On May 21, 2026, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion on a question that had divided the constituents of the International Labour Organization (ILO) for over a decade : is the right to strike protected by Convention No. 87 concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise ? Seized of the matter by the ILO Governing Body in November 2023, the Court was tasked with resolving a dispute between workers’ organizations and employers’ organizations regarding the interpretation of this fundamental convention. Although the right to strike is not explicitly mentioned in the text adopted in 1948, ILO supervisory bodies—notably the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (CEACR) and the Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA)—have long held that it constitutes an essential component of freedom of association.

By ten votes to four, the ICJ concluded that the right to strike is protected by Convention No. 87. According to the Court, the Convention guarantees workers’ organizations the right to organize their activities and defend their members’ interests. Strikes constitute one of the means of effectively exercising these rights and thus contribute to ensuring genuine protection of freedom of association.

The opinion is of particular importance for the ILO’s supervisory system. Since 2012, the disagreement between employers and workers regarding the very existence of a right to strike derived from Convention No. 87 had undermined the functioning of certain supervisory mechanisms and led to challenges against the conclusions of the CEACR and the CFA. By confirming that the right to strike is protected by the Convention, the ICJ reinforces the long-standing approach taken by these bodies and acknowledges the importance of their contribution to the interpretation and application of international labour standards.

However, the Court was careful to specify that its opinion determines neither the exact content of the right to strike, nor its scope, nor the conditions for its exercise. These issues will remain at the heart of the dialogue among ILO constituents, the work of its supervisory bodies, and the choices made by national legal systems. The opinion does not, therefore, put an end to all debate ; rather, it redefines the framework for it.

This decision marks a significant milestone in the history of the ILO. Beyond recognizing the right to strike, it provides long-awaited legal clarification and helps restore confidence in the international system for supervising labour standards. It offers trade unions greater certainty regarding the treaty-based foundation of the right to strike, while leaving the door open for discussions on its precise content and the modalities of its exercise.

The ILO’s unique position within the United Nations system lies in its tripartite structure. At a time when differences of opinion are often viewed as obstacles rather than opportunities for dialogue, the ICJ opinion underscores the importance of a system based on the exchange of views and the pursuit of consensus. Tripartism thus remains one of the Organization’s key assets in advancing international labour standards and fostering social dialogue.