BAHRAIN STRENGTHENS, EXTENDS BAN ON STRIKES, DEMONSTRATIONS
Date: December 8, 2006
Bahrain’s government issued an edict last month that explicitly bans strikes and demonstrations in several sectors of its economy, including areas considered vital to security such as civil defense and ports as well as in the oil and gas sector, educational firms and bakeries. Labor groups sources said the edict appears to violate provisions in the U.S.-Bahrain FTA that prohibit weakening labor laws to spur increased trade or investment, but said this would be difficult to prove.
The edict, made public in a Nov. 20 announcement posted on the state-run Bahrain News Agency website, bans strikes and demonstrations in “vital establishments” where national security and the “daily work process” could be disrupted.
BAHRAIN STRENGTHENS, EXTENDS BAN ON STRIKES, DEMONSTRATIONS
Date: December 8, 2006
Bahrain’s government issued an edict last month that explicitly bans strikes and demonstrations in several sectors of its economy, including areas considered vital to security such as civil defense and ports as well as in the oil and gas sector, educational firms and bakeries. Labor groups sources said the edict appears to violate provisions in the U.S.-Bahrain FTA that prohibit weakening labor laws to spur increased trade or investment, but said this would be difficult to prove.
The edict, made public in a Nov. 20 announcement posted on the state-run Bahrain News Agency website, bans strikes and demonstrations in “vital establishments” where national security and the “daily work process” could be disrupted.
This goes much further than the Bahrain Trade Union law of 2002, which merely listed sectors where strike bans could be imposed. That law listed security, civil defense, transportation, telecommunications, water and electricity sectors as areas where bans could be imposed, as well as airports, ports, and hospitals.
The edict also adds bakeries, educational firms and the oil and gas sector as areas where strikes and demonstrations are banned, according to the announcement.
Under Article 15 of the U.S.-Bahrain FTA, each party “shall strive to ensure” that it does not weaken its labor laws in order to encourage trade or investment. While it could be argued that explicitly banning strikes in areas such as telecommunications could encourage foreign investment, it would be a challenge to prove that the edict was issued specifically to promote trade or investment, labor sources said.
Labor sources criticized the edict as a step back for labor rights in Bahrain. They noted that during FTA negotiations with the U.S., Bahrain promised to improve its labor laws, and to that end implemented a law this fall that prohibited employees from being fired for union activity.
The FTA requires a country to enforce its own labor laws, but does not prohibit a country from weakening its own labor laws, labor sources said.
A U.S. Trade Representative spokeswoman said that USTR was looking into matter, but declined to provide further details.
Bahraini Ambassador Dr. Naser Al Belooshi in an e-mail defended the edict by stating that if there were strikes in these vital establishments, it would negatively affect the country’s ability to service its population and its visitors properly. He also said the measure does not contradict the FTA, or Bahrain’s obligations as a member of the International Labor Organization.
Labor sources were more confident that the edict goes against Bahraini obligations under the ILO. The ILO allows member countries to prohibit strikes in “essential services,” and spells out areas that do not meet the definition of essential services, such as ports, the petroleum sector and transportation. Bakeries would also not be considered an essential service by the ILO, sources said.
The ILO defines essential services as those where there is a clear and imminent threat to the life, personal safety, or health to all or part of a country’s population. Examples would be hospitals or air traffic control, sources said.
However, the ILO includes no enforcement mechanism that could lead to trade retaliation against Bahrain, sources noted.
Labor sources speculated that there could be a relationship between the edict and parliamentary elections held last week in Bahrain, which were the first elections since 1973 that allowed participation by opposition parties. The Bahraini government might have issued the edict out of fear that the labor movement would ally itself with these opposition parties, and to diminish the power of the labor movement, these sources said.
