HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HOLDS INTERACTIVE DIALOGUE WITH THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON CONTEMPORARY FORMS OF RACISM
The Human Rights Council this afternoon held an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, Githu Muigai, who presented his annual report, as well as reports on missions to Mauritania and the United States. The Council also held a general debate on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance, in the context of follow-up and implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action.
Presenting his reports, Mr. Muigai noted that the Durban Review Conference had been of the utmost importance in marking the renewal of international engagement against racism. Although the absence of some States was regrettable, it was encouraging and notable that the outcome document had been adopted by consensus by all participating States. He reiterated his call to those States which had not attended the Conference to express their support for the outcome document and to commit to its domestic implementation, noting that the outcome document would be used as a blueprint and theoretical framework for analysing relevant issues during country visits and other regular activities. The second part of the annual report focused on the thematic issue of poverty. There was no doubt that there was very close association between race or ethnicity and poverty in most countries, generally the result of historical legacies, such as slavery, segregation or apartheid. States needed to collect ethnically disaggregated data, thus providing policy-makers with reliable information concerning the socio-economic situation of minorities. Furthermore, whereas non-discrimination was essential to create a level playing field for different communities, it did not provide for the correction of imbalances which were the result of historical legacies, such as slavery and segregation. In that regard, there continued to be a need for the enactment of special measures towards groups that suffered from decades or centuries of discrimination.
In concluding remarks, addressing concerns raised by several speakers, Mr. Muigai noted that the intersection of the right to freedom of expression and religious freedom was complex. He felt that that issue should be kept under constant review. The Durban Review Conference and the outcome document provided a platform in which that dialogue could be continued and he was committed to being a part of this dialogue.
Speaking as concerned countries were Mauritania and the United States. Mauritania said discrimination on racial or ethnic grounds did not exist in the country, but there had been tensions. The Government punished slavery-like practices, and worked to fully eradicate the sequelae of poverty. After the report, Mauritania had endeavoured to correct certain aspects criticized by the Special Rapporteur. The United States said that it had made great progress in creating a legal and institutional framework to combat racism and racial discrimination but recognized that more needed to be done. President Obama was committed to reinvigorating traditional civil rights enforcement in the United States and increasing the number of enforcement actions in a variety of areas, including police misconduct and employment discrimination.
In the interactive discussion with the Special Rapporteur, many States specifically supported the call for all States which had not done so to publicly support the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference, and welcomed the fact that the Special Rapporteur intended to use that document as a programme and framework for carrying out his mandate. A couple of speakers noted, however, that many of the provisions reflected in the outcome document would not have been necessary if the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action had been properly and effectively implemented. With regard to the analysis in the report of the linkages between poverty and racism, while some considered data collection disaggregated by race and ethnicity as an essential tool for the implementation of public policies targeting excluded groups, others were not convinced that ethnically disaggregated data was a prerequisite for such action, and felt that that process could itself become discriminatory.
Also speaking in the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur were Pakistan, on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Nigeria, the Czech Republic, on behalf of the European Union, Egypt, on behalf of the African Group, the United Arab Emirates, on behalf of the Arab Group, Germany, India, the Russian Federation, Sweden, the United States, Turkey, Senegal, China, Indonesia, Brazil, Algeria, Qatar, Switzerland and Morocco. The following non-governmental organizations also spoke: Arab Commission for Human Rights; International Human Rights Association of American Minorities; Commission to Study the Organization of Peace; European Union of Public Relations; and the Indian Council of South America.
In a general debate on racism in the context of follow-up and implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, it was noted that there was great misinformation around the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. Despite a politicized incident, which regrettably had jeopardized the credibility of the Durban Review Conference, consensus had been achieved on the outcome document, which conveyed a universally valid message that the international community would not tolerate racism. It was also noteworthy that that document struck a delicate balance between exercising the freedom of expression and taking a responsibility for its consequences. Many speakers again stressed that all States, regardless of their participation in the Review Conference, should take effective measures to translate the provisions of the outcome document adopted by consensus into action. Palestine noted that the issues tackled in the Durban Review were still a reality throughout the world, particularly the Middle East, where the Occupying Power practised racism against the Palestinian minority, who were treated as second-class citizens and whose lives were hell. Israel highlighted that Israel was mentioned to the exclusion of others in the Durban Declaration, a document which claimed that the Palestinians were victims of racism, and pointed out that the Durban Review Conference had not mentioned that the Jewish people had suffered for decades.
Speaking in the general debate were Cuba, on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, the Czech Republic, on behalf of the European Union, the Russian Federation, Azerbaijan, Nigeria, Switzerland, the Republic of Korea, the United States, Palestine and Israel.
Tomorrow morning the Council will hold another day of non-stop meetings, from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., starting with an interactive dialogue with the Independent Expert on the human rights situation in Haiti, following the presentation of his report to the Council.
Documents
The Council has before it the report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, Githu Muigai (A/HRC/11/36 and Add.1-3), which examines the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference, held in April 2009 in Geneva, and contains reflections on the Durban Review process. It highlights the “remarkable achievement” of the consensual adoption of the outcome document given the highly tense political atmosphere surrounding the Conference, but notes that there remains an unprecedented level of disinformation and misinformation concerning the contents of both the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action and the new outcome document. It recommends that specific awareness-raising activities be undertaken to ensure that public information concerning the objectives of those landmark texts are widely disseminated, particularly among the media. A second substantive section addresses the issue of poverty and racism, as one of the fundamental challenges in the fight against racism, noting that national data for many countries unambiguously show that racial or ethnic minorities are disproportionately affected by poverty. The Special Rapporteur recalls that the socio-economic vulnerability of minorities is frequently the result of historical legacies, such as slavery across the American continent, systems of inherited status in other continents and also of systems of formalized and State-sponsored discrimination against minorities that were long in place in many parts of the world. Because of the inaction of Governments, imbalances that were historically created continued to profoundly affect minority groups long after formalized discrimination has been dismantled. The Special Rapporteur highlights a number of concrete measures needed to address the disproportionate levels of poverty enjoyed by members of minorities. A third substantive section of the report contains a summary of activities of the Special Rapporteur, and a concluding chapter contains recommendations, including a strong recommendation that countries that did not participate in the Durban Review Conference publicly acknowledge their support for its outcome document and commit to its implementation.
A first addendum gives an account of the communications sent to Governments by the Special Rapporteur between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2008, including the communications sent by the previous mandate holder between 1 January 2008 and 31 July 2008, and also summarizes replies received from Governments until 15 May 2009.
Addendum two is the report of the Special Rapporteur’s visit to Mauritania in January 2008, where he finds that Mauritanian society has been deeply marked by continuing discriminatory practices of an ethnic and racial nature rooted in cultural traditions and pervasively present in social structures, the principal institutions of the State, in particular the armed forces and justice system, and attitudes. A number of persistent features of Mauritanian society have given substance and depth to such discrimination over a long period of time, including the central role of traditional slavery; the cultural and social entrenchment of the caste system; and the use of ethnicity as a political tool, for example, through language policies which have contributed to the polarization of various communities. Among recommendation are that the Government consistently communicate to the public a clear political will to combat all forms of racism and discrimination and to foster democratic, egalitarian and participatory multiculturalism, based on respect for and recognition and promotion of cultural diversity; and that it adopt comprehensive legislation against all forms of discrimination that incorporates a definition of discrimination that is applicable in all areas of social life.
A third addendum contains the report of the Special Rapporteur’s mission to the United States in May and June 2008, which looks at public policies and measures to fight racism in the areas of law enforcement; hate crimes; education; housing; employment; measures to prevent discrimination in the aftermath of the events of 11 September 2001; measures taken in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina; and immigration; as well as the views of civil society and the communities concerned on those issues. While the United States has made decisive progress in the political and legal combat against racism, the report finds that historical, cultural and human depth of racism still permeates all dimensions of life of American society. The Special Rapporteur noted the recognition by authorities of the persistence of different manifestations of racism in the country and willingness to tackle that phenomenon. Instances of direct discrimination and concrete racial bias are most pronounced with regards to law enforcement agencies. The overlap between poverty and race in the United States also creates structural problems that go far beyond patterns of income, creating a vicious cycle of marginalization and exclusion of minorities and reinforcing prejudices and stereotypes, such as an association of minorities to criminality or to poor educational performance. The Special Rapporteur also recalls the need for constant vigilance for the situation of Native Americans, who should be the subject of particular attention in view of the historical legacy of discrimination against them. Among recommendations are that Congress establish a bipartisan commission to evaluate the progress and failures in the fight against racism and the ongoing process of resegregation, and that the Government clarify to law enforcement officials the obligation of equal treatment and, in particular, the prohibition against racial profiling.
Presentation of Report on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance
GITHU MUIGAI, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, presenting his reports, said that he was very proud to have been appointed to this important mandate, and reiterated that he would spare no efforts in fulfilling his obligations as Special Rapporteur. The Durban Review Conference had been of the utmost importance in marking the renewal of international engagement against racism. Although the absence of some States was regrettable, it was encouraging and notable that the outcome document had been adopted by consensus by all participating States. In that regard, he reiterated his call to those States which had not attended the Conference to express their support for the outcome document and to commit to its domestic implementation. Further, he noted that the outcome document would be used as a blueprint and theoretical framework for analysing relevant issues during country visits and other regular activities. To that effect, the annual report identified the concrete commitments taken by States in the outcome document and assessed some initial indicators to monitor how States had performed to meet those commitments.
The second part of the annual report focused on the thematic issue of poverty. There was no doubt that there was very close association between race or ethnicity and poverty in most countries, Mr. Muigai observed. Based on the body of empirical work and country visits carried out in the mandate, as well as on academic and policy-oriented research on the topic, he noted that socio-economic vulnerability of racial or ethnic minorities was generally the result of historical legacies, such as slavery, segregation or apartheid. The report focused on three overarching priorities in order to address the disproportionate levels of poverty experienced by the members of racial or ethnic minorities. He called attention, in particular, to the need for States to collect ethnically disaggregated data, thus providing policy-makers with reliable information concerning the socio-economic situation of minorities. The lack of such data most often prevented policy-makers from devising specific and appropriate public policies aimed at redressing racial or ethnic imbalances. Some key principles for the collection of such data that would help States overcome their concerns in that regard included the right to privacy, the principle of self-identification, and the involvement of minority communities at every stage of the exercise.
Also highlighted was the central obligation that States had in the full implementation of the obligation to non-discrimination as unambiguously contained in international human rights law. Furthermore, whereas non-discrimination was essential to create a level playing field for different communities, it did not provide for the correction of imbalances which were the result of historical legacies, such as slavery and segregation. In that regard, there continued to be a need for the enactment of special measures towards groups that suffered from decades or centuries of discrimination, thus helping transform the goal of integration and equal opportunity into a concrete reality. In conclusion, Mr. Muigai said that he intended to examine this question in more depth in the framework of his mandate in the coming years.
Statements by Concerned Countries
BAL AHMEDOU TIDJANE (Mauritania), speaking as a concerned country, said Mr. Doudou Diène had done excellent work during his mandate, shedding light on the dangers of racism, racial discrimination, and xenophobia, while focusing on means of eliminating that scourge. Mauritania now wished to pay tribute to his successor, and wished him well in his mandate. Conditions of openness and transparency which had marked the visit of the Special Rapporteur to Mauritania were a sign of Mauritania's will to cooperate with United Nations mechanisms and those of other international organizations. The Special Rapporteur had said there were no manifestations of legal or State racism in Mauritania, demonstrating the commitment of the country to promote justice and human rights for all. Tradition, culture and modern developments in Mauritania had seen great openness to the different cultures making up the country. Discrimination on racial or ethnic grounds did not exist, but there had been tensions. Slavery was a practice that was legally and socially condemned, and only existed in some disadvantaged areas that were very poor. The Government punished slavery-like practices, and worked to fully eradicate the sequelae of poverty. Mauritania's cultural policy was based on playing its role in Africa. After the report, it had endeavoured to correct certain aspects criticized by the Special Rapporteur, and there had been legal reforms to change discriminatory provisions in criminal law. Mauritania was going through a decisive phase in deepening democracy and overcoming its political crisis. The Government was determined to live up to its international commitments.
ANNA MORAWIEC MANSFIELD (United States), speaking as a concerned country, said that the United States had welcomed the Special Rapporteur’s visit and appreciated the opportunity for constructive dialogue. The United States appreciated the professionalism and intellectually rigorous approach the Special Rapporteur had exhibited in the course of these meetings. It noted, as the Special Rapporteur did in his report, that the United States was profoundly committed to the fight against racism and racial discrimination and that it was aware of the ongoing challenges in that regard. As described in the report, the United States had made great progress in creating a legal and institutional framework to combat racism and racial discrimination but recognized that more needed to be done. President Obama was committed to reinvigorating traditional civil rights enforcement in the United States and increasing the number of enforcement actions in a variety of areas, including police misconduct and employment discrimination. Further, the United States continued to look for ways to support school districts seeking to achieve diversity and avoid racial isolation in its schools, as well as reduce the achievement gap between white and minority students.
Interactive Dialogue on Report on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance
MUHAMMAD SAEED SARWAR (Pakistan), speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, said that the Special Rapporteur in his first report had touched on some of the important issues of concern in the discourse on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. Issues such as renewing the international engagement against racism and freedom of expression and fight against racism were extremely important and needed to be tackled head on by the international community. Moreover, as rightly pointed out by the Special Rapporteur, the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action and the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference provided the most comprehensive frameworks for the fight against racism. Member States, including those who could not join the consensus adoption of the outcome document, had to take concrete measures to implement those universal commitments. In that regard, the Special Rapporteur’s suggestion to widely publicize the message of those two documents through the United Nations Department of Public Information needed serious consideration.
IFEANYI E. NWOSU, (Nigeria) said it was indeed commendable that the first report of the Special Rapporteur examined in great detail the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference. The Conference had presented an opportunity to redress the pains of the past and also marked the renewal of international engagement against racism. It was instructive that many of the provisions reflected in the outcome document would not have been necessary were the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action properly and effectively implemented. The task before the Special Rapporteur now was to continue to highlight those issues in his subsequent reports, as well as inciting political will for the implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action and the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference by all Member States of the United Nations. Those two documents were the most comprehensive frameworks in the fight against contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.
PETR PRECLIK (Czech Republic), on behalf of the European Union, thanked the Special Rapporteur for his first report. It noted that his report examined in detail the issue of caste and ethnic groups and welcomed the Special Rapporteur’s statement that it was the responsibility of States to promote economic, social and cultural rights. The European Union also welcomed the positive comments of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression, which he described in the report as a condition for the eradication of racism. The Special Rapporteur also referred to his participation in a seminar on the prevention of genocide, and he was asked what the role of the Council was in that regard.
HEBA MOSTAFA RIZK (Egypt), speaking on behalf of the African Group, said that the African Group welcomed the convening in Geneva of the Durban Review Conference, and the adoption by consensus of the outcome document, which reaffirmed the centrality of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action and in which all Governments had expressed their commitment to strengthen their efforts towards its implementation and to address the new and contemporary manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. The African Group joined the call of the Special Rapporteur to those countries which had withdrawn from the Review Conference to declare their support for the outcome document and their commitment to its implementation. The African Group was of the view that the relevance and necessity for the Durban follow-up mechanisms remained unquestionable, particularly in light of the many challenges faced by the international human rights system in eradicating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, including their contemporary manifestations.
OBAID SALEM SAEED AL ZAABI (United Arab Emirates), speaking on behalf of the Arab Group, noted that this was the first report submitted by the new Special Rapporteur, and the first report on the issue since the Durban Review Conference. The Special Rapporteur had welcomed the consensus on the outcome document of the Conference, which had been adopted in a very tense atmosphere. There was a need to implement the different parts of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action and to take into account the injustice of the ongoing Israeli occupation in the Middle East. All States should respect the commitments they had undertaken. The Special Rapporteur should play a role to help States to implement the outcome document, which all States should ratify and with which they should bring their national legislations in line. The Working Group responsible for the implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action should be supported in order to be able to fulfil its mandate.
MICHAEL KLEPSCH (Germany) said that the German Government and large groups of civil society were committed to fight racism and to foster integration into German society. The Special Rapporteur had focused on implementation and on sharing best practices which was very helpful. Germany welcomed the outline and the presentation of the report and would comment on it later on. Regarding the recommendation on disaggregated data, Germany said that there were different views on that and that such data could lead to more profiling.
SANJEEV KUMAR SINGLA (India) thanked the Special Rapporteur for his report. The Special Rapporteur had referred to the issue of caste-based discrimination in his report as well as in the addendum document. India rejected those references and pointed out that such references were outside the scope of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur as caste-based discrimination did not fall within the purview of racial discrimination. That also applied to the communication dated 19 December 2007, as well as communication dated 5 November 2008, addressed to the Government of India in association with two other Rapporteurs.
NATALIA ZOLOTOVA (Russian Federation) was satisfied with the positive analysis of the report on the outcome of the Durban Review Conference, and agreed with the opinion of the Special Rapporteur that the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action and the outcome document were today the most comprehensive strategy to fight all forms and manifestations of racism. The proposal of the Special Rapporteur to conduct, together with the Department of Public Information of the United Nations, an awareness campaign on those documents was supported. Russia awaited with interest the Special Rapporteur's report to the General Assembly on behaviours and practices that could escalate racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance.
KARIN STEIVSOM (Sweden) thanked Mr. Muigai particularly for the very comprehensive table outlining the commitments of Member States in the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference. Sweden agreed that a substantive challenge lay ahead for States when it came to the implementation of the Durban Review outcome. The Special Rapporteur recommended that States adopt concrete targets for implementation, and Sweden wanted to hear some examples of what such targets could be. Sweden had also read with great interest the brief summary of Mr. Muigai’s explanation on the connection between racism and genocide, where he reminded them about when extreme cases of racism had led to terrible human catastrophes. In that regard, how did he believe that his work as Special Rapporteur could be used in efforts to prevent genocide?
ANNA MORAWIEC MANSFIELD (United States) said that the United States was committed to pursuing the elimination of racial discrimination at home and abroad. The United States had struggled to overcome the legacies of racism, intolerance and the effects of past discriminatory policies and persistent racist beliefs. Today, the United States was a multi-racial multi-ethnic democracy in which individuals had the right to be protected against discrimination based on race, colour or national origin in virtually every aspect of public life. Many challenges remained, and the United States was committed to intensifying efforts. As part of that commitment, President Obama planned to expand funding for the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division to ensure that civil rights were protected, even during a time of economic distress. The President also planned to lead the fight to build a more fair and equitable criminal justice system. He sought to strengthen federal hate crimes legislation and would work to ensure that federal law enforcement agencies did not resort to racial profiling. In conclusion, it was with regret that the United States had not joined the recent Durban Review Conference.
ALI ONANER (Turkey) welcomed the views of the Special Rapporteur on the renewal of international engagements that resulted from the Durban Review Conference, and also supported the call to members of the international community who had chosen not to participate in the Conference for their re-engagement for the common cause of eradicating racism. The Special Rapporteur rightly considered that the text agreed upon at the Review Conference on the issue of freedom of expression represented a landmark in the way that the United Nations human rights system would approach this question in the years to come. The agreement reached in the outcome document should be seen as the basis for further understanding the thresholds established by article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The analysis in the report on the links between poverty and racism was noted, but Turkey was not convinced about the recommendation on the collection of ethnically disaggregated data as a prerequisite for any action aimed at tackling the socio-economic vulnerability of persons belonging to ethnic or racial minorities – that process could itself become discriminatory.
MAMADOU MBODJ (Senegal) said that the report of the Special Rapporteur confirmed what Senegal already knew – that people living in poverty were very exposed to racism. Many sources continued to reveal that persons of African descent and migrants suffered from discrimination in the fields of work, education, housing and health. Senegal was in favour of adopting a dual approach aiming to redouble efforts to eliminate discrimination in a general manner and to promote the economic and social rights of those living in poverty. Senegal wanted to know how the Special Rapporteur intended to follow the issue of discrimination related to poverty working together with other relevant institutions.
LI YI (China) expressed appreciation for the Special Rapporteur’s active efforts to promote the elimination of racism. The Durban Review Conference had injected new vitality in the fight against racism and represented a new landmark. The implementation of the outcome document was of the utmost importance, and ensuring pluralism and harmony in real terms was now necessary. The important role of relevant mechanisms working on the elimination of racism should be brought into full play. The inter-governmental working group and the group of experts, among others, all made important contributions in eliminating racism and were encouraged by China to continue their work in that regard. With the end of the Durban Review Conference, the aim of the international community in its fight against racism should focus on eliminating divergences and enhancing cooperation.
GUSTI AGUNG WESAKA PUJA (Indonesia) said the report presented a clear overview of the work undertaken, as well as a critical assessment of the post-Durban Review Conference efforts. The Special Rapporteur clearly pointed out the fundamental challenges to the fight against racism, and Indonesia agreed that the renewed international engagement against racism remained urgent and essential. During the Durban Review Conference Member States had endorsed the outcome document by consensus. That gave further impetus for a breakthrough in the fight against intolerance, and hope to victims around the world. Implementation of the Durban Agreement was not without its challenges, but in order to effectively eliminate racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance all States should implement the provisions of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action and the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference. What strategies did the Special Rapporteur suggest in order to re-engage States? Did he have any further observations on linkages between discrimination and other phenomenon? And could he share any best practices on data collection methods?
MARIANA BENEVIDES (Brazil) said that, as President Lula had stated yesterday, only two months ago countries had reaffirmed their collective commitment to combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. Now it was time to fulfil their promises. The outcome document was balanced and constructive and it further advanced the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. It protected the victims of racism, such as people of African descent, indigenous peoples, women, migrants and children. Brazil considered data collection disaggregated by race and ethnicity as an essential tool for the implementation of public policies targeting excluded groups. Since 1872, Brazil’s national data collection had been disaggregated by colour and ethnicity. Data collected in Brazil showed that people of African descent, who represented almost half of the population, had less access to opportunities. Brazil’s public policies were focused on the reduction of poverty which particularly affected people of African descent.
AHMED SAADI (Algeria) valued the work and commitment of the Special Rapporteur. Racism, xenophobia and colonialism were all violations of human rights. Algeria in particular rejected the targeting of religious symbols. Algeria recalled with appreciation the fact that the Special Rapporteur analysed the relationship between racism and poverty, but said that his analysis should not solely be focused on that relationship. Algeria also supported the recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur, and in particular, the call made for all States who had not done so to publicly support the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference.
SULTAN M. AL-DOSARI (Qatar) said the report had been read with interest, and its content appreciated, particularly the analysis of the outcome of the Durban Review Conference and efforts by the international community to put an end to all contemporary forms of racism. His analysis on the links between ethnic groups and poverty was also of interest. The outcome of the Durban Review Conference had not been particularly satisfying to Qatar, as it fell short of expectations, but would serve as a foundation stone for combating racism and all violations of fundamental freedoms, which were an obstacle. The Durban Declaration and Programme of Action contained a comprehensive framework for combating racism. The residue of colonialism and all forms of discrimination should be combated.
ALEXANDRA RUPPEN (Switzerland) said that the Special Rapporteur’s analysis of the Durban Review Conference outcome document was very useful. The Special Rapporteur intended to use that document as a programme and framework for carrying out his mandate. This approach would undoubtedly also allow other actors, including States, to approach this document in the most complete and adequate manner. Switzerland also thought that it was important to implement the various measures as soon as possible. The Special Rapporteur had also underlined that it was important to have criteria in order to evaluate progress in the fight against racism. Switzerland wanted to know what other criteria the Special Rapporteur had in mind on the than the collection of statistical data? How could the effectiveness of those steps be measured?
OMAR HILALE (Morocco) welcomed the efforts of the Special Rapporteur in the preparatory process leading up to the Durban Review Conference, in particular his call on all States to cooperate to ensure the success of the Conference. The Conference was truly the framework for combating racism, despite some groups who tried to undermine its success, particularly with regard to the links between freedom of expression and incitement to religious hatred. Efforts were needed at all levels to ensure the follow-up to the Conference. The Government was prepared to hold a regional seminar in Africa on the relationship between freedom of expression and incitement to religious hatred. In combating exclusion and marginalization, the King of Morocco had launched an initiative for human development, which was ambitious and aimed to reduce poverty and local and regional disparities. The dynamism of the initiative was complemented by the cooperation of regional organizations. Morocco was committed to continue efforts to ensure economic and social rights of its inhabitants.
ABDEL WAHAB HANI, of the Arab Commission for Human Rights, said the Special Rapporteur should invite former mandate holders to attend presentations of the reports they had provided. The report was interesting, as well as its structure, which covered a range of issues. Progress made in the United States to combat racism was welcome, and the United States should implement the recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur. However, the lack of a recommendation that it ratify the 1969 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Convention on eliminating discrimination was a shame. In the light of the Durban Review Conference, the Special Rapporteur should dedicate a specific chapter of his annual report to discrimination in situations of foreign occupation, particularly colonial occupation, as that created aggravated institutional discrimination. The Special Rapporteur should also promote the universal ratification of international United Nations treaties, including UNESCO and International Labour Organization conventions on combating all forms of discrimination.
MAJID TRAMBOO, of International Human Rights Association of American Minorities, wanted to know what steps could be taken by the international community and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to put an end to the practice of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance that was suffered by those under occupation. It was hoped that the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference would be properly and effectively implemented. In that connection, what steps could civil society take in order to facilitate that? The people of Jammu and Kashmir were now officially subject to the longest territorial military dispute in modern history and had had United Nations peacekeepers there since 1949, some 60 years. The organization asked the Special Rapporteur pay particular attention to the case of Kashmir.
STEPHAN CICCOLI, of Commission to Study the Organization of Peace, said that the United Nations had been seized of the problem of racial discrimination for many decades. It was important to identify the root causes of racism as a form of social consciousness and its conversion into the practice or even the policy of racial discrimination. There were several problems around the world which had to be addressed. Many Western countries refused to acknowledge and address the Roma problem. The Sunni Muslim majority continued to persecute the Shia minority. The situation called for the Council to set up a deadline for stopping such practices and a special committee to monitor the progress on ending racial discrimination.
JEAN-PATRICK SANTORO, of the European Union of Public Relations, said racism and other forms of discrimination were characteristic of systems that were not grounded in democratic ideals, and the structures of State were designed to perpetuate the power of a particular ruling class identified by colour, ethnicity, race or religion. That evil was so insidious that it permeated even democratic societies, particularly those which still valued social and cultural norms. Eradication of discrimination was a slow and gradual process, for it required the disassembling of long-held beliefs and attitudes. Education, coupled with the right State policies, played a crucial role in modifying attitudes to make them consonant with the modern age. Those democracies which were making efforts to eliminate discrimination needed encouragement and support.
RONALD BARNES, of the Indian Council of South America, welcomed the Special Rapporteur’s recent visit to the United States. It was clear that his mandate did not include the impact of colonialism. The Council did not permit this. The Indian Council raised the issue of police attacks on indigenous peoples in Peru, as well as the situation of indigenous peoples in Alaska and Hawaii, and said that colonialism had to be addressed. The report of the Special Rapporteur was a waste of time for the indigenous peoples.
GITHU MUIGAI, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in concluding remarks, thanked all the participants who had commented on the report and their encouragement and support for his mandate. He appreciated that the majority acknowledged that he had only recently taken over the mandate. He paid homage to his predecessor for his reports on the United States and Mauritania. He was committed and hoped to see a results-oriented dialogue with the Council and placed himself at the service of the Council and Member States to facilitate that dialogue. On the issue of incitement of religious hatred and freedom of expression, religious freedom was a fundamental human right, and the exercise of that right by groups was fundamental to all of societies. The incitement of religious hatred was a violation of international law and thus should be illegal in all national laws. Freedom of expression was also a fundamental right and should only be restricted in the most limited sense in order to maintain the public good. The intersection of the right to freedom of expression and religious freedom was complex. He felt that that issue should be kept under constant review. The Durban Review Conference and the outcome document provided a platform in which that dialogue could be continued and he was committed to being a part of that dialogue.
On the measures he intended to take to strengthen the follow-up mechanism, Mr. Muigai said that that he envisaged increased cooperation between his mandate and other mechanisms, such as the expert on minority rights, the expert on poverty and the Committee on Economic, Cultural and Social rights. He hoped that progress achieved through that collaboration could provide concrete measures as to how to address the question further. Clear legal and administrative measures also had to be adopted in every country, including affirmative action in order to address historical injustices, and continued monitoring and follow-up mechanisms were necessary. He hoped that each country would seriously consider that and would cooperate in that regard. On genocide, early warning mechanisms needed to be strengthened, and the international community needed to be able to intervene early enough to avoid the loss of life. With regard to the comment made on caste-based systems and the scope of his mandate, he said general recommendation 32 of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination stated that that type of discrimination fell under the purview of the Convention as a form of racism. In conclusion, he stressed that without the collection of disaggregated data, policies could not be developed based on concrete scientific terms.
General Debate on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Forms of Intolerance, Follow-Up and Implementation of Durban Declaration
GITHU MUIGAI (Cuba), speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, said at the latest summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), held in September 2006, the heads of State and Government of member States had reaffirmed once again their condemnation of all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, and expressed dismay at instances of religious and cultural prejudices, misunderstanding, intolerance and discrimination on the basis of religion or beliefs, and had called for full respect of cultural and religious diversity. The World Conference held in Durban in 2001 had become a milestone in the struggle for equal rights among all human beings, and the effective implementation of the Durban agreements posed a major challenge. The Durban Declaration and Programme of Action was the instructive document that constituted a solid foundation for the struggle against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. The Non-Aligned Movement recognized the ongoing progress made by States at the national, regional and international levels on the comprehensive follow-up to the Durban Conference and the effective implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. However, there was still a lot to be done.
TOMAS HUSAK (Czech Republic), on behalf of the European Union, said that fighting racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance remained a priority on the agenda of the European Union and all its Member States. No country was spared that scourge and no country could claim a full victory in the struggle against it. Over the years, while racism and related intolerance had taken on different forms, the danger remained the same. There could be no categorization of more or less dangerous manifestation of those phenomena, as they all created divides within societies and they all bore an inherent danger of escalation into violence and other deplorable acts. Therefore, they had to reject and fight all forms of racism and related tolerances with the same vigour. The European Union also recalled the invaluable input of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in this field. It was frequently the NGOs with their devoted staff who could best reach out to those addressed by Government-designed anti-discrimination policies and get the message to the grass-roots level.
ALEXEY AKZHIGITOV (Russian Federation) said that the Durban Review Conference had been a positive development and the outcome document had been adopted by consensus. The 141 Member States which had taken part in the Conference had made it a forum for the international community to address racism. As the international community tackled racism and its new contemporary forms, new measures had to be considered. Measures taken to fight against racism had to be implemented at the national, international, regional levels. The outcome document of the Durban Review provided a basis and very good platform for Member States to look to for the establishment of national policies in combating racism. States that had not taken part in the Conference were mistaken in their approach. Combating the plague of racism was something that everyone should be a part of. Furthermore, the Russian Federation was satisfied that the outcome document dealt with ways to combat new contemporary forms of racism, such as Christianophobia and neo-Nazism.
EMIN ASTANAOV (Azerbaijan) said the Durban Review Conference was not an end of the efforts aimed at fighting racism, but rather a new phase to defeat that scourge. There was great misinformation around the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. Azerbaijan welcomed the outcome Document of the Durban Review Conference, which reaffirmed the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, and referred to addressing all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in all spheres of life and in all parts of the world including those under foreign occupation. All States, regardless of their participation in that Conference, should take effective measures to translate the provisions of the outcome document adopted by consensus into action. The suggestion to set up an International Observatory on Racism was supported. Azerbaijan had already submitted its fifth and sixth periodic reports to the Committee on Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Azerbaijan was committed to combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.
IFEANYI E. NWOSU (Nigeria) applauded the successful outcome of the Durban Review Conference held in April. The Conference had presented an opportunity and the momentum to redress the pains of the past as well as present forms of discrimination in all its varied and vicious forms. All States should articulate the political will and resources towards implementing the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action and the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference. The international community should learn to accommodate one another's viewed and opinions – that helped to create peace, and peace was a prerequisite for democracy. Nigeria looked forward to the implementation of the outcome document aimed at addressing racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance so that together the international community could create a global democratic system.
ALEXANDRA RUPPEN (Switzerland) said that the Durban Review Conference had been an imperative step on the path toward eradicating of racism and discrimination. The adopted document reaffirmed fundamental principles, such as the freedom of expression. Switzerland would follow actively the discussion and would take part in them. Since the Durban Conference in September 2001, progress in the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance had been achieved. The success had, however, not eradicated racism. Countries had to implement measures in the fight against racism and formulate concrete political goals and tangible action.
HA WIE-YOUNG (Republic of Korea) said the Durban Review Conference had marked a valuable opportunity to reaffirm that the international community remained resolved to fight racism. Despite a politicized incident, which regrettably had jeopardized the credibility of the Conference, consensus had been achieved on the outcome document, which conveyed a universally valid message that the international community would not tolerate racism. It was also noteworthy that that document struck a delicate balance between exercising the freedom of expression and taking a responsibility for its consequences. That achievement had been possible thanks to the spirit of tolerance and reconciliation shown by the participants. The question now was whether there was a genuine will to put into practice the outcome document. Domestic implementation of the document by each Government was of primary importance. Furthermore, there was a need to further discuss the ways and means to improve the efficiency of the intergovernmental working group and to ensure better synergy with other mechanisms avoiding duplication and redundancy.
MARK J. CASSAYRE (United States) said the United States was committed to pursuing the elimination of racial discrimination at home and abroad, and had struggled to overcome racist beliefs. Today it was a multi-ethnic, multi-racial democracy. Many challenges remained, and the United States was committed to intensifying its efforts to ensure that civil rights were protected, including in times of economic distress. The United States was committed to work with other States who were working to combat racism and racial stereotyping. The United Nations should continue to address the matter of racism and discrimination. It was with great regret that the United States had not joined in the recent Durban Review Conference, and it was grateful to those States who had worked to focus the Conference on the global fight against racism. The United States would continue to work in all United Nations forums to combat bigotry, and the United Nations Member States should work together constructively in that regard.
SAMAH ATOUT (Palestine) noted that in 2001 the international community had decided to come together to fight racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, establishing the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. Eight years later, despite the good will of all signatories, the issues tackled were still a reality throughout the world, particularly the Middle East. The Occupying Power practiced racism against the Palestinian minority, who suffered from multiple forms of discrimination and segregation. On top of that, Israel never tried to integrate or assimilate the Palestinian people, treating them as second-class citizens and turning their lives to hell. The strict restrictions on the movements of Palestinian people constituted grave violations of the right to be free from discrimination. The goals of the Durban Review Conference needed to be determined, and a new foundation for the fight against racism throughout the world determined. The international community as a whole should have committed itself to the success of the Durban Review Conference, but that was sadly not the case. The United Nations and the international community should be able to ensure the follow-up on the ground of both Conferences.
WALID ABU-HAYA (Israel) said that that racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance were some of the things that had plagued mankind since the dawn of history. The outcome of the Durban Review Conference outlined the continuity of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. Israel was mentioned to the exclusion of others in the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. The document claimed that the Palestinians were victims of racism. And yet some countries committed some of the most flagrant violations against their own people. Although the Durban Review Conference did not mention this, the Jewish people had suffered for decades, but the Jewish State would be a partner to combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.
For use of the information media; not an official record
HRC09090E