Human Rights of Armed Forces Personnel rights and fundamental freedoms (see “Chapter 2: OSCE Commitments”).244 More specifically, the 2015 ODIHR/Venice Commission Guidelines on Freedom of Association reiterate relevant international case law on the matter, and note that the association of military personnel in trade unions should be viewed positively, as this permits them to protect their own labour rights.245 A number of ILO conventions recognize union rights, including Convention No. 87 on the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise (C087), Convention No. 98 concerning the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining (C098) and Convention No. 154 on Collective Bargaining (C154). These conventions establish important rights for workers, including the rights to establish and, subject to the rules of the organization concerned, to join organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization (C087, Article 2); to trade-union autonomy, free from interference by public authorities (C087, Article 3); and to establish and join federations of trade unions (C087, Article 5). Convention No. 154 encourages states to provide and promote the use of voluntary negotiations between employers or employers’ organizations and workers’ organizations, with a view to regulating the terms and conditions of employment by means of collective agreements. Although these conventions are expressed in terms that apply to all workers and all sectors,246 all three contain important provisos for members of the armed forces (see Box 7.2), namely that national laws and regulations determine the extent to which the guarantees provided in the conventions apply to the armed forces. In considering complaints to the ILO’s Freedom of Association Committee about whether such restrictions are appropriate, the Committee has found that provisions dealing with exceptions should be interpreted restrictively (and should not apply, for example, to civilians working for the armed forces in manufacturing establishments or in a country’s army bank).247 The committee has stated that, in case of doubt, workers should be treated as civilians.248 The ECHR and ICCPR take an equally restrictive approach (see Box 7.2). It is clear, however, from the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, that the concept of a “lawful restriction” under Article 11(2) does not mean that all domestic laws restricting rights will necessarily be compatible with the Convention. The Convention organs employ a qualitative test – a legal restriction must be foreseeable in its effect and there must be an absence of arbitrariness (see also “Chapter 4: National Protections for the Human Rights of Armed Forces Personnel”).249 244 OSCE Code of Conduct on Politico-Military Aspects of Security, op. cit., note 1, para. 32. 245 See: Guidelines on Freedom of Association (Warsaw: ODIHR/Council of Europe Venice Commission, 2015), para. 146. https://www.osce.org/odihr/132371. 246 For example, Article 1 of the Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 states that “1. This Convention applies to all branches of economic activity.” 247 ILO Freedom of Association Committee, 238th Report, Case No. 1279, para. 140.a, and 284th Report, Case Nos. 1588 and 1595, para. 737.a. 248 ILO Freedom of Association Committee, 295th Report, Case No. 1771, para. 499. 249 114 European Commission of Human Rights, Council of Civil Service Unions and Others v. United Kingdom, 20 January 1987, Decisions and Reports, Vol. 50, 1987, p. 228.