Washington College of Law
Center For Human Rights and Humanitarian Law

Communication No. 1686 (ARGENTINA)

Communication No. 1686: dated June 9, 1970, denouncing that on June 2, 1970, as a result of a strike by members of the Union of Automotive Transport Mechanics and Allied Workers of the city of

and that because of the protests resulting from this measure the authorities of that city carried out official search and seizure without a lawful warrant, arbitrarily arresting 98 workers.

At its Twenty-fourth Session (October 1970), the Commission decided to request the corresponding information from the Argentine Government, in accordance with Articles 42 and 44 of its Regulations, and sent a note to that effect to the Government concerned on November 23. 1971.

At its Twenty-fifth Session (March 1971), the Commission noted that the Argentine Government had not responded to its request for information, and in accordance with the recommendation made by the rapporteur for this case, Dr. Gabino Fraga, again requested the Government, in a note dated May 11, 1971, that it send the pertinent information.

The Argentine Government, in a note dated July 7, 1971 (No. 2023), replied to the Commission stating that the establishments of the IKA RENAULT Company had been occupied by its workers on June 2, 1970, and vacated on June 5; that on June 8 the company had not opened its doors in order to evaluate the damage caused during the occupation; that the Union of Automotive Transport Mechanics and Allied Workers (SMATA), to which these workers belong, had ordered a stoppage for an indefinite period demanding that the workers discharged by the company be reinstated; and that after submission of the dispute to binding arbitration by the Secretariat of State for Labor, the Union had accepted its decision of July 6, 1970 and had ended the forcible measures taken, with the consequent return of activities at the IKA RENAULT Company to normal.

At its Twenty-sixth Session (October-November 1971), the Commission studied the information supplied by the Government of Argentina and observed that the complainants, to whom the pertinent parts of the information submitted by the Argentine Government had been transmitted by the Secretariat, had made no observations thereon as of that date.

Consequently, the Commission decided to file the dossier, without prejudice to reopening its study if, within a reasonable period, the complainants present observations on the information provided by the Government together with facts that make further study of the case necessary.

[ Inter-American Human Rights Database ]