By Chinedu Echianu
The Nigeria Employers’ Consultative Association (NECA) has clarified that the recent advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on workers’ right to strike under International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention 87 is neither a binding judgment nor a ruling, but an interpretation intended to guide further discussions among ILO constituents.
The Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) had in a recent press release, described advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice affirming the right to strike under International Labour Organization as a landmark victory for workers worldwide, arguing that the ruling confirms strike action as an essential component of freedom of association and trade union rights.
However, speaking on the sidelines of the 114th International Labour Conference (ILC) in Geneva, NECA Director-General, Adewale-Smatt Oyerinde, said the ICJ merely provided an advisory opinion on whether Convention 87, which guarantees freedom of association, inherently protects the right to strike. According to him, the matter arose from differing interpretations among governments, employers and workers’ groups within the ILO Governing Body.
Oyerinde explained that the court concluded that Convention 87 protects the right to strike, but also made it clear that the right is not absolute. He noted that the advisory opinion did not define the scope, conditions or limitations for exercising the right, leaving those issues to be addressed through national laws and practices.
“The ICJ did not deliver a judgment or ruling. What was sought was an interpretation of a convention, and what the court gave was an advisory opinion,” he said. “Even the court acknowledged that the right to strike is not absolute and comes with responsibilities and conditions.”
The NECA chief argued that the advisory opinion has effectively returned the matter to the ILO Governing Body for further deliberations, particularly on the practical application of the right to strike. He disclosed that discussions on the issue are expected to continue at the Governing Body’s next meeting in November.
According to him, the central question before the court was not whether workers have a right to strike, but whether Convention 87 specifically protects that right. He noted that while a majority of judges agreed that it does, several judges expressed reservations and emphasised that the right must be exercised within clearly defined legal frameworks.
Oyerinde maintained that Nigeria already has laws regulating industrial actions, particularly the Trade Disputes Act, which outlines procedures and conditions that must be met before workers can embark on a strike.
“For us, the implication is straightforward. The right exists, but it cannot be exercised arbitrarily. There are legal processes and obligations that must be followed before any strike action can take place,” he said.
He reiterated NECA’s commitment to the core conventions of the ILO, including those relating to freedom of association and collective bargaining, stressing that employers remain supportive of social dialogue as the preferred mechanism for resolving labour disputes.
The NECA Director-General added that employers are committed to upholding labour standards and collective agreements, while urging stakeholders to avoid misrepresenting the ICJ advisory opinion as a definitive legal victory for any side in the debate over workers’ right to strike.
