Where an employers’ organization is the complainant, the Office may solicit further information from the complainant in the light of the observations from the government, once received. This is particularly the case where the statements contained in the complaint and the government’s reply merely cancel one another out but do not contain any valid evidence. See the “Rules concerning relations with the complainant” in the Procedures for the examination of complaints alleging violations of freedom of association.
If the complaint concerns the private sector, the government is requested to obtain the view of the enterprise concerned by contacting the employers’ organization. A summary of the views of the employers’ organization will be then included in the report.
Since the CFA meets only three times a year, the Office systematically seeks to have the relevant government make observations on the allegations. Follow-up special communications may sometimes be necessary.
The CFA follows a practice of drawing the special attention of the Governing Body to specific cases it has examined because of the extreme seriousness and urgency of the matters dealt with therein. It does so by highlighting these cases in a special paragraph in the introductory part of its report, under the heading “Serious and urgent cases which the Committee draws to the special attention of the Governing Body”. Special communications may be sent by the Director-General following up on these cases.
The CFA follows a practice of issuing “urgent appeals” if, despite the time which has elapsed since the submission of the complaints or the issuance of its recommendations on at least two occasions, it has not received the observations of the governments in a particular case. “Urgent appeals” are equally found in a special paragraph in the introductory part of its report. Advance warnings of a potentially forthcoming “urgent appeal” equally feature in the introductory part of the report. Click to see examples in paras 6 and 7 of the CFA report. The government is warned that at its following session the CFA may examine the complaint even in the absence of a reply, i.e. by default.
Action to secure a reply may be taken by the Chair, on behalf of the CFA, during the Governing Body or the International Labour Conference through contacts made with the representatives of the government concerned.
ILO field offices may be called on to hasten the sending of government observations on complaints.
Where a workers’ organization is the complainant, the Office may solicit further information from the complainant in the light of the observations from the government, once received. This is particularly the case where the statements contained in the complaint and the government’s reply merely cancel one another out but do not contain any valid evidence. See the “Rules concerning relations with the complainant” in the Procedures for the examination of complaints alleging violations of freedom of association.
If a complaint meets the basic admissibility requirements, the Office gives the complaint a case number, informs the government concerned of the complaint and asks for its observations on the allegations. To know more, see the “Rules for relations with the government concerned” in the Procedures for the examination of complaints alleging violations of freedom of association.
The CFA has recently decided to adopt a similar approach of optional voluntary conciliation for complaints as has been adopted with respect to representations under article 24 of the ILO Constitution. Upon acknowledging a complaint and transmitting it to the government, an additional paragraph will be included pointing to the possibility of optional voluntary conciliation which, if agreed to by both parties, would lead to a temporary suspension of the examination of the complaint for a period of six months. Such cases will be noted in a special paragraph of the introduction of the CFA report, demonstrating the willingness of the parties to attempt to find appropriate solutions at national level. The CFA will review the impact of this approach after a trial period.
In terms of information responding to the allegations, the CFA may hear the parties, or one of them, where:
the complainants and the government have submitted contradictory statements on the substance of the matters at issue; or
the CFA considers it useful to have an exchange of views on certain matters with the government concerned and the complainants in order to appreciate more fully the factual situation, examine
the possibilities for solving the problems and seek conciliation; or
particular difficulties have arisen in the examination of questions involving the implementation of its recommendations.
In practice, face-to-face hearings occur very exceptionally.
