COMMITTEE ON THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION CONSIDERS THE REPORT OF UKRAINE

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today concluded its consideration of the combined twenty-second and twenty-third periodic report of Ukraine on its implementation of the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Introducing the report, Tamara Mazur, Deputy Minister of Culture of Ukraine, said that Ukraine was at a very important stage of the reforms in the area of human rights and its most important mission was the proper implementation of the relevant legislation, in particular that related to combatting racial discrimination and intolerance. Russia’s temporary occupation of Crimea and its aggression in other regions of Ukraine had led to the deterioration of the protection of the rights of Crimean Tatars, ethnic Ukrainians and others; the treatment by Russia could only be defined as racial discrimination.

Also introducing the report, Iryna Strashnenko, Head of Department, Ministry of Culture, said that the 2012 anti-discrimination law provided a generalized definition of discrimination and clear definitions of its key forms, and established a non-exclusive list of grounds on which discrimination was prohibited. Concrete measures to combat discrimination were contained in the National Strategy for Human Rights and its Action Plan to 2020. The National Point of Contact on Combatting Hate Crimes, and the Unit for combatting radical groups and criminal organizations were created within the police to counter intolerance and racial discrimination, and preventive police work was ongoing with the leaders and participants of radical youth organizations. Ukraine was harmonizing its anti-discrimination laws with European and international standards, and in 2015 it improved the legislation regulating the status of refugees.

Committee Experts expressed appreciation for Ukraine’s honouring of its reporting obligations in spite of the difficult times the country was going through and the broadening of the crisis in March 2014 with the secession of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea from Ukraine and the armed conflict in eastern Ukraine. They took positive note of the legal and policy measures taken to combat discrimination, including the adoption in 2012 of the Discrimination Act and several plans of action to address various manifestations of racism, xenophobia and religious intolerance, but were concerned that the prosecution tended to downplay charges and prosecuted hate crimes as hooliganism. The law which raised maximum sentences for crimes on the grounds of racial, national or religious discrimination was not effectively put in place and the practice of down-sizing of the offences was often the rule. The decrease in the number of reported hate crimes was not a necessarily positive phenomenon as it could indicate that victims encountered different obstacles in reporting the crimes, including administrative, financial, or linguistic obstacles.

Experts further remarked that the 2012 Language Act was consistent with the provisions of the Convention as it promoted and recognized international standards on the rights of minorities to use their respective languages. The Act had expanded the area of use of Russian and other minority languages and had sparked protests in the country; the 2014 bill repealing the law had not been signed into the law and Experts noted that this was an unhealthy situation where language became a great divide. Experts commended measures taken to protect the Roma and promote their integration into society, but were concerned about the continued high levels of violence and racially motivated acts against Roma, lack of education among them and insufficient resources provided for the implementation of the Roma Strategy 2020.

In concluding remarks, Yeung Kam John Yeung Sik Yuen, Committee Expert and Rapporteur for Ukraine, noted with appreciation that the delegation answered all questions, including embarrassing ones, with honesty and candour. The issues raised in the discussion would make up part of the concluding observations, jointly prepared by all Committee Experts.

Ms. Mazur reiterated Ukraine’s commitment to take further steps to eliminate racial discrimination in the backdrop of tremendous challenges it was facing as a result of actions of Russia and its proxies.

The delegation of Ukraine included representatives of the Ministry of Culture, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Social Policy, National Police, State Migration Service, and the Permanent Mission of Ukraine to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

Live webcast of country reviews is available at http://www.treatybodywebcast.org.

The Committee will reconvene in public on Monday, 15 August at 10 a.m., to hear from non-governmental organizations from Sri Lanka and Pakistan, whose reports the Committee will consider next week.

Report

The combined twenty-second and twenty-third periodic report of Ukraine can be read here: CERD/C/UKR/22-23.

Presentation of the Report

TAMARA MAZUR, Deputy Minister of Culture of Ukraine, said that Ukraine was at a very important stage of the reforms in the area of human rights and its most important mission was the proper implementation of the relevant legislation, in particular that related to combatting racial discrimination and intolerance. Russia’s temporary occupation of Crimea and its aggression in other regions of Ukraine had led to the deterioration of the protection of the rights of Crimean Tatars, ethnic Ukrainians and others. Russia was ill-treating those minority communities in a manner that could be defined as racial discrimination; this was well documented and publicised in a number of reports by the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Council of Europe, and others.

IRYNA STRASHNENKO, Head of Department, Ministry of Culture, also in the introduction of the report, said that the 2012 law “On Principles of Prevention and Combatting Discrimination in Ukraine” provided a generalized definition of discrimination and clear definitions of its key forms. It prohibited any form of discrimination against an open list of individual and group grounds and thus established a non-exclusive list of grounds on which discrimination was prohibited. At the end of 2015 Ukraine had adopted its National Strategy for Human Rights and the Action Plan for its implementation up to 2020, which contained clear measures, indicators and responsible agencies. It contained separate sections on preventing and combatting discrimination, ensuring the rights of indigenous peoples and national minorities, and protecting the rights of internally displaced persons, which included a number of strategic directions and actions.

In March 2014, Ukraine had decided to establish the Institute of the Government Commissioner for Ethnic and National Policy and to launch the Inter-ethnic Harmony Council; in 2016, in order to strengthen the institutional capacity in the field of ethnic and national policy, the functions of the Government Commissioner had been transferred to the Ministry of Culture. Representatives of national communities were actively involved in public and political life. The post of President of the Commission on the Crimean Tatars had been created to strengthen the implementation of the constitutional rights of this community. To counter intolerance and racial discrimination, Ukraine had created within the National Police, the National Point of Contact on Combatting Hate Crimes, and the Unit for Combatting Radical Groups and Criminal Organizations, while preventive police work was ongoing with the leaders and participants of radical youth organizations.

Ukraine was taking active measures to implement the Strategy of Actions in the field of preventing and combatting discrimination 2014-2017, under which measures were being undertaken to harmonize national laws in the field of non-discrimination with European and international standards. While the broad rights of citizens to freedom of association were guaranteed, the creation and activity of civil unions or political parties aimed at inciting ethnic, racial or religious hatred was prohibited by law. The National Police regularly monitored the Internet, television and printed media to identify potential problems in inter-ethnic relations.

Over the past year, the legislation regulating the status of refugees had been improved, with a particular attention to the prohibition of expulsion or compulsory return, and the Action Plan on the integration of refugees and persons who needed additional protection into Ukrainian society to 2020 had been adopted. There were four temporary accommodation centres in the country, one in Odessa, two in Transcarpathian region and one in Kyiv region, and Ukraine had a well-developed system of social allowances which granted State assistance to foreigners and stateless persons who permanently resided in Ukraine, and recognized refugees and persons in need of additional protection.

The issue of Roma rights was under consideration by the Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights and several measures were being taken to ensure the integration of the Roma minority into society, including through the adoption of the Roadmap of Security and Integration of the Roma minority until 2020 and its Action Plan. The issue of identity documents for Roma was being gradually resolved: over the past two years, 4,400 Roma had received Ukrainian passports and measures were being taken to facilitate the reissuing of passports to Roma moving from occupied territories and regions where anti-terrorist activities were taking place. During 2014-2015, important steps had been taken toward legislative regulation of the rights and freedoms of Crimean Tatars and persons deported on ethnic grounds by the past Soviet regime. The 2014 Parliamentary resolution guaranteed the preservation and development of the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identity of the Crimean Tatar people as an indigenous people and as any other national minority of Ukraine. Following this, the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people was recognized as an executive body of the Kurultai of the Crimean Tatar people, and the Kurultai itself as their highest representative body.

Questions from the Committee Experts

YEUNG KAM JOHN YEUNG SIK YUEN, Committee Expert and Rapporteur for Ukraine, expressed appreciation for Ukraine’s honouring of its reporting obligations in spite of the difficult times the country was going through and the broadening of the crisis in March 2014 when the Autonomous Republic of Crimea had seceded from Ukraine, followed by the armed conflict in eastern Ukraine known as Donbass. The United Nations had adopted a clear position on Crimea, which was consistent with Resolution 68/262 on the Territorial Integrity of Ukraine adopted by the General Assembly on 27 March 2014, calling on all States not to recognize the referendum held in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the City of Sevastopol on 16 March 2014. The Rapporteur remarked that, considering the new situation in the country, the Ukrainian periodic report which covered the period from January 2010 to December 2013 was outdated, unreal, and incomplete and therefore recommended that the Committee engaged with the delegation on the basis of the more recent events.

On the legal and institutional framework for the implementation of the Convention, the Country Rapporteur recognized the adoption of a number of legislative measures, including the Act on the Principles of Preventing and Combatting Discrimination (the Discrimination Act) in 2012, which contained an open-ended list of prohibited grounds but omitted certain grounds well recognized under international human rights law: national origin and descent. The law had been amended in 2014 to seemingly align it with international standards. Several Plans of Action and Policy Frameworks had been adopted to combat manifestations of racism, xenophobia and religious intolerance, particularly with respect to migrants: there was a plan of action on combatting manifestations of xenophobia and racial and ethnic discrimination, and another to foster community strength and tolerance among the population. The Country Rapporteur commended the ascension to the 1954 Convention on the status of Stateless Persons and the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness and noted the need to improve the effective protection safeguards to ensure that all asylum seekers had access to fair and efficient asylum procedures without discrimination.

The post of the Ukrainian Parliamentary Human Rights Commissioner was an important Constitutional post, which had 10 very wide powers. In 2013, the Commissioner had issued an ordinance to establish a strategy for preventing and combatting discrimination in Ukraine for the period 2014-2017. During the period 2010-2013 the Commissioner had received 13,214 communications on matters involving equality and non-discrimination issues. There was a perception that prosecution tended to downplay charges and prosecuted hate crimes as hooliganism – could the delegation report on the number of cases lodged for hate crimes, the number of convictions and the sentences passed?

Ukraine had passed in 2012 the Language Act which governed the use of languages in Ukraine. Ukrainian was the official language but the use of a minority language was permitted in local councils where the minority represented at least 10 per cent of the local population. The law had expanded the sphere of the use of Russian and other minority languages, but this had triggered protests in Kyiv and other cities. The Act appeared to be consistent with the provisions of the Convention as it promoted and recognized international standards on the rights of minorities to use their respective languages and have those duly promoted and protected. Following the passing of the Act, Russian had within weeks been declared as a regional language in several southern and eastern oblasts and cities. In February 2014, a bill repealing the law had been approved by Parliament, but had not been signed into the law by the acting President who had ordered a new draft law. This was an unhealthy situation where language became a great divide.

While commending Ukraine for the adoption of the 2009 law which raised maximum sentences for crimes committed on the grounds of racial, national or religious discrimination, the Rapporteur noted that the law had not been effectively put into practice and that down-sizing of the offences was often the rule. Hate crime was included in the Criminal Code (article 161) but its interpretation appeared to be constrained. There were numerous reports of racial discrimination in the country, including against people of African descent and dark skinned persons. The Country Rapporteur noted the case in Uzhgorod, where the local aqua park had denied access to university students from India and Nigeria, and the pool’s owner, a former mayor and a deputy in the Supreme Parliament, had explained the decision in a thoroughly offensive and racist language. What administrative or criminal actions had been taken against this high profile person? There were reports of harassment by the Police against black people who were profiled as drug dealers, and who also suffered discrimination in renting homes. Furthermore, the Housing Code of Ukraine restricted the right to social housing to citizens, which was not only discrimination based on citizenship but indirectly discriminated against Roma who often lacked personal documentation and did not have citizenship.

Article 161 of the Criminal Code prohibited deliberate actions aimed at inciting national, racial or religious enmity and hatred, but according to some reports, those were difficult to enforce: the procedure was said to be complicated and time consuming, and the violation had to take place during a public event when the accused person had to incite against someone or something. It was also difficult to prove that a crime had been committed on the grounds of ethnicity and had not been an act of hooliganism or similar misconduct. Could the delegation confirm that courts indeed held such a restrictive view of this article, was there a legally expressed opinion to that effect by a court of law? If so, what corrective measures were being taken to adopt appropriate legislation to punish hate crimes with all the rigours of the law?

Turning to avenues of complaints in discrimination cases, the Country Rapporteur noted that the 2012 Discrimination Act had six avenues of complaint, and noted that of those, only one was identifiable – the Parliamentary Human Rights Commissioner. What authorities and bodies received complaints, what were differences between them and what were their respective powers? What was the outcome of the charges brought in March 2012 against the organization “Straight Road” for distributing a pamphlet inciting religious enmity and hate? The 2012 Code of Criminal Procedure established a unified system for reporting criminal offences under the responsibility of the authority of the procurator – would this unified system be applicable for discrimination cases as well? The delegation was asked about serious persistent reports of lack of professionalism, bias, xenophobia and non-respect of basic human rights of refugees and asylum seekers by the officers of the State Migration Services?

The Country Rapporteur commended Ukraine for the measures taken to protect the Roma and promote their integration into society, in particular the Presidential Decree of 2013 on the Roma Strategy 2020, the Education Act and the General Secondary Education Act, and others. Still, weaknesses remained and Roma suffered violence and racially motivated acts against them, as individuals and as a community. They lacked access to education: one in five had no education, one in four could not read or write in Ukrainian, and 12 per cent could not understand Ukrainian. The Roma lacked identification papers and had difficulties in obtaining them, and funds were lacking to implement programmes for the Roma, including the Roma Strategy 2020.

The human rights situation had deteriorated after the breaking away of Crimea from Ukraine and the armed conflict in Donbass, and a new legal framework had been imposed which restricted civil liberties. In April this year, the activities of the Crimean Tatar Mejlis had been banned after the Mejlis had been declared an extremist organization, and the police had targeted members of the Crimean Tatar community. Following the annexation of Crimea, the Crimean Tatar community in mainland Ukraine had been cut off from its traditional culture-cum-educational system established in Crimea; what steps were being taken to revive those facilities in the mainland to ensure that the national identity of Crimean Tatars was adequately supported?

The Country Rapporteur recalled the conclusions in the fourteenth report by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights that only the full implementation of the two Minsk Agreements would result in conditions allowing due respect for international human rights norms. In that respect, 20 recommendations had been addressed to the Ukrainian Government, 13 to all the parties involved in the hostilities in Donetsk and Luhansk regions, and 12 to the de facto authorities of Crimea and Russia.

A Committee Expert took up the issue of education and training on racism and racial discrimination, and asked about the use of the Internet to ensure greater coverage and whether the activities addressed discrimination against people of African descent. Were there statistics available about activities of political parties related to racism and racial discrimination, what measures had been taken and which punishments had been meted out? What was the policy on ethnic diversity within the national police and what was the participation of ethnic groups in the highest levels of the police?

The delegation was asked about the plans to commemorate the International Decade of People of African Descent, as a way to address manifestations of racism against people of African origin; to clarify the situation related to the mass murder of Poles in Volhynia in 1943 and the exchange of information between Ukraine and Poland in that regard; and the participation of non-governmental organizations in the drafting of the report and the time made available for consultations on the draft report.

Experts also asked the delegation to provide statistics and data on acts of incitement to hatred in the media, including which media and the sanctions delivered; on cases of discrimination on racial grounds in employment and sports; and on Roma children and children of other ethnic groups in schools.

An Expert was struck by the statement in the report that “no ethnic, national or cultural conflicts had occurred in Ukraine since it became independent”, and wondered how was it possible that everything was fine before the Russian aggression and how the situation had dramatically changed following the aggression, with terrorist groups operating in the east of the country. What were the defects of the Language Act and what had been done to remedy its negative effects? Did Crimean Tatars consider themselves to be indigenous or tribal peoples?

Without the current information on the size of the Roma population and the previous year’s allocation for the Roma, it was difficult to assess whether the situation of the Roma was progressing or regressing in Ukraine. About 40 per cent of the students at the National Medical University were from African countries, and there were also some 2,000 Asians at the same school; there were reports about verbal discrimination against those students and the delegation was asked about action taken to address this situation. What effective action was being taken to address hate speech and violence at football matches?

Another Expert acknowledged the access to State services provided to refugees and persons in need of additional protection and asked about the procedure through which asylum seekers could obtain the status of refugee, and the status of a person in need of special protection. There was discrimination against non-citizens and stateless persons, particularly in employment as they could not access jobs in the government or the judiciary. What were the reasons for creating those obstacles? What were the results of the implementation of the Roma Integration Strategy, how could the plan improve the situation of Roma in the country, and what concrete suggestions for the improvement of the strategy were made by non-governmental organizations? What effective measures could be put in place to prevent, address and eliminate discrimination against Roma?

YEUNG KAM JOHN YEUNG SIK YUEN, Committee Expert and Rapporteur for Ukraine, asked for disaggregated population data, especially with regard to Roma, ethnic and national minorities, and refugees. What measures was the State taking to remedy the very low rate of prosecutions for discrimination, and to protect minorities from discrimination? Measures had been taken to control the movement of the population across the border with Crimea, and foreigners could enter or exit Crimea only through designated points and only if they possessed identity documents issued by Ukraine. Such measures negatively impacted the movement of non-nationals and could be considered discriminatory. The situation was similar in Dunbass where such measures had been taken at lines of contact and where queues at checkpoints took 24 hours; people going in the fields to “answer the call of nature” sometimes stepped on landmines, while shelling of checkpoints had been reported as well. It seemed that the authorities were rather complacent about this situation.

Another Expert asked whether cultural diversity of the Roma living in modern Ukraine was respected?

ANASTASIA CRICKLEY, Committee Chairperson, recognized the differences and crossovers between the Council of Europe Framework Convention on the Protection of National Minorities and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Responses by the Delegation

Responding to questions and comments raised by the Committee Experts, a delegate explained that the Constitution allowed for banning of political parties and organizations which engaged in promoting war and hatred. There was a law governing this issue as well. At the moment, no political party had been banned on the grounds of violating the anti-discrimination law and no party had been denied registration on those grounds. Currently, 350 political parties had been registered in Ukraine.

Over the past two years, many steps had been taken to address the situation of Roma in Ukraine, the main one being the creation of the Inter-ministerial Working Group for the implementation of the Roma Integration Strategy. A total of 13 State ministries and 35 territorial authorities participated in the Working Group, as did representatives of Roma themselves, one of whom held the position of Deputy of the Working Group. There were many Roma organizations and associations in Ukraine, but there was no unity among them, and the work was ongoing to group some 30 organization into an association. An Expert group was being established which would work on issuing identification documents for Roma and would facilitate their access to social services.

With 25 Roma cultural and linguistic groups in the country, the variety and diversity of Roma cultural heritage was an important point which would be addressed in the Strategy. Roma organizations claimed that there were about 400,000 Roma in the country, and the plan was to organize seminars in various parts of the country to better understand the number of Roma and their cultural and socio-economic particularities. It was estimated that 90 per cent of the Roma population had identification documents. Almost 2,000 Roma children attended preschool in various regions, and 12,000 attended regular secondary school.

Any religious community in Ukraine had the rights to free religious expression, to exercise of religious identity and to change religious identity. The number of people belonging to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate was four time less than the number of people belonging to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate; people were free to change their belonging and subordination, and this was particularly the case following political declarations by the Moscow Orthodox Patriarchate on the situation in Ukraine.

Responding to questions concerning the number of representatives of ethnic minorities in the highest ranks of the police, it was explained that the applications to posts in the police did not contain a section on ethnicity. The head of the police was a Georgian, and among the ranks there were Armenians, Roma, and others. There were no legislative, administrative or practical restrictions or obstacles to the participation of minorities in the police force.

On the statistics on crime for the period from 1 January 2014 to 31 July 2016: the delegation said the police had registered 56 violations in 2014, 85 violations in 2015 and 42 violations in 2016, which had been related to racial, ethnic, religious or other intolerance. In 2014, there had been 37 violations of equality of citizens related to race, 10 related to attacks on religious buildings and six related to destruction of sacred or religious sites. In 2014, 52 individuals had been prosecuted, 16 individuals in 2015 and 31 persons in 2016. In terms of the police reform, a delegate explained that a completely new police force had been established in Ukraine and all new officers had to pass the training in equality and discrimination. Additionally, training activities on human rights and tolerance were being put in place.

The head of the delegation stressed that the problem between the east and west of Ukraine was mainly due to the aggression of a third State. She also clarified that Crimea had not seceded but had been annexed. The Mejlis of the Tatars had been dissolved and a number of disappearances of Tatars had been reported. The Ukrainian army was not using heavy artillery at present, unlike armed groups in the east. Unlike Russia, Ukraine had ratified the conventions on landmines and the use of inhumane weapons, and the head of the delegation noted that those munitions were used by the self-proclaimed republics of Donetsk and Luhansk. Ukraine was determined to protect the rights of national minorities, but their protection in the occupied territories was incumbent on the occupying power.

The police had taken steps to prevent violence during football matches, including checks to ensure that banners containing provocative or extremist language were not present. Referring to an incident whereby a black woman had been taken off a bus in the Zakarpattia region, a delegate explained that the reason was that she had failed to pay the fare. Article 161 of the Criminal Code provided for investigations into discriminatory acts to be undertaken only after the claim was filed by the victim; Indian and Nigerian students who had been denied access to the aqua park in 2015 had never filed a claim, therefore the incident had not been investigated. There was therefore no discrimination by the police on the basis of ethnic origin against persons filing claims of discrimination. Displays and brochures listing the crimes that could fall within the discrimination, and the penalties, were broadcast and published in a dozen languages.

The police was dealing with the conflict between the two Orthodox confessions in an objective manner, and was currently investigating 25 related incidents. Members of both communities were allowed to freely exercise their religion, and the police was doing its utmost to ensure the right to freedom of religion or belief of all people in Ukraine. The police was also investigating 161 crimes committed against Crimean Tatars in Crimea, including disappearances and murders of Tatars simply for expressing their support for Ukraine, torture, as well as allegations of torture and degrading treatment. The investigation had confirmed the measures undertaken in Crimea to prohibit the work of the Mejlis, with the aim of undermining the dignity of Crimean Tatars.

In 2008, Ukraine had adopted the law on the rights of refugees and those requiring additional protection, which had been drafted on the basis on international treaties, including the European Union Directives. The law had, for the first time, introduced the concept of additional protection; it had clearly defined legal terms, and described procedures for submitting requests for refugee status and additional protection. The definition of a refugee in the law fully corresponded to the definition contained in the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees. Ukraine continued to improve its legislation and had introduced amendments to the law in 2014, thus broadening the definition of a person requiring additional protection. Prior to the 2014 amendment, the definition had not covered foreigners or stateless persons fleeing their countries for fear of prosecution; today, the definition was fully aligned with the 1951 Convention and the European Union Directives. In 2015, 143 foreigners or stateless persons had applied for protection; many decisions granting refugee status had been issued and 118 persons had been recognized as persons requiring subsidiary protection. Today, there were 2,500 refugees and persons requiring additional protection. The countries of origin of refugees and asylum seekers were Afghanistan, Syria and Russia.

The rules of entry and exit to occupied and annexed territories of Ukraine were contained in the Decree of the Council of Ministers, which allowed for the movement of foreigners into those areas, and the delegation did not consider that this was an issue of concern.

Turning to the provisions of article 14 of the law on prevention of discrimination, a delegate said that complaints for discrimination and violations of rights could be filed through the Office of Ombudsman in Parliament, or through courts. Additionally, individuals could file complaints for discrimination and violation of rights with State bodies, and with superiors of individuals who they believed committed such acts. The Ministry of Justice provided free legal aid though 170 centres for legal assistance in legal and civil affairs for most disadvantaged groups, and more than 160 mobile centres through which legal aid was being provided by more than 2,000 lawyers. In 2105 there were more than 1,500 requests for legal aid, and more than 20,000 decisions to provide council for court proceedings had been made.

Education in Ukraine was free and mandatory, and guaranteed by the Constitution. There was no statistical data available on the number of Roma children out of school; in 2015, there were more than 21,000 children aged 6 to 18 who were out of schools and some of them were Roma. There were no formal requirements to present documents during inscription and lack of identity documents was not an obstacle to children attending school; this applied to internally displaced persons as well and procedures were in place regulating school inscription of children without documentation.

Ukrainian was an official language and additionally, Ukraine was focusing on multilingual education, with the support of other countries. Thanks to the activities taken in schools to raise awareness about racism and racial discrimination, there had been sharp decrease in the number of incidents recorded by the police. There were no Rusyns schools in the country, but should a request be made for teaching in that language, Ukraine would support it. In universities, in addition to the use of the official languages, courses were provided in Russian, Hungarian and Romanian. The new law on higher education gave greater autonomy to universities in the selection of courses and their focus at the moment was on English, Russian and German. Overall, university courses were taught in more than 40 languages; children in preschool were taught in nine languages, and those in school in seven languages. Ukraine had a good reputation for providing higher education to foreign students, and had seen a 15 per cent increase in the number of foreign students currently.

Ukraine had undertaken all measures and had provided resources to ensure that Crimean Tatars enjoyed their cultural rights in the mainland, including through strengthening the capacity of schools and cultural institutions in the areas where displaced persons lived, and supporting television programmes to bring objective information and to broadcast into the occupied areas to ensure access to objective information.

Ukraine realized the importance of addressing the painful events in Volhynia in 1943 and, while not wishing to politicize this issue, it focused on positive cooperation with Poland, which was Ukraine’s very important partner. Concerning the Rusyns ethnic group in Transcarpatia region, a delegate explained that although there were ethnic groups of the same name in other areas of Europe, the group that lived in Ukraine was culturally and historically distinct. Their ethnic and cultural identity was fully recognized in Ukraine. According to the 2001 census, 10,200 had self-declared as Rusyns, representing one per cent of the population of the region. Because of their low number and a very disperse way of living, they did not make 10 per cent in any of the communities and therefore, according to the State language policies, the language had not been declared a regional language. The language however was mentioned in the State language policy as one of the 70 languages which could be declared a regional language, provided the 10 per cent representation of the speakers in the region was fulfilled.

Ukraine would carefully study and develop the programme on marking of the International Decade of People of African Descent. The Language Act was working and was actual and any attempts to modify the law would be done in full consultation with minorities. On the recognition of the Crimean Tatars as indigenous peoples, a delegate said that there was a complete agreement within the country, the authorities and the Crimean Tatars themselves on the question, and that the law to this effect would be passed by the end of 2016. The law would be instrumental in ensuring the protection of the fundamental rights of Crimean Tatars in both Ukraine and occupied Crimea.

Questions from the Experts

YEUNG KAM JOHN YEUNG SIK YUEN, Committee Expert and Rapporteur for Ukraine, stressed the obligation of Ukraine to provide adequate conditions, including sanitary facilities, at the checkpoints on the line of contact, and to put in place an administrative procedure to reduce the waiting time from the current 24 hours. Turning to article 161 of the Criminal Code concerning hate crimes, the Rapporteur said that Ukraine should maintain the article which stipulated the requirement of “wilful action” for an act to qualify as hate crime. Referring to the incident of denied access to an aqua park to a Nigerian and Indian, the Expert stressed that the police had a national job to do and maintain the reputation of Ukraine. Even in the absence of a complaint by the victims, the police needed to take action against the high-profile person who had engaged in racist and hate speech. Concerning the appointment of the representative of Crimean Tatars in November 2015, the delegation was asked whether the person lived in Crimea and if so, whether the appointment put his life at risk.

It was reported that the number of reported hate crimes was decreasing, but that did not mean that there were less incidents of hate crime; it could mean that the victims did not have confidence in the complaint system and its effectiveness. It was up to the State and all its authorities – the police, the prosecution and the courts – to uphold the dignity of the system. If the system did not work, statistically there would be fewer crimes, but the country would be sitting on a hot potato.

Responding, the head of the delegation said that Crimea was a part of Ukraine and that the representative of Crimean Tatars was living in Crimea and was in fact persecuted by the occupying authorities. Another delegate confirmed that Ukraine did not intend to repeal article 161 of the Criminal Code and said that the issue at hand was that of special benefits or privileges on the basis of ethnicity.

A Committee Expert noted that in 2015 some 21,000 children were out of school and that the majority among them were Roma. The Expert asked for statistical data about the education of Roma and other minorities since 2000 and wondered what measures were being taken to improve their school attendance? The decrease in the number of reported hate crimes was not a necessarily positive phenomenon as it could indicate that there were all sorts of obstacles in reporting the crimes; what steps was Ukraine taking to ensure that victims of hate crimes did not encounter obstacles of administrative, financial, linguistic or any other nature in reporting the crimes? The delegation was also asked about affirmative action for minorities, reversal of burden of proof, and steps to address discrimination against Roma.

Responses by the Delegation

The general trend in the number of children out of school showed a reduction since 2000. The number of 21,000 children out of school at the moment was a general number and did not refer to Roma children only; it was understood that there were also other children who did not go to school but were not included in the figures. There were some issues related to school attendance which were gender specific, with some parents refusing to allow girls to continue schooling through basic secondary education, secondary education and higher education.

In comparison to previous years, when the “militsiya” had covered up hate crimes and aimed to present a picture of a wonderful society, the police today registered all complaints filed by citizens. There were absolutely no efforts by the police to cover up the crimes and it was important to say that the police enjoyed a high-level of trust by the public. On the reversal of burden of proof in hate crimes and crimes of discrimination, a delegate said that the justice system was based on the presumption of innocence and it was up to the prosecutor and investigating authorities to determine the guilt of the accused.

To date, 42 requests for the examination of allegations of discrimination in employment had been received. There was no statistical data on the nationality of internally displaced persons, but the available data demonstrated that 53 per cent of internally displaced persons were elderly, 13 per cent were children, 4.3 per cent were persons with disabilities and 29.7 per cent were persons of a working age; 64 per cent of the internally displaced persons were women and girls.

The law on combatting human trafficking was a relatively new law in Ukraine and it was expected that amendments would be introduced to other laws to step up the fight against the phenomenon and to better support the victims. All victims were properly identified; in 2015 there were 83 persons who had obtained the status of victims of trafficking, while 237 persons obtained such status by 11 August 2016. Public campaigns to combat begging by children were in place in several towns and the authorities and non-governmental organizations were working together on campaigns against trafficking and modern slavery.

Ukraine did not ban the mass media on the basis of language, but the media transmitting programmes with the participation of individuals that threatened the national security of Ukraine were banned, regardless of the language used.

Further Discussion

Committee Experts suggested that Ukraine should ensure that Rusyns had the possibility to self-identify and asked about intentions to put in place an inter-ministerial and inter-agency group to deal with issues of minorities and inter-ethnic harmony because the job was simply too much for one Ministry. There were huge differences that existed between the numbers of Roma in the country, from 40,000 to 400,000; at the same time, only 40,000 identity documents had been issued. Experts took note with satisfaction of the intention of Ukraine to draw the plan of action to commemorate the International Decade of People of African Descent and urged Ukraine to ensure the participation of people of African origin in this activity.

Responding to those and other questions, the delegation said that this year alone, there were 48 events at regional and local levels related to questions of inter-ethnic harmony, mutual understanding, and building consensus on a number of issues, including on harmonizing national legislation. The 2001 survey stated that 48,000 persons had self-identified as Roma and since then they and more had received identity documents. Ukraine was planning an exercise in cooperation with Roma associations in order to understand how many Roma there were in the country. Ukraine would carefully study the preparation of the programme of commemoration of the International Decade of People of African Descent and would consult with those communities in doing so.

Concluding Remarks

YEUNG KAM JOHN YEUNG SIK YUEN, Committee Expert and Rapporteur for Ukraine, thanked the delegation for having come all the way despite the difficulties and for respecting its reporting duties. The delegation answered all questions, including embarrassing ones, with honesty and candour. The issues raised in the discussion would make up part of the concluding observations, jointly prepared by all Committee Experts.

TAMARA MAZUR, Deputy Minister of Culture of Ukraine, reiterated the commitment of Ukraine to take further steps to eliminate racial discrimination in the backdrop of the tremendous challenges that it was facing as a result of actions of Russia and its proxies. It was hoped that the dialogue contributed to better understanding of the depth of challenges in the area of the elimination of racial discrimination in the country.

ANASTASIA CRICKLEY, Committee Chairperson, thanked the delegation and non-governmental organizations from Ukraine.




For use of the information media; not an official record

CERD16/020E