Although freedom of association and the right to organize appeared in the Constitution of the

ILO in 1919, it was not until the end of the 1940s, shortly after the Second World War, that a
general consensus emerged enabling the adoption of the two relevant basic instruments,
Convention No. 87 and Convention No. 98. They are both among the ILO's Conventions on
basic human rights and today, after 50 years, there is still broad consensus within the
Organization on how topical and relevant they remain and on how important it is to secure their
application. The principles of freedom of association and the right to organize appear in all the
international instruments on questions concerning human, political and social rights. These
principles are always evoked in discussions on the social dimensions of the liberalization of
world trade, and freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining are included in the
ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, adopted by the International
Labour Conference at its 86th Session in 1998.

These two Conventions contain the most comprehensive set of standards on freedom of
association to be found at international level, and the ILO has a highly developed system of
supervisory machinery and procedures with which to promote them and to oversee their
application. This article has reviewed the activities of the different supervisory bodies, the main
obstacles they encounter and the remarkable progress they achieve. The effectiveness of ILO
action on freedom of association has been shown to depend on a whole range of factors, from
how serious the actual problems are, to the balance of power, to a government's ideological or
political line, and to the prevailing economic situation. Any evaluation of action by the bodies
charged with examining complaints or protests about infringements of freedom of association
must also take account of the dissuasive or preventive effect often brought about when news
breaks that complainants have taken their case to the ILO. In other words, when measures
violating freedom of association are halted - or reduced - before or during examination of the
case by the competent bodies, so as to prevent the country concerned or its government from
being exposed to publicity or criticism from the international community. It is important to
understand that international public pressure is the ILO's most powerful weapon, for the ILO
does not have power to sanction and its Constitution does not allow it to exclude a State in
punishment for the violation of international labour standards or principles. Nevertheless, the
persistence and perseverance of the supervisory bodies are an extremely powerful weapon in the
ILO's armoury. The complexities presented by the political, ideological, cultural, historical,
economic and social contexts in which problems of freedom of association arise are often
difficult to overcome. Though problems are finally solved over time, new ones then appear -
proving that in this area the work of the supervisory bodies is never done, that they must work
ceaselessly and over the long term. Indeed, today, they must be even more vigilant, for in most
countries of both North and South the trade union movement is losing ground and is being
seriously questioned in certain sectors and countries, including those where it had seemed most
firmly established.