7 Carlos Vargas Pizarro, Agent; Jorge Federico Lee, Deputy Agent; Isabel Damian K., Ambassador to Costa Rica of the Republic of Panama; Angela Alvarez Oller, Consul of the Republic of Panama in Costa Rica; Santiago E. O’Donnell, Minister Plenipotentiary of the Embassy of the Republic of Panama in Costa Rica; Jorge Ruiz, Administrative Vice-President of the Institute of Hydraulic Resources and Electrification; and Sofía Escalante Trejos, Assistant; for the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights: Hélio Bicudo, Delegate; Manuel Velasco Clark, Lawyer; Viviana Krsticevic, Assistant; and Soraya Long, Assistant; witness proposed by the State: Antonio Ducreux Sánchez. 26. The Court summarizes the witness’s statement, as follows: a. Testimony of Antonio Ducreux Sánchez (Deputy Minister of Work and Labor Relations of the Republic of Panama, Panamanian Ambassador to the ILO, Member of the Freedom of Association Committee, President of the ILO Budget and Finance Committee, and President of the Committee for Complaints against Latin America in cases that cannot be considered by the Freedom of Association Committee) As Panamanian Ambassador to the ILO Governing Body, it was his responsibility to verify any complaints presented against Panama, and one of these was the complaint filed by some of the employees dismissed from SITIRHE and SITINTEL in 1991. Regarding the steps taken in relation to the complaint before the ILO, the Freedom of Association Committee examined the documentation presented by the complainants and by the State and, towards the end of 1992, recommended to Panama that it should adopt the measures necessary to reinstate the employees of the two State institutions who had been dismissed under Law 25 of 1990; that it should amend the laws that violated some precepts of ILO Conventions 87 and 98; that it should not take actions contrary to due process; that it should not limit the freedom of association of any trade union and that it should restore to the workers the right to organize, the inviolability of trade union premises and the management of trade union quotas. Although a judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice of Panama declared that, under Law 25, the dismissals were not illegal, the Government that assumed power in 1994 accepted the ILO recommendation and reinstated

Select target paragraph3