Experts of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Ask the Kingdom of the Netherlands about the National Framework for Tackling Racial Discrimination, Racial Profiling by Police Forces, and the Colonial Legacy of the Slave Trade
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today concluded its consideration of the combined twenty-second to twenty-fourth periodic report of the Kingdom of the Netherlands during which its Experts raised questions about the national framework for tackling racial discrimination, instances of racial profiling committed by police officers, and the Dutch colonial legacy and its role in the trans-Atlantic slave trade, among others.
Committee Experts noted the Netherlands’ formal commitment to racial equality; however, modern Dutch society could not be considered inherently inclusive, due to the fractured nature of Dutch national identity and belonging. Formal equality did not equate to material equality. As a result, the Committee Experts asked the delegation about the national framework for tackling discrimination and the allegations that the constitutional framework created a lopsided imbalance between citizens along racial lines leading to discrimination. How did the State party ensure that persons living in Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Maarten, Bonaire, St Eustatius and Saba were adequately represented, enjoyed sufficient autonomy and were able to take part in decision making?
Racial profiling was a common practice of Dutch police during traffic control, border stops and identity checks, Committee Experts said. Minority communities felt over-policed and under-served. They asked if there was a complaint mechanism for victims of racial profiling?
Was the Netherlands committed to amending the charter to finalise decolonisation of territories in Antilles in accordance with international law, and was it committed to providing monetary and other reparations to these islands as a result of violations committed during the colonial period? Committee Experts said the colonial history and the legacy of the Dutch role in the slave trade was not lodged with the past; people were living with these legacies now.
Responding to these questions and comments, the delegation of the Netherlands noted that the legal definition of discrimination derived from, and was in full conformity with, article 1 of the Convention. The public prosecution had discrimination guidelines concerning, for instance, offences such as assault when it was committed with a discriminatory motive. A penalty increase of up to 100 per cent was available to the prosecution in these cases. Municipal anti-discrimination services did not have a supervisory body because the supervision was conducted by provinces. This was not always effective, which was the reason a different system was being considered.
Racial profiling must be prevented, the delegation said. Police took measures against this in policy, such as the multi-annual 2016 Power of Difference programme. One priority was the operational framework for proactive police checks, describing the way that police should interact with members of the public. The existing MEOS app only made information available to policemen in the street, rather than creating new data; apps were designed to specifically avoid racial profiling. In Sint Maarten, learning about profiling was a key component of the training of law enforcement officials in the country.
The statutes governing the relationship between the Netherlands and the other parts of the Kingdom were not up for reform, the delegation said. The Prime Minister of the Netherlands had decided not to apologise for the Dutch role in the trans-Atlantic slave trade, expressing regret instead. A new Government may decide differently. Some internal Dutch regions were examining their particular roles in the slave trade and ways they could confront this. The advisory board of the dialogue on slavery had recommended a parliamentary act recognising the crime of slave trade, but this would have to be decided by a new Government.
Carsten Herstel, Director General for Social Security and Integration at the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment of the Netherlands, noted that the Netherlands had a highly diverse society, with differences between groups with and without a migration background decreasing. At the same time discrimination and exclusion were a hard reality and a source of injustice and inequality in the lives of many. At the request of the Government, an advisory committee on dialogue concerning slavery had delivered a report on the Netherlands’ slavery past and its continuing impact on contemporary society. The focus of the Dutch Government was not only on the European part of the Netherlands, but also on its Caribbean parts: the islands of Bonaire, Saba and Statia, where in 2019 the Government had adopted a social minimum benchmark, giving direction to national and local governments to combat poverty and improve people’s lives.
Olivia Trimon-Croes, Deputy Director, Department of Foreign Affairs of Aruba, noted that while Aruba was a small country within the Kingdom of the Netherlands, historically, the Aruban society had been formed by the combination of migration waves from all over the world, which had resulted in the contemporary diverse community.
Joëlle de Jong-Mercelina, Policy Director at the Ministry of Justice of Curaçao, stated that the Government was committed to promoting inclusion, including via a national platform for the International Decade for People of African Descent, consisting of both governmental organizations and civil society, which had organised several activities relating to the Decade. The celebration of Sinterklaas and Black Pete caused pain to African descendants and the Government had stopped subsidising it.
Patrice Gumbs, Interim Director, Department of Foreign Relations of Sint Maarten, highlighted that in honour of the International Decade for People of African Descent, the Government had undertaken several initiatives, including submitting documentation commemorating the route to freedom of enslaved African persons to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s Memory of the World Committee documentation, and cosponsoring exhibits of art and poetry celebrating the links between African and Caribbean culture.
In his concluding remarks, Silvio Albuquerque, Committee Member and Country Rapporteur for the Netherlands, expressed his gratitude to members of the delegation for their participation. He noted that racism and awareness of racism were related, but distinct.
Carsten Herstel, Director General for Social Security and Integration at the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment of the Netherlands, welcomed the mirror that this discussion held up to the Netherlands, reiterating the tipping point that it was facing in relation to racism.
Li Yanduan, Chair of the Committee on the Elimination of the Racial Discrimination, thanked the delegation for their participation.
The delegation of the Netherlands consisted of representatives of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, Ministry of Interior and Kingdom Relations, Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, Ministry of Justice and Security, and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment.
The delegation of Aruba consisted of representatives of the Department of Foreign Affairs of Aruba, Department of Social Affairs and Department of Education.
The delegation of Curaçao consisted of representatives of the Ministry of Justice, and the Directorate of Foreign Relations.
The delegation of Sint Maarten consisted of a representative of the Department of Foreign Relations.
Documents relating to the Committee’s work, including reports submitted by States parties, are available on the session’s webpage.
The webcast of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here.
The Committee will next meet in public on Wednesday, 25 August at 5 p.m. to close its one hundred and fourth session.
Report
The Committee has before it the combined twenty-second to twenty-fourth periodic report of the Netherlands (CERD/C/NLD/22-24).
Presentation of the Report
CARSTEN HERSTEL, Director General for Social Security and Integration at the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment of the Netherlands, noted that the Netherlands had a highly diverse society, with differences between groups with and without a migration background decreasing. At the same time, discrimination and exclusion were a hard reality and a source of injustice and inequality in the lives of many. The Black Lives Matter demonstrations in 2020, the calls for change coming from parliament and society, and the report by the Parliamentary Committee on Childcare Benefit entitled ‘Unprecedented Injustice’, had brought the country to a tipping point. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on racism had seen and praised the statutory framework and the dedication with which social equality was pursued in the Netherlands. Mr. Herstel said that the country’s laws, policies and dedication were not always sufficient. This was why the Netherlands would be appointing a National Anti-discrimination and Anti-racism Coordinator.
The Government aimed to prevent and combat discrimination on all legally recognised grounds and had increased its focus on intersecting forms of discrimination that people experienced. Specific manifestations of discrimination on the grounds of origin, skin colour and religion, anti-Muslim discrimination,
Anti-Semitism, and discrimination against Roma, Sinti and Travellers, were a focus. The United Nations Decade for People of African Descent had heightened attention to anti-black racism. At the request of the Government, an advisory committee on dialogue concerning slavery had delivered a report on the Netherlands’ slavery past and its continuing impact on contemporary society. The focus of the Dutch Government was not only on the European part of the Netherlands, but also on its Caribbean parts: the islands of Bonaire, Saba and Statia, where in 2019 the Government had adopted a social minimum benchmark, giving direction to national and local governments to combat poverty and improve people’s lives.
OLIVIA TRIMON-CROES, Deputy Director, Department of Foreign Affairs of Aruba, noted that while Aruba was a small country within the Kingdom of the Netherlands, historically, the Aruban society had been formed by the combination of migration waves from all over the world, which had resulted in the contemporary diverse community. About a third of the Aruban population had a migration background from no less than 133 different countries of origin. An important factor contributing to the integration in society was the language of Papiamento, the most spoken language at home. Along with Dutch, it was an official language. The Department of Culture in Aruba, in cooperation with stakeholders, promoted Papiamento through literature and other forms of expression, especially for children and youngsters. COVID-19 presented many challenges; the Government had introduced emergency relief programmes and started a successful vaccination programme for all, regardless of migration status.
JOËLLE DE JONG-MERCELINA, Policy Director, Ministry of Justice of Curaçao, stated that racial discrimination was not tolerated in Curaçao. Both Curaçao’s Constitution and the Criminal Code prohibited discrimination. The Constitution stated that all persons must be treated equally in similar circumstances. Complaints of racial discrimination could be lodged with the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the Office of the Ombudsman, with only one case filed in the past five years. The Government was committed to promoting inclusion, including via a national platform for the International Decade for People of African Descent, consisting of both governmental organizations and civil society, which had organised several activities relating to the Decade. The celebration of Sinterklaas and Black Pete caused pain to African descendants and the Government had stopped subsidising it. Apart from the COVID-19 pandemic, the Government had also been recently dealing with the socio-economic impact of the influx of migrants from Venezuela.
PATRICE GUMBS, Interim Director, Department of Foreign Relations of Sint Maarten, highlighted that with an estimated population of 65,000 people and over 117 different nationalities, Sint Maarten was a 16 square-mile, ethnically diverse part of Saint Martin, a 37 square-mile island which was an overseas collectivity of France. The different racial, ethnic, and national groups were encouraged to partake in national parades and manifestations to highlight and dignify the multifaceted Sint Maarten identity. In honour of the International Decade for People of African Descent, the Government had undertaken several initiatives, including submitting documentation commemorating the route to freedom of enslaved African persons to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s Memory of the World Committee documentation, and cosponsoring exhibits of art and poetry celebrating the links between African and Caribbean culture. Hurricanes Irma and Maria in 2017 as well as the COVID-19 pandemic had severely impacted the socio-economic fabric of Sint Maarten.
Questions by the Country Rapporteur, Members of the Taskforce for the Netherlands, and the Rapporteur for Follow-up
SILVIO ALBUQUERQUE, Committee Member and Country Rapporteur for the Netherlands, noted the Netherlands’ formal commitment to racial equality. However, modern Dutch society could not be considered inherently inclusive, due to the fractured nature of Dutch national identity and belonging. Formal equality did not equate to material equality.
Regarding the national framework for tackling discrimination, had the State incorporated the legal definition of racial discrimination on all grounds in full compliance with article 1 of the Convention? One of the reasons for discrimination of Caribbean citizens was in the constitutional framework that created a lopsided imbalance between citizens along racial lines – could the State party respond to these allegations? Anti-discrimination bureaus did not exist outside of the European territories – why was this the case? Information on hate speech incidents, including racially motivated incidents, as well as any measures taken to combat them, was requested.
Mr. Albuquerque asked for a comment on the fact that since the beginning of the pandemic, Dutch media had been portraying ethnic minorities as more likely to be infected with COVID-19, despite no disaggregated data existing on this issue.
Football in Europe struggled with racist incidents on the pitch, stands and social media, with footballers of African descent often being the victims. Were any measures being taken to redress this situation?
School curricula were creating potential for racism due to a lack of focus on colonialism, racism and anti-Semitism. How was the Kingdom improving this situation?
The Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism had stated that racial profiling was a common practice of Dutch police during traffic control, border stops and identity checks. Minority communities felt over-policed and under-served. Was there a complaint mechanism for victims of racial profiling?
VERENE SHEPHERD, Committee Member and Member of the Task Force for the Netherlands, asked about the national framework for tackling discrimination – how did the State party ensure that persons living in Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Maarten, Bonaire, St Eustatius and Saba were adequately represented, enjoyed sufficient autonomy and were able to take part in decision making?
What was being done about artefacts removed during the Dutch colonial period and transferred to the Netherlands, for example bones transferred from St Eustatius? Was there a seamless transition for students moving between schools in the Caribbean and the mainland, and vice versa?
Discrimination was underreported – what measures was the Government taking to remove obstacles for students to report discrimination, and why was there no mandate for schools to monitor bullying? More information on the actions taken to follow up instances of discrimination reported on the app that the State party identified in its report was requested.
MEHRDAD PAYANDEH, Committee Member and Member of the Task Force for the Netherlands, sought information or statistics on the number of civil as well as criminal cases related to allegations of racial discrimination tried by the Judiciary in the Netherlands, Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten, including hate crimes. Mr. Payandeh asked why there was no information on Curaçao - the State party was responsible for implementation, compliance and reporting with regard to the whole territory of the State.
Could the delegation provide the allegedly missing statistics regarding the implementation of the Act on Municipal Anti-discrimination Services, information on harmonising municipal and regional approaches, and elaborate upon plans to establish a national supervisory body or point out which organ or institution carried such a responsibility currently?
Information regarding the reasoning and effects of the August 2019 face-covering clothing ban which primarily affected Muslim women was requested.
Could the delegation elaborate as to plans regarding the fact that a discriminatory motive was not an aggravating circumstance under Dutch criminal law, and as to the status of the study commissioned to research this? More information on the nature and activity of the complaints office for online discrimination (MiND) was requested.
GUN KUT, Committee Member and Rapporteur for follow-up to concluding observations , appreciated the Netherlands’ timely reporting on the three main issues: racial discrimination, particularly of Jewish and Muslim communities; discrimination and employment; and cooperation with civil society. The Committee found that it needed more information on the first issue, asking for updates on the events of 2019 to further clarify tangible results and evaluations of measures taken to tackle recommendations on the first and second issue. Regarding the third issue, there was a lack of information on whether minority groups were part of integration-related dialogues.
Replies by the Delegation
In response to the questions and comments, the delegation of the Netherlands noted that the legal definition of discrimination derived from, and was in full conformity with, article 1 of the Convention. The public prosecution had discrimination guidelines concerning, for instance, offences such as assault when it was committed with a discriminatory motive. A penalty increase of up to 100 per cent was available to the prosecution in these cases.
Hate speech was a criminal offence. Persons could report hate speech online directly to the platforms, or to the online hate speech hotline, MiND, which did not actively search for instances but reacted to reports; it had a proven track record of removing such speech. The Government was seeking to make it more effective, including by possibly introducing an app.
Profiling was key to police work, but racial profiling must be prevented. Police took measures against this in policy, such as the multi-annual 2016 Power of Difference programme. One priority was the operational framework for proactive police checks, describing the way police should interact with members of the public. An app existed that gave police members information on previous stops.
The Netherlands Institute of Human Rights had the competence to work in the Caribbean, but not to conduct research and give opinion in individual cases.
Anti-discrimination services did not have a supervisory body because the supervision was conducted by provinces. This was not always effective, which was the reason a different system was being considered. The Government had decided to raise the municipal budget for these services by 6 million euros. These services were independent of government bodies.
The face covering ban targeted social safety in public spaces; discrimination of Muslim women on the basis of clothing was unacceptable. An examination of the law would be conducted in 2022. As of now, no sanctions had been imposed.
The Minister of Justice and Security had added an extra budgetary amount of one million Euros per year in 2019-2021 to tackle anti-Semitism, extending to the broader approach to tackle racism.
OLIVIA TRIMON-CROES, Deputy Director, Department of Foreign Affairs of Aruba, noted that regarding the implementation of the Convention in Aruba – the Constitution mandated all persons to be treated equally. Discriminatory acts were prohibited and punishable by law. Encouraging violence against a particular group was also an offense.
Colonial history was taught in secondary education and included a Caribbean perspective. There was no data on ethnicity because all data was collected based on the place of birth.
JOËLLE DE JONG-MERCELINA, Policy Director at the Ministry of Justice of Curaçao, noted that due to time constraints, detailed written answers would be submitted if needed. Regarding school transitions, in Curaçao, students were taught in three languages and were prepared for transition to the Netherlands.
Regarding the lack of reporting on hate speech and discrimination, it was important to note that hate speech was punishable by law. Understaffing and other constraints led to a lack of reporting, but Curaçao was committed to improve reporting in the next cycle. Victims of discrimination could be assisted by the Victims Assistance Organization, subsidised by the Government of Curaçao. To date, according to the police force, there had been no complaints of racial discrimination.
PATRICE GUMBS, Interim Director, Department of Foreign Relations of Sint Maarten, regarding ease of transfer for students, said Sint Maarten was the least Dutch speaking country of the Kingdom and reports existed that students faced cultural issues after going to the Netherlands, despite specific courses existing in the country. Half of the nationals in Sint Maarten’s prisons were not Dutch citizens. Learning about profiling was a key component of the training of law enforcement officials in the country.
The delegation of the Netherlands noted that ensuring equal opportunity was the overall objective of its data collection policies. “Background” was the key statistic, and the collection of statistics was based on descriptive metadata that could not be traced back to individuals. The migration background was based on birth going back two generations.
Regarding football, the Government, together with the Soccer Association, had launched an anti-racism and anti-discrimination plan, including 20 measures to identify and sanction instances of discrimination in professional and amateur settings. Together with the Anne Frank House, “Fair Play” educational projects were being set up in schools to educate the youth.
Since 1 August, schools had to comply with new legislation concerning citizenship education, teaching the three principles of equality, freedom, and solidarity – part of equality was not to discriminate. To tackle bullying, every school was obliged to have an anti-bullying and discrimination counsellor. Increasing awareness was a theme in programmes designed for teacher training.
Regarding the media, the Government took action to encourage self-monitoring with the media, reaching an agreement to report on diversity and representation every five years. A policy framework on the return of colonial artefacts was recently published, with the implementation left to the new Government.
Follow-up Questions by Committee Experts
SILVIO ALBUQUERQUE, Committee Member and Country Rapporteur for the Netherlands, said that the issue of disaggregated data was crucial – the delegation’s explanation on the limits of data collection based on ethnicity as a result of the constitution was understandable. At the same time, the State party was obliged to respect the Convention, and the lack of disaggregated data was a serious obstacle.
VERENE SHEPHERD, Committee Member and Member of the Task Force for the Netherlands, noted that Roma children attended special needs school at a rate of three times higher than other children, requesting more information on policies targeting the Roma.
A Committee Expert welcomed Parliament’s condemnation of discrimination against people of Asian origin in connection with COVID-19. This was commendable; was there any information regarding this type of discrimination when this motion was adopted, and were there any changes now?
Replies by the Delegation
In response, the delegation of the Netherlands said they understood the point made with regards to disaggregated data yet noted the importance of protecting privacy. More detailed information would be submitted in the written answers.
The parliament measure to combat discrimination of persons of Asian origin was a result of an increased amount of instances of such discrimination. The motion called for more research which was being implemented, and more results would be available next year.
Continuing the discussion of racial profiling, the existing MEOS app only made information available to policemen in the street, rather than creating new data. Apps were designed to specifically avoid racial profiling.
More means were going to schools that had children of migration background, including Roma. Financing of primary schools with Roma children was being increased as well.
Questions by Committee Experts
SILVIO ALBUQUERQUE, Committee Member and Country Rapporteur for the Netherlands, noted that the Black Pete tradition was Blackface, and reinforced the damaging stereotype between Blackness and backwardness. The response of the State party that this was a centuries-old tradition formed at a societal level was not satisfactory.
When compared to other countries, discrimination against minorities in the Dutch labour market was less dramatic, but still serious. Could the Netherlands provide information on measures taken to redress it?
A 2018 study showed that the immigration service used stereotypes to assess asylum cases. Eighty-five per cent of petitions by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender plus individuals for asylum were rejected because authorities did not believe the veracity of sexual orientation claims.
MEHRDAD PAYANDEH, Committee Member and Member of the Task Force for the Netherlands, asked the delegation to comment on the claim that in comparison to Dutch citizens born in the Netherlands, citizens born outside of Europe were discriminated against. Nationals from “developed” countries moving to the Netherlands were exempt from the civic integration procedures and language requirements that newcomers from “developing” countries had to pass – how was this justified?
A decision had been made to discontinue translation services in healthcare despite strong opposition – why was this decision taken? All persons located in the Netherlands were entitled to essential medical treatment – how was this defined, and why was this not available in other territories?
VERENE SHEPHERD, Committee Member and Member of the Task Force for the Netherlands, asked whether the Netherlands planned to commemorate the twentieth anniversary of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action.
Was the Netherlands committed to amending the charter to finalise the decolonisation of territories in Antilles in accordance with international law, and was it committed to providing monetary and other reparations to these islands as a result of violations committed during the colonial period? Information on the impact of climate change on the Dutch Caribbean was also requested.
Replies by the Delegation
The delegation of the Netherlands highlighted that the Caribbean areas governed themselves, and the Netherlands lent support to its autonomous countries. In the Caribbean specifically, countries were lent COVID-related support at a similar level with Dutch regions. The statutes governing the relationship between the Netherlands and the other parts of the Kingdom were not up for reform. The Prime Minister of the Netherlands had decided not to apologise for the Dutch role in the trans-Atlantic slave trade, expressing regret instead. A new Government may decide differently. Some internal Dutch regions were examining their particular roles in the slave trade and ways they could confront this.
Regarding Black Pete, significant changes had been made to the celebration. Media had stopped using images of Black Pete in their broadcasts and there was a broader understanding of the hurtful ramifications of this imagery for persons of African descent. This celebration was part of the Dutch society, and as the society changed, so would the nature of the celebration.
The difficulties faced by minorities in accessing the labour market had resulted in an Action Plan against labour market discrimination, a programme for people with a migration background aimed at helping them to find work, and a proposal of a new law submitted in December of last year obliging companies to have recruitment and selection processes that would eliminate possible bias, allowing the Labour Inspectorate to sanction companies.
Civic integration involved exams of language and knowledge of society. A new law had improved this by allowing local municipalities to deal with individual persons and make tailored plans for every person. Local governments would also pay for the civic integration courses.
A 2019 study had concluded that there was no better process to evaluate lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender plus asylum requests, but an evaluation had been commissioned, and results would be available next year.
OLIVIA TRIMON-CROES, Deputy Director, Department of Foreign Affairs of Aruba, noted that different stakeholders, including civil society, were consulted during the Government’s formation. Citizen education was integrated into the secondary school curriculum. Disaggregated data was important, and it was gathered based on the country of origin and nationality. Assistance in medical emergencies in Aruba was provided to all regardless of status.
PATRICE GUMBS, Interim Director, Department of Foreign Relations of Sint Maarten, noted that all persons who had Dutch nationality could run for elections. The Sint Maarten Parliament had persons of Indian and Chinese descent and did not exclude anyone based on race or ethnicity.
Follow-up Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert asked the delegation to provide more information regarding the Roma community, and why the Roma were not recognised as a minority group? There was no national coordination and municipalities were left to define their own policies, some of which were discriminatory.
VERENE SHEPHERD, Committee Member and Member of the Task Force for the Netherlands, noted that colonial history was not lodged with the past and people were living with these legacies now. The delegation’s statement on this was clear. Still, it was great that municipalities were doing research on this issue.
Another Committee Expert added that beyond a public apology that was expected by a part of the population that was suffering, would a law recognise slave trade as a crime? Sint Maarten had launched a process of self-determination supported by a majority of the population; what was the result of this process?
Replies by the Delegation
In response to these final questions and comments, the delegation agreed that it was very important to be aware of history. A parliamentary majority recently voted in favour of an independent investigation into the national history of slavery. The dialogue organised by the advisory committee on this issue was embedded in society, including the Dutch Caribbean. The advisory board of the dialogue on slavery had recommended a parliamentary act recognising the crime of slave trade, but this would have to be decided by the new Government.
Qualitative research was being done into the social position of the Roma, finding that indeed, their social inclusion lagged behind. The latest reports showed tentative signs that younger generations were doing better, particularly girls, and their overall economic situation had also improved. A new legal provision ensured that anti-Tsiganism and anti-Gypsyism would be part of a broader anti-discrimination approach, putting it at the same level as anti-Semitism and other types of discrimination.
Concluding Remarks
SILVIO ALBUQUERQUE, Committee Member and Country Rapporteur for the Netherlands, expressed his gratitude to the delegation for their participation. Racism and awareness of racism were related, but distinct. He welcomed the exhibition of 10 true slave stories held at the National Museum of Arts and History of the Netherlands.
CARSTEN HERSTEL, Director General for Social Security and Integration at the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment of the Netherlands , welcomed the mirror that this discussion held up to the Netherlands, reiterating the tipping point that it was facing in relation to racism. He expressed hope that the new Government would go ahead with the Committee’s recommendations.
LI YANDUAN, Chair of the Committee on the Elimination of the Racial Discrimination , thanked the delegation for the frank and constructive dialogue, and then closed the meeting.
CERD21.006E