Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The ban on strike action imposed on a police trade union did not infringe
its freedom of association
In todays Chamber judgment1 in the case of Junta Rectora Del Ertzainen Nazional Elkartasuna
(ER.N.E.) v. Spain (application no. 45892/09), the European Court of Human Rights held,
unanimously, that there had been:
No violation of Article 11 (freedom of association) of the European Convention on Human Rights,
taken alone and in conjunction with Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination).
The case concerned the inability of the members of a police officers trade union to exercise the
right to strike.
The Court found in particular that the more stringent requirements imposed on law-enforcement
agents, on account of the fact that they were armed and of the need for them to provide an
uninterrupted service, justified the ban on strike action in so far as public safety and the prevention
of disorder were at stake.
The Court noted that the specific nature of these agents duties warranted granting the State a lot of
room for manoeuvre (a wide margin of appreciation) to regulate certain aspects of the trade
unions activities in the public interest, without however depriving the union of the core content of
its rights under Article 11.
Principal facts
The applicant trade union, Junta Rectora Del Ertzainen Nazional Elkartasuna (ER.N.E.), which has its
registered office in Bilbao (Spain), was founded in 1984 and is the largest trade union representing
the Ertzainas, who are the police officers of the Basque country and perform their duties within the
jurisdiction of that Autonomous Community.
In 2004, following the collapse of negotiations on police officers working conditions between the
Department of the Interior of the Government of the Basque Autonomous Community and the
applicant trade union, the latter requested authorisation for the Ertzainas to take strike action.
The request was refused on the grounds that section 6(8) of Institutional Law no. 2/1986 of
13 March 1986 on the security forces barred members of the State security forces from exercising
the right to strike in any circumstances. According to the refusal decision, the police of the Basque
Autonomous Community formed part of the security forces in question. All the appeals lodged by
the applicant trade union, including an amparo appeal, were dismissed on the ground that the
provision in issue was not in breach of the constitutional requirements regarding the right to strike
and the prohibition of discrimination.
1. Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, this Chamber judgment is not final. During the three-month period following its delivery,
any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five judges
considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final
judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution.
Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the European Code of Police Ethics (Recommendation
Rec(2001)10 of 19 September 2001)
As to the issue of possible discrimination, the Court found that the explanations provided by the
Government as to the specific nature of the duties attributed by law to the State security forces
were reasonable and did not disclose any arbitrariness suggestive of discrimination.
Accordingly, the Court held that there had been no violation of Article 11, taken alone and in
conjunction with Article 14 of the Convention.