ÿWPC§ ²áJü5p©`PRð"$<¶m¡ôVÙàPøX>²NXÁªîÙw ÁýÔ"ˆÇ~‰¢Y>'Ôín ˆCìŽæ˺mbäé ¼9­YÑ)ÍÃgq‘ªzÔ2·O@XúS¨é6(‘œD†Ô.øžC²Ô‡Ønás£Iµm À¾ä·%0E´Ô€ßÊãÆ*h4|u#È{+Œî2]Å?ýqº¿µ;$G>éñv5²Ré{}¨郟ÅsÕàE!—-nãSlTñY׿Pæ¦%ÕG[i™"òûmjÜoùçœ5¦Ps“p¬†ûÖ9ž!„ËF“2$[ 8f0uEV{‘(|pÈÚÇ™r®òAmel´-×¹4K”‰¤Ãé·”£Ó!¿[ð~‰jrkª£` œézq œëO”Ùï8Å|‰Ò=Sâÿ×91(#¬ oÿȦ{“N‡æï4Bi~”hhðcNŠkHÁÃ5î~»‘,½­rt·óWH£†Ê¹E)º¼ý÷QiŠ!¡G2 ýHí£2œFȃ”2Ù=îoå>-j³ƒÐxÃåئi¬X^#•ô<û©fšÕfaÔkt†Þ$P|eÌçKN×r›Í“j)X¬ „í¼BÜÂçzÈTâ<Ñå0U> ÌÞ 0µª 0<_ 0Y› 0_ô 0iS Ƽ 0á‚ 0(c D+‹ AM¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶  0N 0Æa #Á' UNè %6M<(@Nh^ jwv4zŽ mô\  `‹&Times New Roman' J. B., P. D., L. S., T. M., D. P., D. S. v. Canada, Communication No. 118/1982 (18 July 194 118/1982 (18 July 19"Angie Dituri"0Angie Dituri .   6F , ÿÿ4Heading 3Ô S ÔÓ p^SÓÔ€£££Ôò òÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ€XXXÔó óÓ p^SÓ<ÿÿ:Default Para6ÿÿ4HyperlinkóóòòÔ ÿ ÔóóÔ  Ô<ÿÿ:FollowedHypeóóòòÔ  ÔóóÔ  Ô< ÿÿ:Normal (Web)Ô S ÔÓ =jSÓÓ =jSÓ Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(¹2³â$££Ý ƒ$h¢!ÝÒÜ°ÒÒÜ°ÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€&X¼zXX&XÔÔ€X¼zXX&X¼zÔÔÔÝ  Ý(ÿÿ$’’'dxd A<< cÿÿ#|x(ÍO$——ÔÿÔòòóóÔÿÔ(žh¢$¡¡ÒÜ°ÒÒÜ°ÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€&X²XX&XÔÔ€X²XX&X²ÔÔÔ˜HP LaserJet 6P/6MP - Standard,ä,,,,,ä0(ÈhH  Z‹6Times New Roman Regular&Xüªó* Äpì*ê:i¢Ø+00ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀÝ ƒ$h¢!ÝÒÜ°ÒÒÜ°ÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€&X¼zXX&XÔÔ€X¼zXX&X¼zÔÔÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôò òHUMAN€RIGHTS€COMMITTEEÐ ° ÐòòÌJ.€B.€et€al.€v.€CanadaóóÐ |Ì ÐÌCommunication€No.€118/1982Ð H˜ ÐÌ18€July€1986Ð  d ÐÌÌADMISSIBILITYó óÐ Æ   ÐÌÌòòòòSubmitted€byóó:€J.€B.,€P.€D.,€L.€S.,€T.€M.,€D.€P.,€D.€S.€(names€deleted)€on€5€January€1982Ð xÈ  ÐÌAlleged€Ô_Ôvictims:TheÔ_Ô€authorsÐ D”  ÐÌòòState€partyóó:€Canada€Ð ` ÐÌòòDeclared€inadmissibleóó:€18€July€1986€(twenty„eighth€session)*/€óóÐ Ü, ÐÌòòÌóóÓ  Óò òòòDecision€on€Admissibilityóóó óÐ ŽÞ ÐÓÓÌÌÓ  Ó1.1.€The€authors€of€the€communication(initial€letter€dated€5€January€1982€and€sevenÐ @ Ðsubsequent€letters)€are€.1.€B.,€P.€D.,€L.€S.,€T.€M.,€D.€P.€and€D.€S.,€in€their€personal€capacitiesÐ &v Ðand€as€members€of€the€executive€committee€of€the€Alberta€Union€of€Provincial€Employees,Ð  \ ÐCanada.€They€are€represented€by€the€Alberta€Union€of€Provincial€Employees€through€legalÐ òB Ðcounsel.€Ð Ø( ÐÌ1.2.€The€authors€refer€to€the€prohibition€to€strike€or€provincial€public€employees€in€theÐ ¤ô ÐProvince€of€Alberta€under€the€Alberta€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€Act€of€1977€andÐ Š Ú Ðclaim€that€such€prohibition€constitutes€a€breach€by€Canada€of€article€22€of€the€InternationalÐ p!À  ÐCovenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights.€Ð V"¦! ÐÌ2.1.€The€facts€of€the€claim€have€been€described€as€follows.€In€1977,€the€Legislature€of€theÐ "$r# ÐProvince€of€Alberta,€Canada,€adopted€the€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€Act,€mainlyÐ %X $ Ðwith€a€view€to€consolidating€a€number€of€existing€legislative€enactments€covering€provincialÐ î%>!% Ðpublic€employees.€The€Act,€which€entered€into€force€on€22€September€1977,€prohibitsÐ Ô&$"& Ðpersons€within€its€scope€from€striking€and€imposes€penalties€in€cases€of€contraventionÐ º' #' Ð(sections€93€and€95€of€the€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€Act,€1977).€The€40,000Ð  (ð#( Ðmembers€of€the€Union€are€said€to€be€adversely€affected€by€these€provisions.€Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌ2.2.€In€November€1977,€the€Canadian€Ô_ÔLabourÔ_Ô€Congress,€on€behalf€of€the€Alberta€Union€ofÐ R+¢&+ ÐPublic€Employees,€lodged€a€complaint€with€the€Committee€on€Freedom€of€Association€ofÐ 8,ˆ', Ðthe€International€Ô_ÔLabourÔ_Ô€Organization€(ILO)€that€the€general€prohibition€of€strikes€for€publicÐ -n(- Ðemployees€contained€in€the€Alberta€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€Act€was€not€inÐ ° Ðharmony€with€article€10€of€ILO€Convention€No.€87òò1óó€".€.€.€since€it€constituted€a€considerableÐ –æ Ðrestriction€on€the€opportunities€open€to€trade€unions€to€further€and€defend€the€interests€ofÐ |Ì Ðtheir€members".€The€complaints€added€that€"such€a€limitation€is€an€impairment€of€articlesÐ b² Ð3€and€8€of€Convention€No.€87€...€".€In€its€report€as€approved€by€the€ILO€Governing€Body€inÐ H˜ ÐNovember€1978€(case€No.€893),€the€Committee€on€Freedom€of€Association€suggested€thatÐ . ~ Ð...€the€Government€[of€Alberta]€consider€the€possibility€of€introducing€an€amendment€to€theÐ  d ÐPublic€Service€Employee€Relations€Act€so€that€in€cases€where€strikes€are€prohibited,€this€beÐ ú J Ðconfined€to€services€which€are€essential.€Ð à 0 ÐÌ2.3.€In€1979,€a€second€complaint€was€lodged€with€ILO€by€the€same€complainant,€on€behalfÐ ¬ ü  Ðof€the€Union.€In€its€observations,€submitted€by€the€Government€of€Canada,€the€GovernmentÐ ’â  Ðof€Alberta€voiced€disagreement€with€the€ILO€recommendation€of€1978€arguing€that€".€.€.Ð xÈ  Ðalthough€some€services€might€to€more€essential€than€others,€the€public€service€generallyÐ ^®  Ðprovides€to€the€people€of€Alberta€services€for€which,€in€the€main,€there€is€no€reasonableÐ D”  Ðalternative€.€.€.".€In€its€second€report€the€Committee€on€Freedom€of€Association€repeated€itsÐ *z  Ðrecommendation€contained€in€its€first€report,€with€the€following€reasoning:€"The€CommitteeÐ ` Ðhas€taken€note€of€this€information.€Under€article€3€of€Convention€No.€87,€trade„unionÐ öF Ðorganizations,€as€organizations€of€workers€for€furthering€and€defending€their€occupationalÐ Ü, Ðinterests€(art.€10),€have€the€right€to€formulate€their€Ô_ÔprogrammesÔ_Ô€and€organize€their€activities.Ð Â ÐIt€is€on€the€basis€of€the€right€which€trade€unions€are€thus€recognized€as€possessing€that€theÐ ¨ø ÐCommittee€has€always€considered€their€right€to€strike€as€a€legitimate„and€indeed€essential„Ð ŽÞ Ðmeans€by€which€workers€may€defend€their€occupational€interests.€The€Committee€hasÐ tÄ Ðrecognized€that€strikes€may€be€restricted,€and€even€prohibited,€in€the€public€service,€essentialÐ Zª Ðservice€or€a€key€Ô_ÔcentreÔ_Ô€of€a€country's€economy€because„and€to€the€extent€that„a€workÐ @ Ðstoppage€may€cause€serious€harm€to€the€national€community.€Accordingly,€the€CommitteeÐ &v Ðholds€the€view€that€it€is€inappropriate€in€the€present€case€to€place€all€public€establishmentsÐ  \ Ðcovered€by€the€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€Act€of€1977€on€the€same€footing€asÐ òB Ðregards€the€prohibition€of€the€right€to€strike.€To€take€only€the€example€quoted€by€theÐ Ø( Ðcomplainants,€the€Alberta€Liquor€Board€is€not€a€service€in€which€strikes€should€be€prohibitedÐ ¾ Ð.€.€.€".€Ð ¤ô ÐÌ2.4.€In€1980,€a€third€complaint€in€the€matter€was€submitted€to€the€ILO€Committee€onÐ p!À  ÐFreedom€of€Association€by€the€Canadian€Ô_ÔLabourÔ_Ô€Congress.€The€Committee€on€Freedom€ofÐ V"¦! ÐAssociation€again€recommended€to€the€Governing€Body€that€it€suggest€to€the€GovernmentÐ <#Œ" Ðof€Canada€that€the€Government€of€Alberta€consider€the€possibility€of€introducing€anÐ "$r# Ðamendment€to€the€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€Act€in€order€to€confine€the€prohibitionÐ %X $ Ðof€strikes€to€services€which€are€essential€in€the€strict€sense€of€the€term.òò2óó€Ð î%>!% ÐÌIn€1983,€as€a€result€of€this€decision,€the€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€Act€wasÐ º' #' Ðamended€to€exclude€from€its€ambit€the€Alberta€Liquor€Board,€the€only€publicly€ownedÐ  (ð#( Ðundertaking€to€which€express€reference€was€òòmade€óóby€the€Committee€on€Freedom€ofÐ †)Ö$) ÐAssociation€in€its€examination€of€the€above€mentioned€Act.òò3óó€Ð l*¼%* ÐÌ2.5.€The€Union€also€commenced€court€action€in€Edmonton,€Alberta,€at€an€unspecified€date,Ð 8,ˆ', Ðin€1979€or€in€the€beginning€of€1980.€The€Union€filed€an€application€with€the€Alberta€CourtÐ -n(- Ðof€the€Queen's€Bench,€with€a€view€to€having€certain€sections€of€the€Public€Service€Employee.Ð ° ÐRelations€Act€of€1977€held€to€be€contrary€to€international€law€and€to€be€thus€void€and€of€noÐ –æ Ðeffect.€This€application€was€introduced€by€way€of€an€Originating€Notice€of€Motion€for€theÐ |Ì Ðdetermination€mainly€of€the€following€questions:€Ð b² ÐÌ(a)€Whether€the€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€Act€S.A.€1977€was,€in€whole€or€in€part,Ð . ~ Ðin€violation€of€Canada's€international€legal€obligations;€Ð  d ÐÌ(b)€Whether€the€Province€of€Alberta€was€empowered€to€legislate€in€violation€of€Canada'sÐ à 0 Ðinternational€legal€obligations;€Ð Æ   ÐÌ(c)€Whether€the€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€Act€was€òòultra€vires€óóthe€legislature€of€theÐ ’â  ÐProvince€of€Alberta.€Ð xÈ  ÐÌ2.6.€During€hearings€preceding€the€judgement,€the€representatives€of€the€Union€and€of€theÐ D”  ÐGovernment€of€Alberta€presented€their€arguments€in€the€case.€On€25€July€1980,€judgementÐ *z  Ðwas€rendered€by€the€Learned€Trial€Judge€of€the€Court€of€the€Queen's€Bench€of€Alberta€inÐ ` Ðanswer€to€the€questions€raised€by€the€Originating€Notice€of€Motion.€It€was€determined€by€theÐ öF ÐJudge€that€the€Public€Service€Employee€Relation€Act€was€neither€in€whole€nor€in€part€inÐ Ü, Ðviolation€of€Canada's€international€obligations;€that€the€Act€was€not€òòultra€viresóó€the€legislatureÐ Â Ðof€the€Province€of€Alberta;€and€that€in€view€of€the€foregoing€it€was€not€necessary€to€answerÐ ¨ø Ðthe€question€whether€Alberta€was€empowered€to€legislate€in€violation€of€Canada'sÐ ŽÞ Ðinternational€obligations.€The€Union€appealed€the€decision€of€the€Learned€Trial€Judge€to€theÐ tÄ ÐAlberta€Court€of€Appeal.€The€appeal€was€dismissed€on€21€September€1981.€The€Union€thenÐ Zª Ðsought€leave€to€appeal€the€decision€of€the€Alberta€Court€Of€Appeal€to€the€Supreme€Court€ofÐ @ ÐCanada.€On€23€November€1981€the€Supreme€Court€of€Canada€refused€leave€to€appeal.€Ð &v ÐÌ2.7.€The€Alberta€Union€of€Provincial€Employees€maintained€(at€the€time€of€the€submissionÐ òB Ðof€the€communication€on€5€January€1982)€that€all€available€domestic€remedies€had€beenÐ Ø( Ðexhausted.€Ð ¾ ÐÌ3.€By€its€decision€of€8€July€1983,€the€Working€Group€of€the€Human€Rights€CommitteeÐ Š Ú Ðtransmitted€the€communication€under€rule€91€of€the€provisional€rules€of€procedure€to€theÐ p!À  ÐState€party,€requesting€information€and€observations€relevant€to€the€question€of€admissibilityÐ V"¦! Ðof€the€communication.€Ð <#Œ" ÐÌ4.1.€Under€cover€of€the€note€dated€6€August€1984,€the€State€Party,€òòinter€alia,€óósubmitted€that:€Ð %X $ ÐÌthe€Human€Rights€Committee€must€consider€a€communication€inadmissible€if:€Ð Ô&$"& ÐÌ(a)€It€is€incompatible€with€the€provisions€of€the€Covenant;€Ð  (ð#( ÐÌ(b)€The€same€matter€as€that€dealt€with€is€being€examined€under€another€procedure€ofÐ l*¼%* Ðinternational€investigation€or€settlement;€or€Ð R+¢&+ ÐÌ(c)€The€communicant€has€not€exhausted€all€available€domestic€remedies.€Ð -n(- ЇThe€Government€of€Canada,€after€consultation€with€the€Government€of€the€Province€ofÐ ° ÐAlberta,€is€of€the€view€that€the€present€communication€fails€to€meet€these€requirements€andÐ –æ Ðshould€therefore€be€found€inadmissible€by€the€Committee.€Ð |Ì ÐÌ4.2.€With€respect€to€the€compatibility€of€the€communication€with€the€provisions€of€theÐ H˜ ÐCovenant,€the€State€party€argued:€Ð . ~ ÐÌArticle€3€of€the€Optional€Protocol€to€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€RightsÐ ú J Ðprovides€that€the€Human€Rights€Committee€11€shall€consider€inadmissible€anyÐ à 0 Ðcommunication€under€the€present€Protocol€.€.€.€which€it€considers€.€.€.€to€be€incompatible€withÐ Æ   Ðthe€provisions€of€the€Covenant".€The€Government€of€Canada€is€of€the€view€that€article€22,Ð ¬ ü  Ðparagraph€1,€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights€does€not€guaranteeÐ ’â  Ðthe€right€to€strike€and€that€as€a€result€the€present€communication€is€inadmissible€òòÔ_ÔrationeÔ_ÔÐ xÈ  ÐÔ_ÔmateriaeÔ_Ô.óó€Ð ^®  ÐÌNo€mention€of€the€right€to€strike€is€made€in€article€22,€paragraph€1,€of€the€InternationalÐ *z  ÐCovenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights.€The€Government€of€Canada€considers€that€thisÐ ` Ðsilence€is€of€import,€especially€in€light€of€article€8,€paragraph€I€òò(d),€óóof€the€InternationalÐ öF ÐCovenant€on€Economic,€Social€and€Cultural€Rights€which€does€recognize€the€right€to€strike.Ð Ü, Ð.€.€.€Ð  ÐÌ...€Thus,€so€long€as€a€State€party€meets€its€basic€requirements€under€article€22,€paragraph€1,Ð ŽÞ Ðof€the€Covenant,€which€is€to€permit€and€make€possible€trade„union€action€aimed€at€protectingÐ tÄ Ðthe€occupational€interests€of€trade„union€members,€there€is€no€breach€of€the€Covenant.€InÐ Zª Ðgiving€effect€to€this€obligation,€a€State€party€is€free€to€choose€the€mean,€which€it€considersÐ @ Ðappropriate.€Therefore,€if€a€State€party€meets€it's€basic€obligations€under€article€22,Ð &v Ðparagraph€1,€any€communication€which€aims€at€forcing€it€to€accept€a€given€method€ofÐ  \ Ðcompliance€in€preference€to€another€would€clearly€be€incompatible€with€the€Covenant.€Ð òB ÐÌIn€the€present€case.€the€communicant's€sole€argument€is€that€the€Public€Service€EmployeeÐ ¾ ÐRelations€Act€enacted€by€the€legislature€of€the€Province€of€Alberta€violates€article€22,Ð ¤ô Ðparagraph€1,€of€the€Covenant€by€forbidding€strikes€in€the€provincial€public€service.€It€makesÐ Š Ú Ðno€argument€as€to€why,€apart€from€prohibiting€strikes,€the€Alberta€scheme€would€failÐ p!À  Ðadequately€to€safeguard€the€occupational€interest€of€trade„union€members.€It€is€asking€theÐ V"¦! ÐCommittee€to€recognize€that€article€22,€paragraph€1,€of€the€Covenant€confers€a€right€to€strikeÐ <#Œ" Ðand€as€a€result€it€does€away€with€the€discretion€which€States€possess€to€choose€the€meansÐ "$r# Ðthey€consider€the€most€appropriate€to€implement€article€22,€paragraph€1.€In€this€respect,€theÐ %X $ Ðcommunication€is€incompatible€with€the€provisions€of€article€22,€paragraph€1,€of€theÐ î%>!% ÐCovenant.€Not€only€does€this€article€not€recognize€a€right€to€strike,€it€allows€a€State€party€toÐ Ô&$"& Ðchoose€how€it€will€give€effect€to€the€"right€[of€everyone]€to€form€and€join€a€trade€union€forÐ º' #' Ðthe€protection€of€his€interest".€Therefore,€the€Government€of€Canada€considers€the€presentÐ  (ð#( Ðcommunication€inadmissible€on€the€basis€of€incompatibility€with€the€Covenant.€Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌ4.3.€With€respect€to€the€issue€of€òòlis€pendens,€theóó€State€party€argued:€Ð R+¢&+ ÐÌArticle€5,€paragraph€2€òò(a),€óóof€the€Optional€Protocol€to€the€International€Covenant€on€CivilÐ -n(- Ðand€Political€Rights€provides€that€"the€Committee€shall€not€consider€any€communicationÐ ° Ðfrom€an€individual€unless€it€has€ascertained€that€...€the€same€matter€is€not€being€examinedÐ –æ Ðunder€another€procedure€of€international€investigation€or€settlement".€The€Government€ofÐ |Ì ÐCanada€considers€that€the€proceedings€initiated€on€behalf€of€the€Alberta€Union€of€PubicÐ b² ÐEmployees€before€the€Committee€on€Freedom€of€Association€of€the€International€Ô_ÔLabourÔ_ÔÐ H˜ ÐOrganization€result€in€òòlis€pendens€óósince€proceedings€before€that€Committee€imply€the€useÐ . ~ Ðof€another€procedure€of€international€complaint€or€settlement€and€since€the€matter€dealt€withÐ  d Ðby€the€Committee€is€the€same€as€that€on€which€the€Human€Rights€Committee€is€asked€toÐ ú J Ðexpress€its€views.€.€.€Ð à 0 ÐÌFor€article€5,€paragraph€2€òò(a),€óóof€the€Optional€Protocol€to€apply€a€communication€to€theÐ ¬ ü  ÐCommittee€on€Freedom€of€Association€of€the€International€Ô_ÔLabourÔ_Ô€Organization€must€beÐ ’â  Ðconsidered€to€be€another€procedure€of€international€investigation€or€settlement.€In€the€viewÐ xÈ  Ðof€the€Government€of€Canada,€the€special€machinery€for€the€protection€of€freedom€ofÐ ^®  Ðassociation€established€by€the€International€Ô_ÔLabourÔ_Ô€Organization€(or€ILO)€in€1950€followingÐ D”  Ðan€agreement€with€the€United€Nations€Economic€and€Social€Council€is€such€a€procedure€...€Ð *z  ÐÌThis€procedure.€like€that€under€which€the€Human€Rights€Committee€operates,€implies€thatÐ öF Ðcomplaints€are€received,€investigations€made€and€recommendations€issued.€There€areÐ Ü, Ðdifferences€between€the€two€systems€out€these€do€not€affect€the€nature€of€the€InternationalÐ Â ÐÔ_ÔLabourÔ_Ô€Organization's€special€procedure.€Ð ¨ø ÐÌEven€if€proceedings€are€being€carried€on€before€two€international€investigative€bodies.€aÐ tÄ Ðcommunication€is€only€inadmissible€under€article€5,€paragraph€2€òò(a),€óóof€the€OptionalÐ Zª ÐProtocol€if€these€two€bodies€are€examining€the€same€matter.€It€is€the€view€of€the€GovernmentÐ @ Ðof€Canada€that€this€is€the€situation€in€the€present€case.€.€.€.€Ð &v ÐÌIn€its€complaint€now€before€the€Committee€on€Freedom€of€Association€[see€para.€5.2€below),Ð òB Ðthe€communicant€is€alleging€that€the€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€Act€in€force€in€theÐ Ø( ÐProvince€of€Alberta€fails€to€set€up€an€impartial€conciliation€and€arbitration€procedure€as€anÐ ¾ Ðalternative€to€strikes€and€that€as€a€consequence€the€Government€of€Canada€is€in€breach€of€theÐ ¤ô Ðobligations€under€Convention€No.€87.€In€its€communication€in€respect€to€article€22,Ð Š Ú Ðparagraph€I,€of€the€Covenant,€it€seeks€a€recognition€that€this€article€confers€a€right€to€strikeÐ p!À  Ðand€that€therefore€the€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€Act€is€in€breach€of€Canada'sÐ V"¦! Ðinternational€obligations.€The€aims€of€these€two€communications€are€identical.€In€both€cases.Ð <#Œ" Ðthe€communicant€seeks€a€recognition€of€the€right€to€strike€although€in€one€case,€its€methodÐ "$r# Ðis€direct€and€in€the€other€indirect.€.€.€.€Ð %X $ ÐÌIn€the€view€of€the€Government€of€Canada.€if€the€issue€raised€by€the€communicant€wereÐ Ô&$"& Ðdebated€before€the€Human€Rights€Committee€.€it€would€in€fact€be€dealing€with€the€sameÐ º' #' Ðmatter€as€is€currently€before€the€Committee€on€Freedom€of€Association.€As€previouslyÐ  (ð#( Ðindicated,€it€is€the€view€of€the€Government€of€Canada€that€the€Covenant€does€not€recognizeÐ †)Ö$) Ðthe€right€to€strike.€If€the€Committee€did€not€dismiss€the€present€communication€on€theÐ l*¼%* Ðground€of€incompatibility€with€the€Covenant.€the€communicant€would€have€to€show€why€andÐ R+¢&+ Ðhow€the€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€Act€contravened€article€22,€paragraph€1,€of€theÐ 8,ˆ', ÐCovenant.€To€do€this,€it€would€almost€inevitably€have€to€resort€to€the€same€arguments€it€isÐ -n(- Ðinvoking€in€the€other€forum.€For€this€reason,€the€Government€of€Canada,€after€consultationÐ ° Ðwith€the€Government€of€the€Province€of€Alberta,€considers€that€there€is€in€this€case€òòlisÐ –æ Ðpendens€óóand€that€the€communication€should€be€found€in€admissible€under€article€5.Ð |Ì Ðparagraph€2€òò(a),€óóof€the€Optional€Protocol.€Ð b² ÐÌ4.4.€With€respect€to€the€issue€of€exhaustion€of€domestic€remedies,€the€State€party€argued:€Ð . ~ ÐÌThe€communicant,€before€it€made€the€present€communication,€had€challenged€theÐ ú J Ðconstitutional€validity€of€the€no„strike€provisions€of€the€Public€Service€Employee€RelationsÐ à 0 ÐAct€of€the€Province€of€Alberta€before€the€Court€of€the€Queen's€Bench€of€the€Province€ofÐ Æ   ÐAlberta.òò4óó€A€reading€of€the€decision€of€Sinclair€Ô_ÔC.J.Q.B.Ô_Ô€in€òòRe€Alberta€Union€ofóó€òòProvincialÐ ¬ ü  ÐEmployees€óóet€al.,€òòand€the€Crown€in€Right€of€Alberta€showsóó€that€this€challenge€was€based€onÐ ’â  Ðthe€notion€of€division€of€powers€between€the€federal€and€provincial€levels€of€governmentÐ xÈ  Ðwithin€the€Canadian€federation.€Basically,€the€plaintiff€was€arguing€that€international€lawÐ ^®  Ðrecognized€to€all€persons€employed€in€the€public€service€save€(hose€employees€engaged€inÐ D”  Ðessential€services€the€right€to€strike€and€that€under€the€Canadian€Constitution€only€theÐ *z  ÐFederal€Government€could€legislate€in€breach€of€international€law.òò5óó€No€mention€is€made€ofÐ ` Ðthe€provision€of€the€Alberta€Bill€of€Rights€which€protects€freedom€of€association.€.€.€.€Ð öF ÐÌWhen€the€communicant€sought€leave€to€appeal€to€the€Supreme€Court€of€Canada€the€decisionÐ Â Ðof€the€Court€of€Appeal.€it€should€be€noted€that€it€did€invoke€the€freedom€of€associationÐ ¨ø Ðprovisions€of€the€Alberta€Bill€of€Rights€as€one€of€the€grounds€of€appeal.€It€argued€that€theÐ ŽÞ ÐAlberta€Bill€of€Rights€ought€to€be€interpreted€in€light€of€Canada's€international€obligationsÐ tÄ Ðwhich.€in€its€view,€recognized€to€employees€of€nonessential€publicly„owned,€undertakingsÐ Zª Ðthe€right€to€strike.€It€did€not€argue€that€freedom€of€association€as€recognized€in€the€BillÐ @ Ðconferred€by€itself€the€right€to€Strike.òò6óó€Further.€in€its€pleadings.€the€communicant€alsoÐ &v Ðnarrowed€the€focus€of€its€appeal.€It€no€longer€challenged€the€no„strike€provisions€of€theÐ  \ ÐPublic€Service€Employee€Relations€Act€as€they€applied€to€the€entire€Public€service.€butÐ òB Ðrather€it€limited€its€challenge€to€their€application€to€the€non„essential€employees€of€theÐ Ø( ÐCrown„owned€undertakings.òò7óó€Clearly€when€the€communicant€made€its€communication€it€hadÐ ¾ Ðnot€exhausted€local€remedies....€Ð ¤ô ÐÌThe€Government€of€Canada€has€indicated€that€the€communicant€is€currently€proceeding€withÐ p!À  Ða€challenge€against€the€no„strike€provisions€of€the€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€ActÐ V"¦! Ðunder€subsection€2€òò(d)óó€of€the€Canadian€Charter€of€Rights€and€Freedoms€[see€para.€5.3Ð <#Œ" Ðbelow).€This€provision€reads€as€follows:€Ð "$r# ÐÌ"2.€Everyone€has€the€following€fundamental€freedoms:€Ð î%>!% ÐÌ".€.€.Ð º' #' ÐÌ"(d)€Freedom€of€association."òò8óó€Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌThe€issue€of€whether€freedom€of€association€confers€to€trade€unions€and€their€members€aÐ R+¢&+ Ðright€to€strike€is€a€matter€which€was€not€litigated€before€the€Supreme€Court€of€Canada€andÐ 8,ˆ', Ðwhich€does€not€appear€to€have€been€dealt€with€by€lower€courts€under€the€Canadian€Bill€ofÐ -n(- ÐRights€or€the€Alberta€Bill€of€Rights.€However.€under€the€Charter€the€relationship€betweenÐ ° Ðfreedom€of€association€and€the€right€to€strike€is€a€question€which€has€been€submitted€to€theÐ –æ Ðcourts€for€adjudication€at€both€the€federal€and€provincial€levels.òò9óó€Because€of€the€importanceÐ |Ì Ðof€the€matter€and€of€conflicting€judicial€interpretation,€it€is€likely€that€the€Supreme€Court€ofÐ b² ÐCanada,€which€is€in€the€Canadian€federation€the€court€of€last€resort€for€both€the€federal€andÐ H˜ Ðprovincial€jurisdictions,€will€be€given€an€opportunity€to€render€judgement€on€this€question.€Ð . ~ ÐÌSince€the€Alberta€Union€of€Public€Employees€failed€to€exhaust€domestic€remedies€before€itÐ ú J Ðsubmitted€a€communication€to€the€Human€Rights€Committee€and€since€it€is€currentlyÐ à 0 Ðpursuing€proceedings€before€the€Alberta€Court€of€Queen's€Bench€on€the€same€matter,€theÐ Æ   ÐGovernment€of€Canada€considers€that€its„€communication€should€be€found€inadmissibleÐ ¬ ü  Ðunder€article€5,€paragraph€2€òò(b),€of€óóthe€Optional€Protocol€to€the€International€Covenant€onÐ ’â  ÐCivil€and€Political€Rights.€Ð xÈ  ÐÌIn€their€comments€under€rule€91,€dated€2€June€1986,€the€authors€address€the€three€mainÐ D”  Ðobjections€of€the€State€party€with€regard€to€the€admissibility€of€the€communication.€First,Ð *z  Ðthey€submit€that€the€communication€is€indeed€compatible€with€the€provisions€of€theÐ ` ÐCovenant,€and€refer€to€the€relevance€of€article€22,€paragraph€3,€which€provides€that€"NothingÐ öF Ðin€this€article€shall€authorize€States€Parties€to€the€International€Ô_ÔLabourÔ_Ô€OrganizationÐ Ü, ÐConvention€of€1948€concerning€Freedom€of€Association€and€Protection€of€the€Right€toÐ Â ÐOrganize€(Convention€No.€871€to€take€legislative€measures€which€would€prejudice,€or€toÐ ¨ø Ðapply€the€law€in€such€a€manner€as€to€prejudice,€the€guarantees€provided€for€in€thatÐ ŽÞ ÐConvention".€It€is€implied,€they€argue,€that€a€denial€of€the€right€to€strike€would€prejudice€theÐ tÄ Ðguarantees€of€ILO€Convention€No.€87.€Moreover,€an€interpretation€of€article€22,€paragraphÐ Zª Ð1,€of€the€Covenant€would€also€have€to€take€into€consideration€other€international€instruments,Ð @ Ðincluding€ILO€Convention€No.€87,€which€is€an€elaboration€of€the€principles€of€freedom€ofÐ &v Ðassociation€in€international€law.€It€is€submitted€that€in€a€series€of€decisions€the€CommitteeÐ  \ Ðon€Freedom€of€Association€of€ILO€has€determined€that€the€right€to€trike€derives€from€articleÐ òB Ð3€of€ILO€Convention€No.€87€and€that€it€is€an€essential€means€by€which€workers€can€promoteÐ Ø( Ðand€defend€their€occupational€interests.€In€particular,€the€authors€point€out€that,€in€four€cases,Ð ¾ Ðthe€Committee€on€Freedom€of€Association€has€considered€the€provisions€of€the€AlbertaÐ ¤ô ÐPublic€Service€Employee€Relations€Act€and€has€found€that€the€statute€does€not€comply€withÐ Š Ú Ðthe€guarantee€of€freedom€of€association€contained€in€Convention€No.€87.€The€Committee€onÐ p!À  ÐFreedom€of€Association€has€accordingly€requested€the€Canadian€Government€"to€re„examineÐ V"¦! Ðthe€provisions€in€question€in€order€to€confine€the€ban€on€strikes€to€services€which€areÐ <#Œ" Ðessential€in€the€strict€sense€of€the€term".€The€ILO€Committee€of€Experts€on€the€ApplicationÐ "$r# Ðof€Conventions€and€Recommendations€it€is€argued,€has€also€reaffirmed€the€importance€ofÐ %X $ Ðthe€right€to€strike€in€the€non„essential€public€service.€Ð î%>!% ÐÌ5.2.€With€regard€to€the€State€party's€objection€that€the€matter€is€being€examined€underÐ º' #' Ðanother€procedure€of€international€investigation€or€settlement€(para.€4.3€above),€the€authorsÐ  (ð#( Ðsubmit€that€the€complaint€submitted€by€the€Canadian€Ô_ÔLabourÔ_Ô€Congress,€on€behalf€of€theÐ †)Ö$) ÐAlberta€Union€of€Provincial€Employees,€to€ILO€is€no€longer€under€examination€since€theÐ l*¼%* ÐILO€investigation€was€concluded€in€1985€and€recommendations€for€resolving€the€differencesÐ R+¢&+ Ðhave€been€made€by€the€Committee€on€Freedom€of€Association€and€affirmed€by€theÐ 8,ˆ', ÐGoverning€Body€of€the€International€Ô_ÔLabourÔ_Ô€Office.€These€recommendations,€the€authorsÐ -n(- Ðadd,€have€been€ignored€by€the€Government€of€the€Province€of€Alberta.€Ð ° ÐÌ5.3.€With€regard€to€the€question€of€exhaustion€of€domestic€remedies,€the€authors€submit€thatÐ |Ì Ðall€available€domestic€remedies€have€indeed€been€exhausted.€In€particular,€the€authorsÐ b² Ðdispute€the€relevance€of€the€State€party's€contention€(para.€4.4€above)€that€their€argumentÐ H˜ Ðbefore€the€Canadian€courts€was€narrower€than€that€before€the€Human€Rights€Committee,Ð . ~ Ðexplaining€that€"since€the€Canadian€courts€decided€that€there€was€no€right€to€strike€[forÐ  d Ðpublic€employees€in€the€Province€of€Albert],€the€question€of€the€entitlement€of€persons€likeÐ ú J Ðthe€complainants€was€never€reached".€With€regard€to€the€State€party's€contention€that€theÐ à 0 ÐAlberta€Union€of€Provincial€Employees€is€pursuing€this€matter€under€the€Canadian€CharterÐ Æ   Ðof€Rights€and€Freedoms,€the€authors€point€out€that,€at€the€time€of€submission€of€the€presentÐ ¬ ü  Ðcommunication€to€the€Human€Rights€Committee€on€5€January€1982,€the€Charter€of€RightsÐ ’â  Ðand€Freedoms€had€not€come€into€force.€After€the€Charter€was€proclaimed€on€17€April€1982,Ð xÈ  Ðthe€Alberta€Union€of€Provincial€Employees,€however,€commenced€an€action€in€the€Court€ofÐ ^®  ÐQueen's€Bench€of€Alberta€for€a€declaration€that€certain€provisions€of€the€Public€ServiceÐ D”  ÐEmployee€Relations€Act,€including€the€strike€prohibition,€were€contrary€to€the€guarantee€ofÐ *z  Ðfreedom€of€association€contained€in€section€2€(d)€of€the€Charter.€On€29€February€1984,€theÐ ` ÐProvince€of€Alberta€referred€certain€questions€to€the€Court€of€Appeal€of€Alberta€for€anÐ öF Ðadvisory€opinion€and€obtained€a€stay€of€the€proceedings€that€had€been€launched€by€theÐ Ü, ÐAlberta€Union.€On€17€December€1984,€the€Court€of€Appeal€of€Alberta€certified€its€opinionÐ Â Ðon€a€number€of€points,€while€declining€to€issue€an€opinion€on€the€question€here€in€dispute.Ð ¨ø ÐThe€Alberta€Union€therefore€appealed€to€the€Supreme€Court€of€Canada,€which€heardÐ ŽÞ Ðargument€on€the€appeal€on€28€and€29€June€1985.€After€argument,€the€Supreme€Court€ofÐ tÄ ÐCanada€reserved€judgement€on€the€appeal€and€to€date€has€not€rendered€judgement.€TheÐ Zª Ðauthors€conclude€that,€"while€the€Human€Rights€Committee€may€wish€to€postpone€furtherÐ @ Ðconsideration€of€this€complaint€until€the€Supreme€Court€of€Canada€has€made€its€decision,€itÐ &v Ðis€respectfully€submitted€that€the€complaint€should€not€be€ruled€inadmissible€for€the€reasonÐ  \ Ðthat€some€domestic€remedy€has€not€been€exhausted".€Ð òB ÐÌ6.1.€Before€considering€any€claim€contained€in€a€communication,€the€Human€RightsÐ ¾ ÐCommittee€shall,€in€accordance€with€rule€87€of€its€provisional€rules€of€procedure,€decideÐ ¤ô Ðwhether€the€communication€is€admissible€under€the€Optional€Protocol€to€the€InternationalÐ Š Ú ÐCovenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights.€Ð p!À  ÐÌ6.2.€The€question€before€the€Committee€is€whether€the€right€to€strike€is€guaranteed€by€articleÐ <#Œ" Ð22€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights.€Article€22,€paragraph€1,Ð "$r# Ðprovides:€Ð %X $ ÐÌEveryone€shall€have€the€right€to€freedom€of€association€with€others,€including€the€right€toÐ Ô&$"& Ðform€and€join€trade€unions€for€the€protection€of€his€interests.€Ð º' #' ÐÌSince€the€right€to€strike€is€not€òòÔ_ÔexpressisÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔverbisÔ_Ô€óóincluded€in€article€22,€the€Committee€mustÐ †)Ö$) Ðinterpret€whether€the€right€to€freedom€of€association€necessarily€implies€the€right€to€strike,Ð l*¼%* Ðas€contended€by€the€authors€of€the€communication.€The€authors€have€argued€that€such€aÐ R+¢&+ Ðconclusion€is€supported€by€decisions€of€organs€of€the€International€Ô_ÔLabourÔ_Ô€Organization€inÐ 8,ˆ', Ðinterpreting€the€scope€and€the€meaning€of€Ô_ÔlabourÔ_Ô€law€treaties€enacted€under€the€auspices€ofÐ -n(- ÐILO.€The€Human€Rights€Committee€has€no€qualms€about€accepting€as€correct€and€just€theÐ ° Ðinterpretation€of€those€treaties€by€the€organs€concerned.€However,€each€international€treaty,Ð –æ Ðincluding€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights,€has€a€life€of€its€own€andÐ |Ì Ðmust€be€interpreted€in€a€fair€and€just€manner,€if€so€provided,€by€the€body€entrusted€with€theÐ b² Ðmonitoring€of€its€provisions.€Ð H˜ ÐÌ6.3.€In€interpreting€the€scope€of€article€22,€the€Committee€has€given€attention€to€theÐ  d Ð"ordinary€meaning"€of€each€element€of€the€article€in€its€context€and€in€the€light€of€its€objectÐ ú J Ðand€purpose€(article€31€of€the€Vienna€Convention€on€the€Law€of€Treaties).òò10óó€The€CommitteeÐ à 0 Ðhas€also€had€recourse€to€supplementary€means€of€interpretation€(article€32€of€the€ViennaÐ Æ   ÐConvention€on€the€Law€of€Treaties)€and€perused€the€òòÔ_ÔtravauxÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔpreparatoiresÔ_Ôóó€of€the€CovenantÐ ¬ ü  Ðon€Civil€and€Political€Rights,€in€particular€the€discussions€in€the€Commission€on€HumanÐ ’â  ÐRights€and€in€the€Third€Committee€of€the€General€Assembly.€The€Committee€notes€that€inÐ xÈ  Ðthe€course€of€drafting€the€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights€and€the€Covenant€onÐ ^®  ÐEconomic,€Social€and€Cultural€Rights,€the€Commission€on€Human€Rights€based€itself€on€theÐ D”  ÐUniversal€Declaration€of€Human€Rights.€The€Universal€Declaration,€however,€does€not€referÐ *z  Ðto€the€right€to€strike.€At€its€seventh€session€in€1951,€the€Commission€adopted€the€text€of€aÐ ` Ðsingle€"draft€covenant€on€human€rights"€comprising€73€articles€(E/1992,€annex).€The€7.€inÐ öF Ðthe€light€of€the€above,€the€Human€Rights€relevant€draft€articles€16€("the€right€ofÐ Ü, Ðassociation")and€27€("the€right€of€everyone,€in€conformity€with€article€16,€to€form€and€joinÐ Â Ðlocal,€national€and€international€trade€unions")€did€not€provide€for€the€right€to€strike.€In€theÐ ¨ø Ðcourse€of€the€discussions€of€these€articles€at€the€Commission's€eighth€session€in€1952,€articleÐ ŽÞ Ð27€was€dealt€with€first.€An€amendment€to€article€27€providing€for€the€inclusion€of€the€rightÐ tÄ Ðto€strike€was€rejected€by€11€votes€to€6,€with€I€abstention.€Three€weeks€later,€the€CommissionÐ Zª Ðdiscussed€article€16€and€adopted€it€with€minor€amendments,€without,€however,€any€proposalÐ @ Ðor€amendment€being€tabled€with€a€view€to€including€the€right€to€strike€in€that€article.Ð &v ÐPursuant€to€General€Assembly€resolution€A/543€(VI),€the€single€draft€covenant€on€humanÐ  \ Ðrights€was€split€into€a€draft€covenant€on€civil€and€political€rights€and€a€draft€covenant€onÐ òB Ðeconomic,€social€and€cultural€rights.€Article€16€was€assigned€to€the€draft€covenant€on€civilÐ Ø( Ðand€political€rights,€eventually€being€renumbered€as€article€22.€Article€27,€on€the€other€hand,Ð ¾ Ðwas€assigned€to€the€draft€covenant€on€economic,€social€and€cultural€rights,€eventually€beingÐ ¤ô Ðrenumbered€as€article€8.€Five€years€after€the€adoption€of€draft€articles€16€and€27€by€theÐ Š Ú ÐCommission€on€Human€Rights,€the€Third€Committee€of€the€General€Assembly€againÐ p!À  Ðdiscussed€the€draft€covenants.€Whereas€an€amendment€to€the€new€draft€article€8€of€theÐ V"¦! ÐCovenant€on€Economic,€Social€and€Cultural€Rights€was€adopted,€including€"the€right€toÐ <#Œ" Ðstrike,€provided€that€it€is€exercised€in€conformity€with€the€laws€of€the€particular€country",Ð "$r# Ðno€similar€amendment€was€introduced€or€discussed€with€respect€to€the€draft€covenant€on€civilÐ %X $ Ðand€political€rights.€Thus€the€Committee€cannot€deduce€from€the€òòÔ_ÔtravauxÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔpreparatoiresÔ_Ôóó€thatÐ î%>!% Ðthe€drafters€of€the€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights€intended€to€guarantee€the€right€toÐ Ô&$"& Ðstrike.€Ð º' #' ÐÌ6.4.€The€conclusions€to€be€drawn€from€the€drafting€history€are€corroborated€by€a€comparativeÐ †)Ö$) Ðanalysis€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights€and€the€InternationalÐ l*¼%* ÐCovenant€on€Economic,€Social€and€Cultural€Rights.€Article€8,€paragraph€I€òò(d),€óóof€theÐ R+¢&+ ÐInternational€Covenant€on€Economic,€Social€and€Cultural€Rights€recognizes€the€right€toÐ 8,ˆ', Ðstrike,€in€addition€to€the€right€of€everyone€to€form€and€join€trade€unions€for€the€promotionÐ -n(- Ðand€protection€of€his€economic€and€social€interests,€thereby€making€it€clear€that€the€right€toÐ ° Ðstrike€cannot€be€considered€as€an€implicit€component€of€the€right€to€form€and€join€tradeÐ –æ Ðunions.€Consequently,€the€fact€that€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€RightsÐ |Ì Ðdoes€not€similarly€provide€expressly€for€the€right€to€strike€in€article€22,€paragraph€1,€showsÐ b² Ðthat€this€right€is€not€included€in€the€scope€of€this€article,€while€it€enjoys€protection€under€theÐ H˜ Ðprocedures€and€mechanisms€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Economic,€Social€and€CulturalÐ . ~ ÐRights€subject€to€the€specific€restrictions€mentioned€in€article€8€of€that€instrument.€Ð  d ÐÌ6.5.€As€to€the€importance€which€the€authors€appear€to€attach€to€article€22,€paragraph€3€(para.Ð à 0 Ð5.1€above),€of€the€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights,€the€Committee€observes€that€theÐ Æ   ÐState€party€has€in€no€way€claimed€that€article€22€authorizes€it€to€take€legislative€measuresÐ ¬ ü  Ðor€to€apply€the€law€to€the€detriment€of€the€guarantees€provided€for€in€ILO€Convention€No.Ð ’â  Ð87.€Ð xÈ  ÐÌ7.€In€the€light€of€the€above,€the€Human€Rights€Committee€concludes€that€the€communicationÐ D”  Ðis€incompatible€with€the€provisions€of€the€Covenant€and€thus€inadmissible€òòrations€óóÔ_ÔmateriaeÔ_ÔÐ *z  Ðunder€article€3€of€the€Optional€Protocol.€In€the€circumstances,€the€Committee€does€not€haveÐ ` Ðto€examine€further€the€question€of€the€admissibility€of€the€communication€under€article€5,Ð öF Ðparagraph€2€òò(a)€óóand€(b),€of€the€Optional€Protocol,€or€the€question€whether€an€alleged€breachÐ Ü, Ðof€a€collective€right,€such€as€the€right€to€strike,€can€be€the€subject€of€a€claim€submitted€byÐ Â Ðindividuals€pursuant€to€articles€I€and€2€of€the€Optional€Protocol.€Ð ¨ø ÐÌ8.€The€Human€Rights€Committee€therefore€decides:€Ð tÄ ÐÌà0 4 àThat€the€communication€is€inadmissible.€Ð@4ü!4ü! ÐÌÌòòNotesóó:Ð òB ÐÌ*/€€€The€text€of€an€individual€opinion€submitted€by,€five€Committee€members€is€appendedÐ ¾ Ðto€the€present€decision.€Ð ¤ô ÐÌ1/€€€International€Ô_ÔLabourÔ_Ô€Organization,€international€Conventions€and€Recommendations,Ð p!À  Ð1919„1981€(Geneva,€1982).€Ð V"¦! ÐÌ2/€€€International€Ô_ÔLabourÔ_Ô€Office;€"Complaint€presented€by€the€Canadian€Ô_ÔLabourÔ_Ô€CongressÐ "$r# Ðagainst€the€Government€of€Canada€(Alberta):€Case€No.€893"€in€Reports€of€the„€GoverningÐ %X $ ÐBody€Committee€on€Freedom€of€Association€(203rd,€204th€and€205th)€(1980)€Ô_ÔLXIIIÔ_Ô€OfficialÐ î%>!% ÐBulletin,€Series€B,€No.€3,€p.€28,€para.€134€(b).€Ð Ô&$"& ÐÌ3/€€€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€Act,€Schedule,€section€6€as€added€by€the€Ô_ÔLabourÔ_ÔÐ  (ð#( ÐStatutes€Amendment€Act,€1983,€S.A.€1983,€c.€34,€Ô_ÔsubsectÔ_Ô.€5€(13).€Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌ4/€€€When€this€challenge€was€initiated,€there€existed€no€constitutional€protection€of€freedomÐ R+¢&+ Ðof€association€in€Canada.€Such€a€protection€came€into€existence€only€on€17€April€1982€withÐ 8,ˆ', Ðthe€coming€into€force€of€the€Canadian€Charter€of€Rights€and€Freedoms.€However.€theÐ -n(- ÐAlberta€Bill€of€Rights.€Ô_ÔR.S.A.Ô_Ô€1980,€c.€A„16,€did€protect€various€basic€rights€and€freedomsÐ ° Ðincluding€freedom€of€association.€The€Bill€was.€however.€not€constitutionalized.€Ð –æ ÐÌ5/€€€The€Alberta€Union€of€Provincial€Employees€et€al..€and€the€Crown€in€Right€of€Alberta.Ð b² Ð120€Dominion€Law€Reports,€pp.€592„622.€See,€in€particular,€P.€592€for€a€summary€of€theÐ H˜ Ðmatters€in€litigation,€P.€609€for€the€employees€covered€by€the€plaintiffs€arguments€and€pp.Ð . ~ Ð621„622€for€the€conclusion€of€Sinclair€Ô_ÔC.J.Q.B.Ô_ԀР d ÐÌ6/€€€The€Alberta€Union€of€Provincial€Employee€et€al.,€v.€The€Crown€in€Right€of€Alberta:Ð à 0 ÐMotion€for€leave€to€appeal,€25€November€1981,€pp.€10,€20€and€21.€Ð Æ   ÐÌ7/€€€Ibid.,€pp.€10€and€21.€Ð ’â  ÐÌ8/€€€Rights€protected€by€the€Canadian€Charter€of€Rights€and€Freedoms€are€not€absolute.Ð ^®  ÐSection€I€provides€that€the€rights€and€freedoms€set€out€in€the€Charter€are€guaranteed€subjectÐ D”  Ð"to€such€reasonable€limits€prescribed€by€law€as€can€be€demonstrably€justified€in€a€free€andÐ *z  Ðdemocratic€society".€Ð ` ÐÌ9/€€€Apart€from€the€proceedings€initiated€by€the€communicant,€mention€ought€to€be€made€ofÐ Ü, ÐRe€Service€Employees'€International€Union,€Local€204.€and€Broadway€Manor€Nursing€HomeÐ Â Ðet€al.,€and€two€other€applications(1984),€44€O.R.€392€(Ontario€High€Court€of€Justice,Ð ¨ø ÐDivisional€Court),€Public€Service€Alliance€of€Canada€v.€The€Queen€cc€al..€Federal€Court€ofÐ ŽÞ ÐCanada.€Trial€Division,€21€March€1984€(unreported)€and€Dolphin€Delivery€Ltd.€v.€Retail,Ð tÄ ÐWholesale€and€Department€Store€Union.€Local€580€et€al.,€5€March€1984€(unreported).€AllÐ Zª Ðof€the€decisions€have€been€appealed.€the€last€one€to€the€Supreme€Court€of€Canada.€Ð @ ÐÌ10/€€€Official€Records€of€the€United€Nations€Conference€on€the€Law€of€Treaties,€Vienna,€26Ð  \ ÐMarch„24€May€1968€and€9€April„22€May€1969€(United€Nations€publication,€Sales€No.Ð òB ÐE.70.Ô_ÔV.5Ô_Ô),€p.€287.€Ð Ø( ÐÌÌÓXÓò òòòÓ  ÓAppendixóóó ó€Ð Š Ú ÐÓn©ÓÓÓÌò òINDIVIDUAL€OPINIONó ó€Ð V"¦! ÐÌò òSubmitted€by€Ms.€Rosalyn€Higgins€and€Messrs.€Ô_ÔRajsoomÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔLallahÔ_Ô,€AndreasÐ "$r# ÐÔ_ÔMavrommatisÔ_Ô,€Ô_ÔTorkelÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔOpsahlÔ_Ô€and€S.€Amos€Ô_ÔWakoÔ_Ô€concerning€the€admissibility€ofÐ %X $ Ðcommunication€No.€118/1982,€J.€Bòò€et€alóó.ó ó€ò òv.ó ó€ò òCanadaó ó€Ð î%>!% ÐÌ1.€In€its€decision€the€Committee€states€that€the€issue€before€it€is€whether€the€right€to€strikeÐ º' #' Ðis€guaranteed€by€article€22€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights;€and,Ð  (ð#( Ðfinding€that€it€is€not,€it€declares€the€communication€inadmissible.€Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌ2.€We€regret€that€we€cannot€share€this€approach€to€the€issues€in€this€case.€We€note€that€inÐ R+¢&+ ÐCanada,€as€in€many€other€countries,€there€exists,€in€principle,€a€right€to€strike,€and€that€theÐ 8,ˆ', Ðcomplaint€of€the€authors€concerns€the€general€prohibition€of€the€exercise€of€such€right€forÐ -n(- Ðpublic€employees€in€the€Alberta€Public€Service€Employee€Relations€Act.€We€believe€that€theÐ ° Ðquestion€that€the€Committee€is€required€to€answer€at€this€stage€is€whether€article€22€aloneÐ –æ Ðor€in€conjunction€with€other€provisions€of€the€Covenant€necessarily€excludes,€in€the€relevantÐ |Ì Ðcircumstances,€an€entitlement€to€strike.€Ð b² ÐÌ3.€Article€22€provides€that€"Everyone€shall€have€the€right€to€freedom€of€association€withÐ . ~ Ðothers,€including€the€right€to€form€and€join€trade€unions€for€the€protection€of€his€interests."Ð  d ÐThe€right€to€form€and€join€trade€unions€is€thus€an€example€of€the€more€general€right€toÐ ú J Ðfreedom€of€association.€It€is€further€specified€that€the€right€to€join€trade€unions€is€for€theÐ à 0 Ðpurpose€of€protection€of€one's€interests.€In€this€context€we€note€that€there€is€no€comma€afterÐ Æ   Ð"trade€unions",€and€as€a€matter€of€grammar€"for€the€protection€of€his€interests"€pertains€toÐ ¬ ü  Ð"the€right€to€form€and€join€trade€unions"€and€not€to€freedom€of€association€as€a€whole.€It€is,Ð ’â  Ðof€course,€manifest€that€there€is€no€mention€of€the€right€to€strike€in€article€22,€just€as€thereÐ xÈ  Ðis€no€mention€of€the€various€other€activities,€such€as€holding€meetings,€or€collectiveÐ ^®  Ðbargaining,€that€a€trade„unionist€may€engage€in€to€protect€his€interests.€We€do€not€find€thatÐ D”  Ðsurprising,€because€it€is€the€broad€right€of€freedom€of€association€which€is€guaranteed€byÐ *z  Ðarticle€22.€However,€the€exercise€of€this€right€requires€that€some€measure€of€concertedÐ ` Ðactivities€be€allowed;€otherwise€it€could€not€serve€its€purposes.€To€us,€this€is€an€inherentÐ öF Ðaspect€of€the€right€granted€by€article€22,€paragraph€1.€Which€activities€are€essential€to€theÐ Ü, Ðexercise€of€this€right€cannot€be€listed€òòa€priori€óóand€must€be€examined€in€their€social€contextÐ Â Ðin€the€light€of€the€other€paragraphs€of€this€article.€Ð ¨ø ÐÌ4.€The€drafting€history€clearly€shows€that€the€right€of€association€was€dealt€with€separatelyÐ tÄ Ðfrom€the€right€to€form€and€join€trade€unions.€òòThe€Ô_ÔtravauxÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔprdparatoiresÔ_Ô€óóindicate€that€in€1952Ð Zª Ðthe€right€to€strike€was€proposed€only€for€the€draft€article€on€trade€unions.€This€is€what€weÐ @ Ðwould€have€expected.€It€was€at€that€time€rejected.€They€show€also€that€in€1957,€when€theÐ &v Ðright€to€strike€(subject€to€certain€limitations)€was€accepted€as€an€amendment€to€the€draftÐ  \ Ðarticle€on€the€right€to€form€and€join€trade€unions,€such€an€amendment€was€neither€introducedÐ òB Ðnor€discussed€with€respect€to€the€draft€covenant€on€civil€and€political€rights.€The€reasonÐ Ø( Ðseems€to€us€both€clear€and€correct„namely,€that€because€what€is€now€article€22€of€theÐ ¾ ÐCovenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights€deals€with€the€right€of€association€as€a€whole,Ð ¤ô Ðconcerning€clubs€an„d€societies€as€well€as€trade€unions,€mentioning€particular€activities€suchÐ Š Ú Ðas€strike€action€would€have€been€inappropriate.€Ð p!À  ÐÌ5.€We€therefore€find€that€the€òòÔ_ÔtravauxÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔproparatoiresÔ_Ô€óóare€not€determinative€of€the€issue€beforeÐ <#Œ" Ðthe€Committee.€Where€the€intentions€of€the€drafters€are€not€absolutely€clear€in€relation€to€theÐ "$r# Ðpoint€at€hand,€article€31€of€the€Vienna€Convention€also€directs€us€to€the€object€and€purposeÐ %X $ Ðof€the€treaty.€This€seems€to€us€especially€important€in€a€treaty€for€the€promotion€of€humanÐ î%>!% Ðrights,€where€limitation€of€the€exercise€or€rights,€or€upon€the€competence€of€the€CommitteeÐ Ô&$"& Ðto€review€a€prohibition€by€a€State€of€a€given€activity,€are€not€readily€to€be€presumed.€Ð º' #' ÐÌ6.€We€note€that€article€8€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Economic,€Social€and€CulturalÐ †)Ö$) ÐRights,€having€spoken€of€the€right€of€everyone€to€form€trade€unions€and€join€the€union€of€hisÐ l*¼%* Ðchoice,€goes€on€to€Speak€of€"the€right€to€strike,€provided€that€it€is€exercised€in€conformityÐ R+¢&+ Ðwith€the€laws€of€the€particular€country".€While€this€latter€phrase€gives€rise€to€some€complexÐ 8,ˆ', Ðlegal€issues,€it€suffices€for€our€present€purpose€that€the€specific€aspect€of€freedom€ofÐ -n(- Ðassociation€which€is€touched€on€as€an€individual€right€in€article€22€of€the€Covenant€on€CivilÐ ° Ðand€Political€Rights,€but€dealt€with€as€a€set€of€distinctive€rights€in€article€8,€does€notÐ –æ Ðnecessarily€exclude€the€right€to€strike€in€all€circumstances.€We€see€no€reason€for€interpretingÐ |Ì Ðthis€common€matter€differently€in€the€two€Covenants.€Ð b² ÐÌ7.€We€are€also€aware€that€the€ILO€Committee€on€Freedom€of€Association,€a€body€singularlyÐ . ~ Ðwell€placed€to€pronounce€authoritatively€on€such€matters,€has€held€that€the€generalÐ  d Ðprohibition€of€strikes€for€public€employees€contained€in€the€Alberta€Public€Service€EmployeeÐ ú J ÐRelations€Act€was€not€in€harmony€with€article€10€of€ILO€Convention€No.€87€".€.€.€since€itÐ à 0 Ðconstituted€a€considerable€restriction€on€the€opportunities€open€to€trade€unions€to€further€andÐ Æ   Ðdefend€the€interests€of€their€members."€While€we€do€not€at€this€stage€purport€to€comment€onÐ ¬ ü  Ðthe€merits,€we€cannot€fail€to€notice€that€the€ILO€finding€is€based€on€the€furtherance€andÐ ’â  ÐÔ_ÔdefenceÔ_Ô€of€interests€of€trade„union€members;€and€article€22€also€requires€us€to€consider€thatÐ xÈ  Ðthe€purpose€of€joining€trade€union€is€to€protect€one's€interests.€Again,€we€see€no€reason€toÐ ^®  Ðinterpret€article€22€in€a€manner€different€from€ILO€when€addressing€a€ComparableÐ D”  Ðconsideration.€in€this€regard€we€note€that€article€22,€paragraph€3,€provides€that€nothing€in€thatÐ *z  Ðarticle€authorizes€a€State€party€to€ILO€Convention€No.€87€to€take€legislative€measures€whichÐ ` Ðwould€prejudice,€or€to€apply€the€law€in€such€a€manner€as€to€prejudice,€the€guaranteesÐ öF Ðprovided€for€in€that€Convention.€Ð Ü, ÐÌ8.€We€cannot€see€that€a€manner€of€exercising€a€right€which€has,€under€certain€leading€andÐ ¨ø Ðwidely€ratified€international€instruments,€been€declared€to€be€in€principle€lawful,€should€beÐ ŽÞ Ðdeclared€to€be€incompatible€with€the€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights.€Ð tÄ ÐÌ9.€Whereas€article€22,€paragraph€1,€deals€with€the€right€of€freedom€of€association€as€such,Ð @ Ðparagraph€2€deals€with€the€extent€of€the€exercise€of€the€right€which€necessarily€includes€theÐ &v Ðmeans€which€may€be€resorted€to€by€a€member€of€a€trade€union€for€the€protection€of€hisÐ  \ Ðinterests.€Ð òB ÐÌ10.€Whether€the€right€to€strike€is€a€necessary€element€in€the€protection€of€the€interests€of€theÐ ¾ Ðauthors,€and€if€so€whether€it€has€been€unduly€restricted,€is€a€question€on€the€merits,€that€isÐ ¤ô Ðto€say,€whether€the€restriction€imposed€in€Canada€are€or€are€not€justifiable€under€article€22,Ð Š Ú Ðparagraph€2.€But€we€do€not€find€the€communication€inadmissible€on€this€ground.€Ð p!À  ÐÌ11.€It€is€therefore€necessary€for€us€to€see€whether€the€communication€is€renderedÐ <#Œ" Ðinadmissible€on€other€grounds.€With€regard€to€the€State€party's€objection€that€the€matter€isÐ "$r# Ðbeing€examined€under€another€procedure€of€international€investigation€or€settlement€(seeÐ %X $ Ðpara.€4.3€of€the€Committee's€decision),€we€note€that€the€ILO€investigation€is€concluded.Ð î%>!% ÐWithout€pronouncing€upon€whether€reference€to€the€ILO€Committee€on€Freedom€ofÐ Ô&$"& ÐAssociation€and€to€its€Governing€Body€constitutes€examination€under€another€procedure€ofÐ º' #' Ðinternational€investigation€or€settlement€within€the€terms€of€article€5,€paragraph€2(a),€of€theÐ  (ð#( ÐOptional€Protocol,€we€note€that€the€terms€of€article€5,€paragraph€2(a),€cannot€be€applicableÐ †)Ö$) Ðto€the€facts€before€us.€Ð l*¼%* ÐÌ12.€With€regard€to€the€issue€of€exhaustion€of€local€remedies,€we€find€that€all€relevant€localÐ 8,ˆ', Ðremedies,€we€find€that€all€relevant€local€remedies€available€to€the€authors€at€the€time€of€theÐ -n(- Ðsubmission€of€the€present€communication€have€been€exhausted.€Ð ° ÐÌ13.€We€would€therefore€consider€the€communication€admissible.€Ð |Ì ÐÓ®©Ó