United Nations’ top court says right to strike is protected by a key labor treaty

THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — The United Nations’ top court issued a landmark advisory opinion on the right to strike on Thursday, finding that a cornerstone labor treaty protects the ability of workers to walk off the job.

The International Court of Justice was asked in 2023 by the International Labor Organization, a U.N. agency, to settle an internal dispute over whether one of the ILO’s conventions gives workers the right to strike.

Advisory opinions aren’t legally binding, but carry significant weight. The decision could have a worldwide impact on labor regulations, enshrining the right to strike in labor standards and international trade agreements.

Labor unions welcomed the decision.

“As any trade unionist will tell you, there is no right to organize without the right to strike!” Christy Hoffman, general-secretary of UNI Global Union, said in a statement after the opinion was announced. “The two are inseparable foundations of any functional and fair industrial relations system. Congratulations to the many advocates who argued the point so brilliantly before the ICJ.”

The word “strike” never appears in the 1948 Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, but the ICJ’s 14 judges found walkout actions are covered under the other guarantees.

“The protection of the right to strike is encompassed in the freedom of association,” court president Yuji Iwasawa said, reading out the ruling in the Great Hall of Justice in The Hague.

The convention has been ratified by 158 countries and is incorporated into a variety of employment guidelines and standards, including those from the United Nations, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and various international trade agreements.

The United States is a member of the ILO, but hasn’t ratified the convention.

International labor law expert Paul van der Heijden said that the advisory opinion from the ICJ gives workers an important tool when their actions face legal opposition. This decision “is important when you go to court,” he told The Associated Press.

The judges were careful to note that in some cases, the right to strike may be restricted. The opinion “does not entail any determination on the precise content, scope or conditions for the exercise of that right,” Iwasawa said.

A number of U.N. agencies can ask the ICJ to weigh in on legal questions and issue advisory opinions. Last year, the court said in a landmark advisory opinion that countries could be in violation of international law, if they fail to take measures to protect the planet from climate change.

During hearings in October, the court in The Hague heard from 18 countries and five international organizations, including the ILO, with a number of other countries submitting writing arguments.

The majority of participants favored the right to strike, a protection which is already granted in most European countries.