freedom of association rights of industrial workers.

When the time did come, events moved fairly quickly. In the ILO itself, the 1944 Declaration
of Philadelphia contained the provision mentioned above. In addition, the Third Conference
of American States Members of the ILO adopted in 1946 a resolution on freedom of
association that spelt out the basic principles which would be included in Convention No. 87.
In 1947, the International Labour Conference adopted the Right of Association
(NonMetropolitan Territories) Convention (No. 84), which refers not only to the right of
employers and workers to associate for any legal purpose, but also to collective agreements,
consultations and the solution of labour conflicts.

Though ratified by only four countries, 4 this Convention had an important effect on the
development of international law on the subject.

The same year, the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations (ECOSOC) examined
10
reports on freedom of association from the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) and
the American Federation of Labor (AFL), and decided to ask the ILO to include these
subjects on the agenda of its Conference. The ILO did so in 1947, and adopted a resolution
which prepared the ground for the adoption of Convention No. 87 in 1948, before the
adoption of the Universal Declaration, and of Convention No. 98 shortly thereafter, in 1949.

The adoption of international human rights law in a “legislative” process — in international

Conventions adopted by the ILO and the United Nations — really began only in 1948, with
that of Convention No. 87 and the Universal Declaration. Before the ILO was established,
there had been some early attempts to adopt international agreements on workers’ rights by
negotiation between States, but they had not been terribly successful. At the end of the First
World War, in 1919, the League of Nations and the International Labour Organization were

10
This was before the split in its membership which led to the establishment of the International Confederation
of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU).

14 | P a g e
established, and the ILO set about adopting international Conventions on conditions of work.
The only instruments which really amounted to what are called “human rights” treaties today
were the Slavery Convention adopted by the League of Nations in 1926, and the Forced
Labour Convention (No. 29) adopted by the ILO in 1930 to develop the coverage of labour
aspects of slavery. But no other human rights instruments were adopted until after the Second
World War.

Since 1948, the ILO and the United Nations have developed along parallel lines as far as
freedom of association issues are concerned — and other human rights questions as well —
and regional organizations have also developed both standards and supervisory capacity. But
consideration will first be given to how the United Nations and other organizations developed
the concepts, and then to the development of these principles by the ILO through its
Conventions and supervisory process.

15 | P a g e
 Chapter -5

The development of freedom of association outside the ILO

The United Nations

Article 23(4) of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, quoted above, is couched in
language deriving directly from Convention No. 87, and is a general statement of the same
philosophy. Article 2 of Convention No. 87 reads:

Workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, shall have the right to establish and,
subject only to the rules of the organisation concerned, to join organisations of their own
choosing without any previous authorisation.

The main difference between this text and that of the Universal Declaration is that the latter
omits any reference to employers. Also, of course, it stops at the general expression of the
principle, as is its vocation.

In 1966, the United Nations codified the principles laid down in the Declaration in two
seminal texts: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Both Covenants came into force ten
years later once they had received a sufficient number of ratifications; they are the most
influential international human rights instruments of broad coverage. They also followed the
earlier ILO provisions on freedom of association.

Article 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is its only detailed
article on freedom of association. The first paragraph of that Article is an almost exact
restatement of Article 23(4) of the Universal Declaration. The second paragraph states that no
restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right “other than those which are prescribed
by law and which are necessary in a democratic society” and allows “lawful restrictions on
members of the armed forces and of the police in their exercise of this right”, as does
Convention No. 87. The third paragraph reads as follows:

Nothing in this article shall authorise the States Parties to the International Labour
Organisation Convention of 1948 concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the
Right to Organise to take legislative measures which would prejudice, or apply the law in
such a manner as to prejudice the guarantees provided for in that Convention.

16 | P a g e
Entire legislative conformity is guaranteed with Convention No. 87 in this remarkable
provision, which was incorporated in the other Covenant as well.

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights contains a more
detailed treatment of the same subject, in Article 8:

1. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to ensure:

(a) The right of everyone to form trade unions and join the trade union of his choice, subject
only to the rules of the organisation concerned, for the promotion and protection of his
economic and social interests. No restriction may be placed on the exercise of this right other
than those prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests
of national security or public order or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others;

(b) The right of trade unions to establish national federations or confederations and the
right of the latter to form or join international trade-union organisations;

(c) The right of trade unions to function freely subject to no limitations other than those
prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of
national security or public order or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others;

(d) The right to strike, provided that it is exercised in conformity with the laws of a particular
country.

2. This article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these
rights by members of the armed forces or of the police or of the administration of the State.

3. Nothing in this article shall authorise the States Parties to the International Labour
Organisation Convention of 1948 concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the
Right to Organise to take legislative measures which would prejudice, or apply the law in
such a manner as to prejudice the guarantees provided for in that Convention.

In comparing this provision with ILO standards, Valticos and von Potobsky point out the
relative merits of the two approaches:

This provision is not as detailed as Convention No. 87. Moreover, the restrictions which it
authorizes might reduce considerably the extent of the protection which it affords. This
applies to the limitations which, contrary to Convention No. 87, are permitted as regards the
members of the administration of the State. This is also the case as regards the limitations

17 | P a g e
“which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public
order or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others”, for which there is no
equivalent in Convention No. 87. However, the obligations arising from that Convention are
expressly reserved by the saving clause contained in Article 8, para. 3, of the Covenant. On
the other hand, this Article recognizes the right to strike, but it leaves the conditions of its
exercise to the discretion of national legislations.11

Thus, while there are some differences, the ILO and United Nations texts are almost
completely consistent one with the other; certainly they have not been developed by the
supervisory bodies of the two organizations in a way which gives rise to any difficultie

11
Nicolas Valticos and Geraldo von Potobsky: International labour law, 2nd revised edition, Deventer, Kluwer,
1995, p. 105.

18 | P a g e
 Chapter -6

Freedom of association and civil liberties: Developed by ILO

supervisory bodies
This subject is of overarching importance in the field of freedom of association, and bears a
special relationship to the principles laid down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
There is a general consensus that respect for civil and political rights is necessary for the
exercise of trade union rights. In the preparatory report prepared for the adoption of
Convention No. 87, the Office stated that “freedom of industrial association is but one aspect
of freedom of association in general, which must itself form part of the whole range of
fundamental liberties of man, all interdependent and complementary one to another,
including freedom of assembly and of meeting, freedom of speech and opinion, freedom of
expression and of the press, and so forth”. 12

The supervisory bodies have always insisted on the importance of civil liberties. The
Committee on Freedom of Association in particular has stated that a “genuinely free and
independent trade union movement can only develop where fundamental human rights are
respected”. In 1992 the Director-General stated in his report Democratisation and the ILO
that: “The ILO takes a keen interest in civil and political rights, for, without them, there can
be no normal exercise of trade union rights and no protection of the workers”. In its 1994
General Survey, the Committee of Experts stated:

The Committee considers that the guarantees set out in the international labour Conventions,
in particular those relating to freedom of association, can only be effective if the civil and
political rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other
international instruments, notably the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
are genuinely recognized and protected. These intangible and universal principles, the
importance of which the Committee wishes to emphasize particularly on the occasion of the
75th anniversary of the creation of the ILO and the 50th anniversary of the Declaration of
Philadelphia, should constitute the common ideal to which all peoples and all nations aspire.

According to a Resolution concerning trade union rights and their relation to civil liberties,
adopted by the Conference in 1970, the civil liberties essential for the normal exercise of
trade union rights include: “(a) the right to freedom and security of person and freedom from
12
ILO: Freedom of association and industrial relations, Report VII, International Labour Conference, 30th
Session, 1947, Geneva, pp. 11 and 12.

19 | P a g e
arbitrary arrest and detention; (b) freedom of opinion and expression and in particular
freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information
and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers; (c) freedom of assembly; (d) the
right to a fair trial by an independent and impartial tribunal; (e) the right to protection of the
property of trade union organizations.” 13

Chapter -7
13
ILO: Record of proceedings, International Labour Conference, 54th Session, Geneva, 1970, pp. 733-736.

20 | P a g e
Freedom of association and economic competitiveness

While there is international consensus that freedom of association is a fundamental human

right, there has been debate regarding its impact on economic development. In particular,
some developing countries have expressed concern that the full exercise of freedom of
association and the right to collective bargaining could have a negative impact on their
economic competitiveness. This is premised on the idea that a high level of unionisation and
collective bargaining may lead to an excessive rise in labour costs as well as labour market
rigidities. However, a joint study by the ILO and the World Trade Organisation in 2007 noted
that there is little concrete evidence to support this view. The study points out that a narrow
focus on the economic aspects of these rights overlooks the undeniably positive benefits for
development that can flow from facilitating social dialogue between government, workers
and employers. These include promoting “broad social support for economic reforms ... as
well as a more equitable distribution of the burdens and benefits from trade
liberalisation”.Moreover, trade union density and collective bargaining are only one factor
amongst many that can influence economic performance, such as macro-economic policy, the
broader regulatory framework and skills availability.14

In fact, given the right domestic policies and structures, there is evidence to suggest that
respect for freedom of association can have a positive effect on economic development. For
example, a 2006 study on the effects of freedom of association, the right to collective
bargaining and democracy on exports found robust relationships between these rights and
higher total manufacturing exports, suggesting that freedom of association can enhance
export competitiveness. These studies suggest that freedom of association does not harm
developing countries’ prospects for growth and may even stimulate it. However, there is no
single model of industrial relations that is conducive to economic growth and the careful
design of policies, regulations and institutions is important to ensure that freedom of
association reinforces economic development and contributes to a positive business
environment.

CONCLUSION
14
ILO, Organisation, bargaining and dialogue for development in a globalising world, report for the Governing
Body, GB.279/WP/SDG/2, November 2000, p 19.

21 | P a g e
Freedom of association is a defining feature of democracy: the freedom of different interest
groups to collectively organise and represent their interests is one of the mechanisms by
which healthy democracies strike a balance between competing interests. As such, the levels
of respect for freedom of association in a society can be seen as a good indicator of the
strength and openness of a democracy. Where there are serious constraints on freedom of
association and other basic civil rights, economic and social development is threatened.

The right to organize and form employers' and workers' organizations is the prerequisite for
sound collective bargaining and social dialogue. Nevertheless, there continue to be challenges
in applying these principles: in some countries certain categories of workers (for example
public servants, seafarers, workers in export processing zones) are denied the right of
association, workers' and employers' organizations are illegally suspended or interfered with,
and in some extreme cases trade unionists are arrested or killed. ILO standards, in
conjunction with the work of the Committee on Freedom of Association  and other
supervisory mechanisms, pave the way for resolving these difficulties and ensuring that this
fundamental human right is respected the world over.

The provisions of Convention No. 87, its place in general international human rights law and
the ways in which its principles have been developed by the supervisory bodies of the ILO
and by reference to the practice of member States, illustrates both the vitality of this
supervisory process, and the changing nature of the exercise of the right to freedom of
association.

BIBIOGRAPHY

22 | P a g e
 Book:

 Freedom of association - Compilation of decisions of the Committee on Freedom of

Association, ILO

Websites:

https://ergonassociates.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/wcms_160208.pdf?x74739

file:///C:/Users/USER/Downloads/Freedom_of_Association_as_a_Core_Labor_Right_and_t.pdf

https://www.ilo.org/public/english/revue/download/pdf/swepston.pdf

23 | P a g e