Confiscation of NUM funds in Luxembourg
The British government will stop at nothing to break the
British miners' strike. On September 28, 1984 a British court declared the miners' strike unlawful in the Derbyshire region and unofficial in the Yorkshire region and on October 10, the
National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) were ordered to pay a fine of £200,000 for defying this judgement.
In the face of the quite correct refusal of the union to pay this fine, the British court decided that the NUM's assets, the main part of which had been transferred to foreign banks, should be sequestrated. The bulk of the funds (£4.9 million) were deposited in Luxembourg in the Nobis Finanz International bank. The rest (£3 million) were deposited in banks in Switzerland and Dublin.
Price Waterhouse and Co, the company charged with the sequestration of these funds were unsuccessful in their original attempt because a Luxembourgeois court of law decided that only £200,000 could be frozen and that the NUM should have the right to dispose of the rest.
In Luxembourg, however, a lively protest campaign developed following the announcement by the Tory government of its intention to confiscate the funds. On December 17, 1984 a picket of the British embassy in Luxembourg was organised by the youth section of the railway workers union together with Luxembourgeois Womens Liberation Movement (MLF).
The Confederation of Free Trade Unions (CGT) issued a statement saying that only the NUM had the right to dispose of funds which had come from the dues paid to it by the members.
The PSR (Revolutionary Socialist Party, Luxembourgeois section of the Fourth International) took up the campaign by launching an appeal directed at the government (a coalition of the Socialist Party and the right-wing christian social democracy) and the minister of justice, also the chairperson of the Socialist Party. The appeal aimed to prevent any complicity with Margaret Thatcher's government and reaffirm that only the NUM had the right to remove their own funds. This appeal was officially launched on January 12 in all the left wing daily papers and was endorsed by about thirty famous personalities including Socialist and Communist Party and Greens' deputies; the chairpersons and leaders of the three main union confederations (the Free Trade Union, the Christian trade unions and the railway workers union); the PSR; the MLF ete.
Following this appeal, according to the British daily, the Times of January 10, 1985, the bank concerned was forced to delay its intended surrender of the union's funds to the British sequestrator, Michael Arnolds.
Replying to a parliamentary question from a communist deputy the minister for the treasury and foreign affairs, Jacques F. Poos (a socialist) stated that the Luxembourgeois government had asked the bank concerned not to surrender the union's funds to the British receiver because British law could not be exercised on Luxembourg territory and that it would have to be a decision by the Luxembourg courts which would determine what should happen to the funds - whether they should go to the NUM or to the British receivers. International Viewpoint 11 March 1985
It was, therefore, in the face of widespread opposition and against the recommendation of the government and the law courts in Luxembourg that Nobis Finanz International nevertheless decided to hand the entire sum of £4.9 million to the
British receivers (apart from the small sum of £200,000 already frozen by the Luxembourg courts).
This scandalous action brought an immediate wave of protest in Luxembourg: the three trade-union federations protested *emphatically against this measure which constitutes a challenge to basic trade-union rights, and which, has to be put in the framework of the aggressive policies of the BritishTory govern ment and is part and parcel of repeated attempts by right-wing forces throughout Europe to openly attack trade-union rights. 'Everything must be done to ensure that the NUM's funds are restored'
The trade unions called on all political and democratic organisations to act together to ensure the right of the miners of the NUM to get their funds back.' At the same time, 300 well-known personalities and activists of the labour movement protested against the fact that British law was being imposed on Luxembourg territory thus violating basic trade union rights. The signatories of an appeal to this affect demanded that everything be done to ensure that the funds be restored immed.
to the NUM who urgently need them in these difficult
In response to this appeal, the government, through their spokesperson, J. F. Poos denied any responsibility in the affair and they confirmed that the funds had indeed been paid against the wishes of the government and the courts to a parent bank of the bank in question, in West Germany. In order to get round the Luxembourg courts, the funds had been paid into the Industrial Credit Bank in Dusseldorf. The bank was so unsure of their ground in carrying this out that, in collaboration with the sequestrators, an insurance policy with Lloyds bank in London was taken out.
It is urgent that labour movement organisations across Europe protest strongly
Against this conspiracy by European capital who are united in their attempt to bring the European trade union move ment to its knees, we have to counterpose the solidarity of the international working class and its organisations.
In the meantime, many questions still remain unanswered in the whole affair: Did the parent bank in West Germany act illegally? Where did the bank in Dusseldorf or the sequestrators get the money to pay for the insurance policy with Lloyds? And finally, the treasury minister in Luxembourg has said that the sum deposited by the NUM in the bank concerned is available to them; what right does the bank then have to prevent access by the NUM to those funds?
Everything must be done to ensure that the funds are restored to the NUM to whom they rightfully belong.
Britain and its butcher's apron out of Ireland now!
from the council meetings by both Sinn Fein and SDLP [Social Democratic and Labour Party] councillors, and noisy scenes in the public gallery as police have been called in to clear MeAnulty's protesting constituents.
The affair has attracted much pub-