HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HOLDS DEBATE WITH SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON RACISM AND CHAIR OF WORKING GROUP ON PEOPLE OF AFRICAN DESCENT

The Human Rights Council this afternoon held a clustered interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, and the Chairperson of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, under its agenda item on Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance and follow-up and implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. It then held a general debate under that agenda item.

Githu Muigai, the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, said numerous cases of acts of violence or discrimination, or incitements thereto, against believers were brought to his attention in the last year. These acts were strictly prohibited by international human rights law; States should therefore denounce and prosecute acts of violence against individuals and should also take all necessary measures to ensure that all individuals enjoyed their human rights without discrimination of any kind. The report concluded that advocacy of racial or religious hatred was an external manifestation of something much more profound, which was intolerance, ignorance or bigotry. His second report related to the implementation of the General Assembly resolution entitled “Inadmissibility of certain practices that contributed to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance”. All States should be more vigilant vis-à-vis extremist political parties, movements and groups which promoted either explicitly or implicitly the dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination and xenophobia, as well as acts of violence or incitement to such acts against specific groups of individuals.

Mirjana Najcevska, Chairperson of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, presented the report of the Working Group on the situation of peoples of African descent in the United States. The Working Group was impressed with the wide-ranging and comprehensive legislative framework that protected and advanced the right to non-discrimination on the basis of race and ethnicity and noted with satisfaction the many programmes and other initiatives implemented by the government to combat racial discrimination affecting people of African descent. The Working Group also noted the existence of a circle of poverty and challenges related to education, employment opportunities and the administration of justice affecting the lives of people of African descent. The experts remained particularly alarmed and concerned by the onerous employment situation of many women of African descent, poor access to quality education and with aspects of the administration of justice that adversely affected the African American population; particularly disproportionate incarceration rates compared to the general population and the seemingly discriminatory application of some laws.

The United States, speaking as a concerned country, said the United States agreed with the conclusion of the Working Group that a comprehensive solution to inadequate access to quality education was needed. To that end, the Obama Administration was implementing the “Race to the Top” programme, a competitive grant programme designed to encourage and reward the states that were creating the conditions for innovation and reform in education. The Department of Education had also launched the Promise Neighbourhoods programme, which was the first federal initiative to put education at the centre of comprehensive support services that were designed to improve educational outcomes for students in communities of concentrated poverty, the United States said. The United States clarified the reference in the Working Group’s conclusions related to the abolition of slavery and said that while the Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery, it allowed the state or federal government to compel the labour of anyone convicted of a crime.

In the interactive discussion, speakers welcomed the preliminary report on the human rights challenges posed by extremist political parties and groups and said that those were greatly responsible for igniting old and new manifestations of racism, xenophobia and related intolerance throughout the world. Such organizations were not operating in a vacuum and their performance was greatly influenced by official State policies and that was why States bore the primary obligation to ensure fundamental freedoms and the protection of its citizens from violence. Despite an impressive arsenal of anti-racism and anti-discrimination legislation, many challenges remained. Laws were not enough to fight racism and intolerance; there was a need for a broad set of policy measures, in particular preventive measures. More vigilance vis-à-vis extremist political parties and groups by States was needed, and governments should address early-warning signs through a wide range of measures to create a peaceful society.

Several speakers welcomed the Special Rapporteur's recommendation to move away from the notion of defamation of religions towards the legal concept of advocacy of racial or religious hatred that constituted incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, in order to anchor the debate in the relevant existing international legal framework. A number of countries raised concerns about the cases mentioned in the preliminary report, and made remarks about the shortcomings in the methodology used by the Special Rapporteur. Several speakers commented on the scope of the preliminary report and noted that although the Special Rapporteur was mandated to evaluate in particular the ongoing serious implications of Islamophobia, this issue wasn't dealt with in a clear and sufficient manner allowing the Council to evaluate the full aspects of this phenomenon.

Speakers also welcomed the report of the Working Group on People of African Descent and their visit to the United States and welcomed their recommendations which, when implemented, would ameliorate the challenges faced by the people of African descent, particularly in the area of unemployment, lower income levels, access to higher levels of education and quality health care. Speakers expressed the hope that the United States would soon take decisive measures to address this discrimination in accordance with their well known commitment to democracy and human rights.

Speaking in the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on racism and with the Chair of the Working Group on people of African descent were the representatives of Belgium on behalf of the European Union, Venezuela, India, Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Indonesia, Nigeria on behalf of the African Group, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Honduras, Armenia, Saudi Arabia, Poland, Denmark, Brazil, United States of America, China, Ecuador, Djibouti, Russian Federation, Norway, Malaysia, Maldives, Senegal, Libya, Switzerland, United Kingdom, Thailand, Azerbaijan, Algeria, the African Union, Sweden, Bangladesh and Philippines. Also speaking were International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism, Human Rights First, Ligue international contre le racisme et l’antisémitisme and Cairo Institute of Human Rights.

In the context of the general debate, speakers said that work to combat racism and xenophobia remained a global challenge that needed a multilateral response, but with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination States had an effective and relevant international instrument to tackle this challenge. Despite the progress in the fight against racism, there was resurgence in the manifestations of contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in various parts of the world. Many measures undertaken so far failed to recognise the root causes of the problem. It was the responsibility of States to adopt effective measures to combat criminal acts motivated by racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, particularly by including appropriate legal measures in constitutions and so filling the judicial vacuum in dealing with the issue of religious intolerance. Speakers welcomed the series of expert workshops being organised by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to attain a better understanding of the legislative patterns, judicial practices and national policies in different regions of the world with regard to the concept of incitement to hatred.

Speaking in the general debate were the representatives of Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Nigeria on behalf of the African Group, Belgium on behalf of European Union, Egypt on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, Syria on behalf of the Arab Group, Libya, Russian Federation, Cuba, United States of America, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Guatemala, Turkey, Iran, Israel, Kuwait, Holy See and Azerbaijan.
The following National Human Rights Institutions and non-governmental organizations also took part: Mouvement contre le Racisme et pour l'amitié entre les peuples, Fraternité Notre Dame Inc., International Islamic Federation of Student Organizations, Charitable Institute for Protecting Social Victims, International Educational Development, Verein Sudwind Entwicklungspolitik, International Humanist and Ethical Union, France Libertés-Fondation Danielle Mitterand, Liberation, Mbororo Social and Cultural Development Association of Cameroon, Organization for Defending Victims of Violence, United Nations Watch, Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, Association for World Education, International Club for Peace Research, European Union of Public Relations, International Institute for Peace, Commission to study the Organization of Peace, World Union for Progressive Judaism, Rencontre Africaine pour la défense des droits de l'homme, International Youth and Student Movement for the United Nations, Association of World Citizens and Afro-Asian People's Solidarity Organization.

The Council will continue its meeting this afternoon when it will hold an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Cambodia under the agenda item pertaining to technical assistance and capacity building.


Documents

The Report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, Githu Muigai, on the inadmissibility of certain practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, (A/HRC/15/45), addresses the human rights and democratic challenges posed by extremist political parties, movements and groups, including neo-Nazis and skinhead groups, as well as similar extremist ideological movements. The Special Rapporteur, following a brief introduction, examines how these parties, movements and groups may pose challenges to the human rights principles of non-discrimination, the rights to life and to security of person, the rights to freedom of expression, assembly and association, as well as to democracy.

The Report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, Githu Muigai, on all manifestations of defamation of religions, in particular the ongoing serious implications of Islamophobia, for the enjoyment of rights by their followers, (A/HRC/15/53), refers to cases pertaining to Human Rights Council resolution 13/16 brought to his attention and makes related observations. The cases cover a wide range of issues and appear to fall under five broad and non-exhaustive categories. The themes covered include: (a) acts of violence or discrimination, or incitement thereto, against individuals on the basis of their religion or belief; (b) attacks on religious sites; (c) religious and ethnic profiling; (d) religious symbols; and (e) negative stereotyping of religions, their followers and sacred persons. In conclusion, the Special Rapporteur presents some recommendations.

Corrigendum, (A/HRC/15/53/Corr.1), is currently unavailable.

The Report of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent: Mission to the United States of America, (A/HRC/15/18), summarizes information received during the meetings it held with Government officials and civil society organizations regarding the general situation of people of African descent in the United States and the situations that expose them to discrimination and outlines the action taken at various levels for their well-being. It concludes with recommendations that the Working Group believes will, if implemented, make tangible improvements in the situation of people of African descent in the United States.

The Note of the Secretariat transmitting the report of the Secretary General containing proposals for a programme of work of activities for the International Year for People of African Descent, (A/HRC/15/59), is currently unavailable.

Presentation of Reports by the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance and the Working Group on People of African Descent

Githu Muigai, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, said the report he was introducing today dealt with reported cases on issues pertaining to Human Rights Council resolution 13/16, and should be read together with his earlier report which focused on the legal and conceptual questions concerning the debate on "defamation of religions" and incitement to racial or religious hatred. Since submitting his first report on the topic, he had continued to receive regular information on issues pertaining to Human Rights Council resolution 13/16. One of the most recent examples was the plan of a small group of individuals in Florida to organize a "Burn a Koran Day", an initiative he very much regretted. This event demonstrated that actions undertaken by a small group of persons could sometimes have worldwide repercussions. The cases contained in the report covered a wide range of issues and appeared to fall under five broad and non-exhaustive categories: acts of violence or discrimination, or incitement thereto, against individuals on the basis of their religion or belief; attacks on religious sites; religious and ethnic profiling; bans or restrictions on religious symbols; and negative stereotyping of religions, their followers and sacred persons.

Numerous cases of acts of violence or discrimination, or incitement thereto, against believers were brought to his attention in the last year. These acts were strictly prohibited by international human rights law; States should therefore denounce and prosecute acts of violence against individuals and should also take all necessary measures to ensure that all individuals enjoyed their human rights without discrimination of any kind. States should also live up to their responsibilities under the relevant international human rights standards which protected religious sites. States should not resort to profiling based on discriminatory grounds prohibited by international law, including on racial, ethnic or religious grounds. States should also have the objective to safeguard both the positive freedom to display religious symbols and the negative freedom from being forced to display religious symbols. Concerning negative stereotyping of religions, vigorously interrogating and criticising religious doctrines and their teachings was thoroughly legitimate, and constituted a significant part of the exercise of freedom of expression and freedom of religion. The Council should focus on how advocacy of racial or religious hatred that constituted incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence could be effectively combated. The report concluded that advocacy of racial or religious hatred was an external manifestation of something much more profound, which was intolerance, ignorance or bigotry. Tackling the root causes of manifestations of religious intolerance affecting individuals' human rights required a broad set of policy measures, and States should put a strong emphasis on a broad range of preventive measures which aimed at fostering a peaceful society, in particular in the areas of education, awareness-raising and interreligious and intercultural dialogue.

The second report related to the implementation of the General Assembly resolution entitled Inadmissibility of certain practices that contributed to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. Due to the fact that extremist political parties, movements and groups most often relied on intolerance, discrimination, exclusion and xenophobia, their persistent existence posed major challenges to democracy and to a number of human rights and freedoms, including the principle of non-discrimination; the rights to life and to security of person; and the rights to freedom of expression, assembly and association. States were faced with a complex dilemma when countering extremist political parties, movements and groups. They must ensure the full enjoyment of the right to freedom of expression, and allow all political parties, movements and groups to enjoy their right to freedom of assembly and association, while taking measures to counter extremist political parties, movements and groups. The Special Rapporteur emphasised the key role that political leaders and parties had to play, and recommended that political parties base their programme and activities on respect for human rights, and refuse to enter into any alliance with extremist parties of a racist or xenophobic character to form majorities wielding political power in a given State. All States should be more vigilant vis-à-vis extremist political parties, movements and groups which promoted either explicitly or implicitly the dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination and xenophobia, as well as acts of violence or incitement to such acts against specific groups of individuals. No State was immune from such attempts to debase humans and create divisions within society.

MIRJANA NAJCEVSKA, Chairperson of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, presented the report of the Working Group on the situation of peoples of African descent in the United States of America and thanked the US Government for its invitation, as well as its help and assistance before and during the Working Group’s visit to the country. The Working Group was impressed with the wide-ranging and comprehensive legislative framework that protected and advanced the right to non-discrimination on the basis of race and ethnicity. The Working Group also noted with satisfaction the many programmes and other initiatives implemented by the United States Government to combat racial discrimination affecting people of African descent. Furthermore, the structure used by the Government for collecting and analysing disaggregated data on race proved to be an important tool in the identification of racial disparities in access to employment, education, health and other fundamental rights and in the design and implementation of policies to remedy the identified challenges.

The Working Group also noted the existence of a circle of poverty and challenges related to education, employment opportunities and the administration of justice affecting the lives of people of African descent. The experts remained particularly alarmed by the onerous employment situation that many women of African descent endured, working two or three jobs in order to support their families as single mothers. On the issue of education, the Working Group was informed that one of the structural reasons for poor access to quality education was that public schools were funded by local property taxes and so the poorer neighbourhoods had less revenue to spend on their schools.

Notwithstanding the efforts put forth by the American government to address racial imbalances, the experts believed that the history of slavery and electoral disenfranchisement still lingered in the present-day structures of the nation. The experts were also quite concerned with aspects of the administration of justice that adversely affected the African American population; particularly disproportionate incarceration rates compared to the general population and the seemingly discriminatory application of some laws. The members of the Working Group were informed that there was not an appropriate education system for children in adult prisons and children were forced to work during their imprisonment for very low compensation. In conclusion, the Working Group firmly believed that the lessons of this visit would be of benefit for its upcoming visits to Portugal and Canada.

Statement by Concerned Country

MARK J. CASSAYRE (United States of America), speaking as a concerned country, said the United States welcomed the visit of the Working Group on People of African Descent and said it agreed with the conclusion of the Working Group that a comprehensive solution to inadequate access to quality education was needed. To that end, the Obama Administration was implementing the “Race to the Top” programme, which was a competitive grant programme designed to encourage and reward the states in the United States that were creating the conditions for innovation and reform in education. “Race to the Top” encouraged ambitious plans in core education reforms and sought to achieve substantial gains in student achievement, improved high school graduation rates, and better student preparation for college and careers. It aimed to close achievement gaps. The Department of Education had also launched the Promise Neighbourhoods programme, which was the first federal initiative to put education at the centre of comprehensive support services that were designed to improve educational outcomes for students in communities of concentrated poverty.

The United States clarified the reference in the Working Group’s conclusions related to the abolition of slavery and said that while the Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery, it allowed the state or federal government to compel the labour of anyone convicted of a crime. This exception applied broadly to every person in the United States, not only to African Americans. Because the term “slavery” was associated with the chattel slavery of African Americans before the Civil War, use of the term to apply to convicted prisoners might be misleading, the United States said. In closing, the United States said it greatly appreciated the visit of the Working Group and looked forward to working with it in the future.

Clustered Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Racism and the Working Group on People of African Descent

NICOLE RECKINGER, (Belgium, speaking on behalf of the European Union), said the European Union welcomed the Special Rapporteur's recommendation encouraging States to move away from the notion of defamation of religions towards the legal concept of advocacy of racial or religious hatred that constituted incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, in order to anchor the debate in the relevant existing international legal framework, and fully shared this recommendation. Although the European Union noted that the concept of defamation of religions was not a human rights concept, it acknowledged the concerns behind the discourse, which were not limited to one religion, or to one region. The report enumerated incidents that appeared to fall under five categories, warranting different approaches under international human rights law. By providing this framework, the Special Rapporteur had contributed to advancing the debate on intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief, but the European Union wished for a clear common understanding of which of the incidents under the five categories should be the subject of discussion within the Human Rights Council. The European Union acknowledged that despite an impressive arsenal of anti-racism and anti-discrimination legislation, many challenges remained, including in Europe, noting that laws were not enough to fight racism and intolerance and that there was a need for a broad set of policy measures, in particular preventive measures.

FELIX PENA RAMOS (Venezuela), thanked the Special Rapporteur and the Working Group for their reports. Venezuela stated that it would enthusiastically take part in the year of African descent. Venezuela also regretted that the Special Rapporteur on racism highlighted in his report an isolated incident that occurred some two years ago in Venezuela in a place of worship. The delegate reiterated that freedom of religion or belief was a fundamental and protected right in Venezuela and had never been under attack. In conclusion, the Government of Venezuela remained committed to combating all forms of religious hatred or intolerance.

GOPINATHAN ACHAMKULANGARE (India), said India thanked the two Special Procedures on their report and said it wished to comment on the report of the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. The Special Rapporteur emphasised in his discourse that he had not referred to action by States and did not take a position on his own on the cases cited in the report. India wished to express reservations as to the methodology used to list the cases in the report. India, as a concerned country, referred the case mentioned to the Supreme Court and found it was non-existent. Even if it was accurate, just listing cases alone without mentioning the context would not be correct, India concluded.

SHAFQAT KHAN, (Pakistan, on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference), said the Organization of the Islamic Conference attached immense importance to the mandate of the Special Rapporteur, which was one of the core issues shaping the contemporary human rights discourse. Extremist political parties and related groups posed a major challenge to a range of fundamental human rights and freedoms, and the majority of victims in this regard were immigrants, with a large number Muslims. The Organization of the Islamic Conference supported the recommendation by the Special Rapporteur for States to be more vigilant vis-à-vis extremist political parties and groups and to adopt and strictly enforce a wide range of legislative as well as other complimentary measures to deal with this phenomenon. The Organization of the Islamic Conference requested that the Special Rapporteur explain the rationale behind categorising the cases of defamation of religion, and in particular Islamophobia, into five broad categories. The Special Rapporteur should further guide the Council on the necessary steps that should be taken to prevent discriminatory measures against individuals, in particular measures that were taken on the pretext of security. While healthy criticism led to constructive debates, defamation and insults invited hatred and led to disharmony and discrimination. The Organization of the Islamic Conference supported the recommendation that governments should address early-warning signs through a wide range of measures to create a peaceful society.

DICKY KOMAR (Indonesia), said that the Special Rapporteur’s report outlined acts of racism and the government of Indonesia highlighted the fact that it had established laws to combat such acts. Moreover, defamation of religion and the rising trend of Islamophobia remained of great concern for the government of Indonesia. Racial discrimination was often the result of poverty and poor access to and quality of education. Education and awareness-raising were therefore important objectives in the promotion of racial tolerance. As a multicultural nation, Indonesia was a firm believer in multi-faith and multi-ethnic dialogue, which was important in promoting a climate of acceptance and tolerance within a society.

FRANK ISOH (Nigeria, speaking on behalf of the African Group), said it welcomed the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and his preliminary report on the human rights challenges posed by extremist political parties and groups. The existence of groups, parties and movements based on racial superiority, intolerance and discrimination posed a constant threat to human rights and principles of non-discrimination and democracy, right to life and to security of persons. It was regrettable that in the 21st century such groups would resort to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance to achieve their political aims. The Group fully welcomed the recommendations put forward by the Special Rapporteur and called on states to be more vigilant and put in place measures to deal with this trend. The Group welcomed the report of the Working Group on People of African Descent and their visit to the United States and welcomed their recommendations which, when implemented, would ameliorate the challenges faced by the people of African descent, particularly in the area of unemployment, lower income levels, access to higher levels of education and quality health care.

MAHMOUD AFIFI, (Egypt), said Egypt shared the concerns stated in the report of the Special Rapporteur, especially when he noted that no region of the world was immune to the phenomenon, and there was a capacity of dissolved extremist political parties, movements and groups to return under other names and status, and therefore continue to propagate their agenda based on hatred. Egypt wished to commend the work of the Special Rapporteur in making useful recommendations, specifically his call to adopt a more robust enforcement of legislative measures, as well as other complementary measures, including holding public figures accountable for bigoted words or statements that encouraged discrimination and violence and created a climate of fear for vulnerable groups. Egypt also supported his recommendation to States to take action against racially-motivated violence. The Special Rapporteur should elaborate more on how States should work to adapt their legislative and institutional frameworks to deny these extremist parties and groups the tools which they currently misused to violate basic human rights, especially extremist political parties which benefited from their legal status in obtaining social ground and momentum for their ideas and actions. Although the Special Rapporteur was mandated to evaluate in particular the ongoing serious implications of Islamophobia, this issue wasn't dealt with in a clear and sufficient manner allowing the Council to evaluate the full aspects of this phenomenon. He should have recognized in his report that defamation or denigration of religions, in all of its forms, represented a source of restriction on the freedom of opinion and expression.

HUSSAIN AL-ZUHHAIRY (Iraq), said that for a number of years, the United Nations had been debating racism and xenophobia, particularly with regard to Islam. Every time the question was addressed on how to combat racism, certain countries used freedom of expression as a justification to allow racist views to be heard. Nearly a quarter of the world’s population was Muslim and Iraq expressed concerns that Muslims were being unfairly targeted and unjust connections were being made between terrorism and Islam. Iraq concluded by saying that the Council should adopt a very clear and firm resolution condemning Islamophobia and anti-Islamic expression.

MOHAMMAD REZA GHAEBI (Iran), said Iran attached great importance to the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, which it believed was one of the core issues determining the contemporary human rights discourse. With regard to the report of the Special Rapporteur, Iran said that the Special Rapporteur had been requested to report on all manifestations of defamation of religions and in particular on the ongoing serious implications of Islamophobia. Unfortunately, the recent report was not completely relevant to the key aim of reporting and it seemed that he had deviated from the main goal of the resolution. Iran expressed its concern over the approach taken by the Special Rapporteur in addressing irrelevant issues in the report, particularly in raising two irrelevant and unacceptable cases against Iran. Iran concurred with the Special Rapporteur that extremist political parties and related groups posed a major challenge to a range of fundamental human rights and freedoms, but Iran regretted that the Special Rapporteur had not take into consideration a number of recent actions in some western countries by extremist political parties which resulted in incitement to discrimination against Islam and Muslims for political reasons.

ROBERTO FLORES BERMUDEZ, (Honduras), said the Durban Declaration gave a path to follow to give equal opportunities in all fields, and the benefits would be extended to immigrants who in many cases experienced the most extreme cases of defencelessness. Honduras was party to the International Labour Organization Convention 169 on indigenous and tribal peoples, and to a number of other Conventions. The Government condemned all forms of racial discrimination, and the Government was establishing a body for the protection of the rights of indigenous and Afro-descendants, contributing to strengthening its position against all forms of discrimination. The report of the Special Rapporteur was approved, and it was necessary for all members of society to promote tolerance, democratic principles and human rights. There was no overnight solution to this, but education was a decisive tool for instilling democratic principles, tolerance and respect in persons at an early age.

VAHEH GEVORGYAN (Armenia) said Armenia commended the tireless efforts of Mr. Muigai and shared the view that extremist political parties were greatly responsible for igniting old and new manifestations of racism, xenophobia and related intolerance throughout the world. It must however, be recognised that those organizations were not operating in a vacuum and that their performance was greatly influenced by official State policies. That was to say that States bore the primary obligation to ensure fundamental freedoms and that the failure of States to protect citizens from violence may be a complicity and defined as a State’s liability. The recent monumental judgement of the European Court of Human Rights was a good case in point. In that regard, Armenia wished to know the Special Rapporteur’s opinion about whether and in which ways human rights mechanisms and bodies, both at the global and regional level, could assist States in combating extremist political agendas and organizations. Armenia shared the view of the Special Rapporteur that it was necessary to assess if the ban or restrictions of religious symbols ran counter to the freedom to manifest one’s religion or belief, the freedom of expression, and the principle of non-discrimination, among other things. In the view of Armenia these criteria could provide universal guidance to tackle this issue in every cultural framework without applying double standards to believers of universally recognised religions.

KHALID MOHAMMAD KARAKUTLY, (Saudi Arabia), said restrictions in constructions of mosques and minarets or banning the wearing the veil were discriminatory measures. The existence of many extremist political parties in many countries was condemned and measures should be taken to eradicate these parties as well as the structural problems that were at the origin of their existence. The media played a fundamental role in the spread of extremist ideas.

MERZY BAVRSKI, (Poland), said States were faced with a difficult dilemma when countering intolerant, discriminatory or xenophobic rhetoric and activities. The way in which States responded to challenges posed by extremism constituted a credible litmus test of their attachment to the core democratic principles and human rights. Democratic systems, by providing space for the free flow of ideas, should respect the right of all people to present proposals for change and to voice critical ideas, including those deemed as radical. At the same time, democratic, pluralistic societies were best placed to effectively prevent racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. States in their actions must ensure that all individuals and groups of individuals fully enjoyed their right to freedom of expression and allow all political parties, movements and groups to exist and enjoy their right to freedom of assembly and association. States should arrange for a regular examination of the progress in dealing with cases related to racial discrimination and related offences by law enforcement bodies, and the public authorities should identify reasons behind cases which had been discontinued. The response against racist offences should not always be affected through criminal law, but sometimes remedied within administrative, civil, labour or ethical proceedings.

ARNOLD DE FINE SKIBSTED (Denmark) said both reports of the Special Rapporteur were timely contributions to the ongoing debate on religious intolerance and extremist ideological movements. Denmark was of the view that the report on the manifestation of defamation of religions clearly illustrated that intolerance against individuals, based on their religion or belief, was a global phenomenon that continued to require the international community’s attention. Denmark therefore fully agreed with the Special Rapporteur that States must find the most effective ways to protect individuals from advocacy and violence by others. Based on the report’s findings, could the Special Rapporteur elaborate on which approaches seemed most effective in addressing these challenges? The Special Rapporteur was to be commended for unambiguously encouraging States to move away from the notion of defamation of religions towards the concept of advocacy of racial or religious hatred that constituted incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. Denmark fully supported this recommendation and believed that focusing the debate on the full implementation of existing human rights conventions was the right way forward. In closing, Denmark emphasised that the concept of defamation of religion did not belong in a human rights discourse.

FRANKLIN RODRIGUES HOYER (Brazil), said Brazil condemned any form of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, including those based on religion and belief. The increasing instances of manifestations of religious intolerance and negative stereotyping of individuals based on their ethnic origin demanded the constant attention of this Council. Brazil agreed on the necessity of tackling the root causes of the manifestations of religious intolerance through broader sets of policy measures. Brazil supported the approach of the Special Rapporteur to this sensitive issue and Brazil found his current report balanced and constructive and it contained views shared by Brazil. Placing the debate under the notion of defamation of religions had proved to be unfruitful and had diverted the debate from the real problems that needed to be addressed, Brazil said. Convinced that political platforms based on racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia should be condemned, Brazil had introduced in 2000 a resolution on the incompatibility between democracy and racism. Brazil commended the Special Rapporteur for the way he addressed this critical issue in his report and agreed on the necessity of tackling the root causes of this phenomenon with a much broader set of policy measures.

MARK J. CASSAYRE, (United States of America), said racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance were serious challenges facing the international community and these important issues deserved continuing attention and action. The United States condemned all actions that wilfully sought to exploit tensions or perpetuate intolerance, bigotry and fear based on race, ethnicity or religion. Proactive measures to combat intolerance such as the enforcement of discrimination and hate crimes laws, education, interfaith dialogue, and Governmental condemnation of intolerance were much more potent and appropriate antidotes to intolerance than banning offensive speech. The United States regretted that the Special Rapporteur did not offer a necessary context in his report on Islamophobia regarding the actions taken by the State concerned or other relevant stakeholders in response to the serious incidents cited. Without noting the context and the efforts made by many States to address the incidents referenced in his report, the latter risked contributing to the notion that these issues occurred unabated and that Governments were generally unresponsive. The United States appreciated the work of the Special Rapporteur and wished to express strong support for his conclusion that addressing the root causes of intolerance required a much broader set of policy measures, including increased education, awareness-raising and interreligious and intercultural dialogue. States must foster a peaceful society where the freedoms of religion and expression could be fully exercised by all individuals.

NING BO (China) said China had listened with interest to the presentation of the reports of both the Special Rapporteur and the Working Group on People of African Descent and would like to commend their efforts. The Special Rapporteur had rightly pointed out that racism constituted a huge challenge to non-discrimination and the right to freedom of speech, among other rights. China was of the view that the issue needed to be tackled by the whole of mankind working together and China would like to see greater activism to implement a zero tolerance policy both nationally and internationally. In this connection, China condemned the incident which had occurred in certain countries where individuals had threatened to burn the Koran. China was firmly against linking terrorism with any specific group.

JUAN HOLGUIN (Ecuador), said Ecuador welcomed the report by the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and the introduction to the report by the Working Group on People of African descent. Both reports contributed valuable elements that contributed to the debate in the Council. One year ago Ecuador had received the visit of the Working Group and following the recommendations then received, Ecuador had adopted measures to eliminate systematic forms of racial discrimination. The Secretariat for People’s Social Movement and Public Participation, a body in charge of implementing policies in this sector, held training workshops for armed forces on human rights, implemented affirmative actions in over 50 municipalities and added concrete elements to the core curriculum.

MOHAMED SIAD DOUALEH, (Djibouti), said the report of the Special Rapporteur was troubling with regard to the light that it cast on the threats weighing on human rights and democracy posed by political parties, movements and extremist groups, neo-Nazis, and skinheads, and the conclusions drawn from this contemporary racist approach. Political platforms based on racism were alarming, as they explained the emergence of new forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. The analysis in the report showed that racism was at the same time a threat to democracy directly as well as indirectly, as it undermined political ground rules. The flagrant violations of the right to security of persons and of life must be punished by the adoption of dissuasive measures and punitive measures, as it led to a negative atmosphere undermining life in society. The dilemma in this regard facing democratic societies was highlighted in the report. Everything must be done to ensure that extremism and racism were not seen as banal, and the international community must condemn acts of violence based on religious belief. The recommendations of the Special Rapporteur were supported, and there should be the widest possible dissemination of the Durban Declaration and Program of Action which was a vital tool to combat the nefarious effects of racism and discrimination.

ROMAN KASHAEV (Russian Federation) said the Russian Federation attached great significance to the activities of the Special Rapporteur as well as those of the Working Group on People of African Descent and thanked the experts for the reports submitted. The Russian Federation particularly welcomed the report by Mr. Muigai on the unacceptability of certain practices that promoted racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance. These challenges were topical, the Russian Federation said, but pointed out that the Special Rapporteur had not discussed important topics such as worshipping of the Nazi movement, and it hoped this and other problems would be duly reflected in future reports to the Council. The Russian Federation would like to see this type of research continued and was prepared to provide all the necessary support to the Special Rapporteur.

VEBJORN HEINES (Norway), said Norway agreed with the point of departure taken by the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, that there was a reason for serious concern with regard to acts of violence and discrimination against individuals based on religious intolerance. Norway particularly appreciated the observations and recommendations with regard to religious symbols and said that the concrete recommendations in paragraph 87 of the report should be kept in mind when assessing the legality of restrictions. Legislative measures were necessary, but never enough to tackle the complex challenges described in the report. States must be creative in the development of positive measures to prevent and combat acts of violence and acts of discrimination targeting individuals which were based on religious intolerance. It was easy to seize the extremes, Norway said, but most people shied away from the extremes and sought solutions in the middle ground. In conclusion, Norway asked the Special Rapporteur about his advice on how the Human Rights Council could contribute to a more effective dialogue on those issues, a dialogue that seized the middle ground and not the extremes.

SITI HAJJAR ADNIN, (Malaysia), said Malaysia took due note of the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Special Rapporteur in both his reports, and was in general agreement with his assessments on the challenges posed by the rise of extremist political parties, movements and groups. Malaysia was fully cognisant of the need for the State to maintain the utmost vigilance on society's tendencies to promote either explicitly or implicitly the dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination and xenophobia, as well as acts of violence or incitement. Tensions would inevitably surface as the State struggled to balance the protection and promotion of the right to freedom of expression, and society's larger interest in preservation of peace and harmony among the diverse communities. In this context, Malaysia had found that the rigorous application of law and the facilitation of access to judicial remedies went a long way to defray tension. Malaysia was concerned with the Special Rapporteur's observation that the rise of Islamophobia was gaining legitimacy, particularly within political circles and in the sphere of public opinion in certain parts of the world. Defamation of religion was an act which unacceptably derogated the right to freedom of religion or belief, and was inextricably linked to intolerance, xenophobia, and incitement to racial and religious hatred.

LIVSHA ZAHIR (Maldives) said the Maldives welcomed the Special Rapporteur’s report which dealt with one of the most important contemporary challenges: the scourge of Islamophobia and other forms of religious intolerance. As a Muslim country, the Maldives were saddened by the rising tide of Islamophobia around the world which was based on a thoroughly misguided understanding of the true nature of Islam. The Maldives could see a clear difference between State-sanctioned Islamophobia and those anti-Muslim activities attributable to marginal segments of the population. However, there was a clear responsibility on the part of each State represented in this room to disavow and confront intolerance, stereotyping, profiling, incitement, and hatred. States should work within and across civilizations to promote a culture of dialogue, tolerance and understanding. The Maldives also took note of concerns expressed in the report regarding the Maldives’ Constitution, particularly its provisions on citizenship. These provisions were not designed to discriminate against religions other than Islam or to incite intolerance. Rather, they reflected a historical and societal reality in the Maldives, a country that had a 100 per cent Muslim population, where religious and national identify were closely interrelated, and where Islam played a crucial role in national unity.

MARIAME SY (Senegal), said that by highlighting the threat that extremist parties and groups posed to human rights, the Special Rapporteur underlined the urgent need to address this issue. The discourse fuelling racism was a reflection of a lack of knowledge of others, and insufficient understanding of the heritage of mankind, said Senegal. That was why it was important for states to incorporate human rights education in school curricula to eradicate this phenomenon. Regarding the report presented by the Working Group on People of African descent, Senegal noted that despite the many strides forward, segregation of people of African descent still existed in many walks of life in the United States. Senegal hoped that the United States would soon take decisive measures to address this discrimination in accordance with their well known commitment to democracy and human rights.

NAJIB TLEBA, (Libya), said all States of the world had undertaken, under the Charter, to promote, strengthen and encourage human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without cultural or religious discrimination. Flying in the face of the United Nations and contradicting public opinion, racist attitudes and goals continued to be widespread, with an increase of hatred in the world. Incitement to hatred and religious hatred and the distortion of religious beliefs had also occurred. Libya wished to reaffirm that it was important to put an end to hatred and incitement to hatred against religions, in particular attacks on places of worship. The principle of non-discrimination was a fundamental principle, enshrined in all international Conventions, and forming the base of all human rights and fundamental freedoms. The Special Rapporteur should present in his next report the ways and means of attacking these phenomena and what measures States could take to combat these.

JEAN-DANIEL VIGNY (Switzerland) said Switzerland thanked the Special Rapporteur for having maintained a rights-based approach. Switzerland also shared the concerns voiced on the two topics of the agenda. Everywhere in the world, the emerging diversity resulting from globalisation gave rise to identity-based tensions that could be exploited. Switzerland was opposed to explicitly recognizing the concept of “defamation of religions” as relevant to human rights. It was also of the view that it was dangerous to consider this concept as a contemporary form of racism. International law had sufficient