Experts of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Commend Argentina for its Active Participation in United Nations Human Rights Protection Mechanisms, Ask about Hate Speech and Challenges to the Integration of Migrants, Asylum Seekers and Refugees
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today concluded its consideration of the combined twenty-fourth to twenty-sixth periodic report of Argentina, with Experts commending the Argentine Republic for its active participation in the processes of United Nations human right protection mechanisms, and asking about stigmatising discourse against minority groups, including women, indigenous peoples, migrants and Afro-descendants, and challenges to the integration of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees.
Eduardo Ernesto Vega Luna, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Argentina, commended Argentina for its active participation in the processes of United Nations human rights protection mechanisms, and for the State’s response to human rights violations worldwide.
Mr. Vega Luna said discriminatory and stigmatising discourse had reportedly grown in recent times in Argentina, mainly affecting women, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons, indigenous peoples, migrants and Afro-descendants. What measures were in place to prevent, investigate and punish racial hate speech and incitement to discrimination and racial violence in the media, on the internet, and on social platforms, including by public authorities? Argentina needed to tackle racial hate speech, examining how to protect freedom of expression while monitoring and working to prevent hate speech. Had the State developed a new national human rights plan that addressed racial discrimination, and were organizations of indigenous peoples, people of African descent, people from the Roma, and Jewish and Muslim communities participating in its development?
Bakari Sidiki Diaby, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Argentina, said migrants, asylum seekers and refugees were victims of violence and discrimination, and there were challenges in their local integration, with a lack of programmes ensuring their socio-economic welfare, making it difficult for them to access social integration. What efforts were being made at the State level to improve their protection, and to combat racism and xenophobia perpetrated against migrants, asylum seekers and refugees?
Other Experts asked what was being done to engage social networks directly regarding tackling hate speech? A Committee Expert complimented the work being carried out by the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism. It appeared clear that the State was lagging behind in its fight to ensure the protection and promotion of human rights of minority groups, and Experts wondered if there was not a systemic problem somewhere that needed to be identified by the State, urging that strong measures be taken when it was identified. Further, in the context of hate crimes, Experts asked whether this racist motivation was recognised in judicial proceedings, and whether there had been any progress made in this regard.
Greta Marisa Pena, Comptroller of the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism of Argentina and head of the delegation, said Argentina aimed to construct a more just and egalitarian society and to promote the elimination of racial discrimination. The COVID-19 pandemic and the legacy of the previous Government had caused a substantial increase in poverty and an extraordinary level of external debt. In the last three years, Argentina had allowed different international mechanisms and experts to visit the country and conduct free investigations. It had also submitted all periodic reports required under the treaty bodies system and regularly responded to requests from the Special Procedures. There were several bills before parliament to modify the national law on discriminatory acts, as well as specific projects to recognise sexual orientation and gender identity as grounds for discrimination.
Federico Villegas, Permanent Representative of the Argentine Republic to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said that Argentina did not have a system that regulated hate speech online and in the media, partly due to concerns regarding freedom of speech. Mr. Villegas called on the Committee to work with Argentina to find a solution in this regard. The delegation said that the State party had in 2020 developed a joint study with civil society on hate speech, and planned to carry out more studies this year. The Penal Code had provisions that allowed for the prosecution of hate speech. Coordinated work with civil society was needed to combat hate speech in all spheres. There had been an exponential rise in hate speech: these were events that were about annulling and discrediting identities, attacking the rights of women, gender and different sexual identities, and those who advocated for the rights of indigenous peoples.
The delegation said there was a need to modify the State’s anti-discrimination law, which this year turned 35. Groups subject to discrimination, such as persons with disabilities and ethnic minorities, would be addressed specifically by the revised legislation. The legislation would also reverse the burden of proof in discrimination cases to force the accused to prove their innocence. There would also be measures included to increase access to justice for marginalised groups. The National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism had delegations and offices in all provinces of the country. It included persons representing vulnerable groups. Its ethnicity programmes were led by persons from the relevant ethnicity. The National Institute provided direct assistance and care to victims of discrimination and proper reparations as necessary through its rapid response group. The National Plan of Action for Business and Human Rights included a component that addressed discrimination, specifically of indigenous peoples. The plan would be updated to incorporate more than 40 commitments against discrimination to be implemented by the State’s various ministries.
The rights of migrants and refugees were supported by laws and international instruments, the delegation said, and solutions were found through the National Institute on Migrant Affairs, which abided by the principles of non-refoulement, non-criminalisation, supporting family reunification and treating people with dignity, both refugees and asylum seekers.
The Government was working to combat hate speech and fake news, the delegation of Argentina said, and was trying to do this not just to celebrate diversity, but to ensure that it was seen as a strength. On the situation of migrants, Argentina was proud of its migration policy: it was not saying it was the best and did everything perfectly, but the relevant law was a paradigm in the human rights sector, seeing migration as a human right, and the Government sought to have it fully enforced. There was a guarantee of due process with economic, social and cultural rights. The rights of migrants and refugees were supported by laws and international instruments, and solutions were found through the National Institute on Migrant Affairs, which abided by the principles of non-refoulement, non-criminalisation, supporting family reunification, and treating people with dignity, both refugees and asylum seekers.
In concluding remarks, Mr. Vega Luna said the Committee appreciated the work of the delegation: this had been a sincere dialogue with a lot of cordial discussion. The key word was structural discrimination, which still affected the indigenous, people of African descent, and other minorities including migrants. The Committee recognised that there would be need to tackle the issue from a different point of view in order to tackle structural discrimination. This was a very critical moment. There was a need for important significant changes, and the Committee was calling for this, calling upon the State party to do a bit more to reduce the distance between what the Government was doing and what the provincial Governments were doing. Things could definitely be done to improve the situation of migrants and persons of African descent.
Ms. Pena, in concluding remarks, said the Government was waiting for the final outcome of the census, with regard to demographic composition. A lot had been done: many Ministries were including demographics, such as ethnic and religious criteria in their programmes, with a lot of affirmative action for persons of African descent and indigenous communities. The National Body for Social Security had a multilingual staff in the different territories, ensuring access to social welfare, serving the original communities in their own languages. Additional studies were being planned.
The delegation of Argentina consisted of representatives of the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism; the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs; the Secretariat of Human Affairs of the Nation; the Ministry of External Affairs, International Trade and Worship; and the Permanent Mission of Argentina to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will issue its concluding observations on the report of Argentina after the conclusion of its one hundred and ninth session on 28 April. Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, while webcasts of the public meetings can be found here. The programme of work of the Committee’s one hundred and ninth session and other documents related to the session can be found here.
The Committee will next meet in public on Tuesday, 18 April at 3 p.m. to consider the combined eighteenth and nineteenth periodic report of Portugal (CERD/C/PRT/18-19).
Report
The Committee has before it the combined twenty-fourth to twenty-sixth periodic report of Argentina (CERD/C/ARG/24-26).
Presentation of Report
GRETA MARISA PENA, Comptroller of the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism of Argentina and head of the delegation, said Argentina aimed to construct a more just and egalitarian society and to promote the elimination of racial discrimination. On 10 December 2019, a new national Government took office with the firm commitment to improve institutional quality and guarantee the full exercise of human rights. The COVID-19 pandemic and the legacy of the previous Government had caused a substantial increase in poverty and an extraordinary level of external debt. The new Government had implemented policies to mitigate this situation.
In the last three years, Argentina had allowed different international mechanisms and experts to visit the country and conduct free investigations. It had also submitted all periodic reports required under the treaty bodies system and regularly responded to requests from the Special Procedures.
In 2022, the State conducted the national census, which introduced new processes to record data on gender identity, racial ethnic self-recognition, and disability, in line with the Committee’s previous concluding observations. In response to the results of the census, the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism carried out the "I recognise myself" campaign, which promoted the inclusion of all the diverse groups of the Argentine population in society.
The Argentine Congress was working to ratify the Inter-American Convention against All Forms of Discrimination and Intolerance and the Inter-American Convention against Racism, Racial Discrimination and Related Forms of Intolerance. There were several bills before parliament to modify the national law on discriminatory acts, as well as specific projects to recognise sexual orientation and gender identity as grounds for discrimination. These would give the State greater tools to combat the growing phenomenon of hate speech.
The National Afro-descendant Plan for 2021 to 2024 was being developed within the framework of the International Decade for People of African Descent. Its objective was to provide a roadmap for the management of policies for inclusion and improvement of living conditions of Afro-Argentine, Afro-descendant and African populations throughout the national territory. In 2020, the first Inter-Ministerial Table of Public Policies for the Afro Community in Argentina was created, which proposed to develop public policies, programmes and projects for the recognition, promotion and protection of the rights of Afro-descendants. In 2022, the National Programme for Afro-Descendants and Human Rights was also created for the implementation of public policies promoting the rights of the Afro-Argentine, Afro-descendant and African population in the country.
The National Institute for Indigenous Affairs was pursuing the peaceful resolution of territorial conflicts between indigenous communities and other actors, having intervened in 369 territorial conflicts in all provinces of the country. Legislation was introduced in 2021 to conclude the demarcation of indigenous lands and suspend evictions of indigenous communities from their traditional lands. Seventy indigenous territories had been recognised since 2020. The National Institute also continued to implement the Community Strengthening Programme to guarantee the legal defence of indigenous communities. Argentina was the only Latin American country that participated in the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, which promoted education, memory and research worldwide about the Holocaust. The State was also paying tribute to the victims of the genocide of the Roma population and advancing a common agenda for the promotion of their rights.
Argentina had a policy of protecting the rights of migrants and refugees. In March 2021, the President restored the full validity of the National Migration Law, which was in line with the Constitution and the international system for the protection of human rights. The National Directorate of Migration also implemented new regularisation programmes for persons from Senegal, Member States of the Caribbean Community, the Dominican Republic, the Republic of Cuba, and Venezuelan migrant children and adolescents. A special humanitarian visa programme was adopted for persons displaced by socio-natural disasters or armed conflicts. The procedure for determining refugee status was carried out in accordance with the principles of confidentiality and due process. Applicants whose petitions were rejected could appeal, with the Human Rights Secretariat intervening in the appeal.
In conclusion, Ms. Marisa Pena said that the dialogue would allow the delegation to provide information on progress made and recommit to facing the challenges that Argentina still had ahead.
Questions by Committee Experts
EDUARDO ERNESTO VEGA LUNA, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Argentina, commended Argentina for its active participation in the processes of United Nations human rights protection mechanisms, and for the State’s response to human rights violations worldwide.
Mr. Vega Luna said the 2022 national census, which included questions on the self-identification of Afro-descendants and indigenous peoples, constituted a step forward for the State party. The results of the census were not yet available, which made it difficult to analyse the demographic composition of the population and their socio-economic situation. What measures were in place to expedite the publication of the results? Had steps been taken to promote ethnic self-identification in other Government measures?
Was the Convention directly applicable in the domestic legal system and at all levels of Government? Could the delegation give some examples of court cases that had invoked the Convention? How did domestic law, specifically the Act against Discriminatory Acts, reflect the definition of racial discrimination used in the Convention? Did it expressly cover all prohibited grounds of discrimination?
There were reports of racial discrimination in various areas of public administration, including in the police and other security forces, in prisons and in the judicial system. What training was provided on the Convention to public officials, and how did the State measure the impact of such training? How was the State party sensitising its population and non-citizens to their rights under the Convention, as well as to the complaint mechanisms and remedies available to them?
The Committee had recommended in 2010 and 2016 that the State party criminalise acts of racial discrimination and conduct described in article four of the Convention. Had the State criminalised acts of assistance to racist activities and incitement to racial discrimination and violence? Were organizations that promoted and incited racial discrimination prohibited? Bills had been submitted to amend the Act against Discriminatory Acts. Did these bills incorporate articles one and four of the Convention? Was the State considering adopting new comprehensive legislation against discrimination that was in line with the Convention? Did racial hatred constitute an aggravating circumstance in the State party's criminal legislation? Were there examples of court decisions dealing with racial discrimination and hatred?
Discriminatory and stigmatising discourse had reportedly grown in recent times in Argentina, mainly affecting women, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons, indigenous peoples, migrants and Afro-descendants. The Special Rapporteur against racism noted in 2016 xenophobic and stigmatising discourse by some public officials and politicians. There was also reportedly no regulation of content on the internet and social platforms against hate speech, incitement to violence, and racial discrimination. What measures were in place to prevent, investigate and punish racial hate speech and incitement to discrimination and racial violence in the media, on the internet, and on social platforms, including by public authorities? The Office of the Public Defender for Audio-visual Communication Services could receive complaints but could not apply sanctions. How was the State facilitating reporting and investigation of racial hate speech? Did it intend to extend the powers of the Public Defender's Office to the digital sphere?
The National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism had reported systematic violence against indigenous peoples and Afro-descendants. What measures had the State party taken to prevent racial violence and to effectively punish those responsible? In the case of the murder of Fernando Báez Sosa, why was the racial element not considered in the sentence when various testimonies were presented about racist insults uttered during the beating of this 18-year-old youth? What disaggregated data could the delegation provide the Committee with on racial violence?
Mr. Vega Luna said the Committee remained concerned that the Ombudsman had not been elected since 2009. The Law on the Creation of the Ombudsman's Office needed to make explicit the Ombudsman’s mandate to promote human rights; formalise a clear, transparent and participatory selection and appointment process for the Ombudsman; and ensure the independence of its management board. What measures had been taken to appoint an Ombudsman and revise the law, especially to strengthen the autonomy of the national human rights institute? The Committee welcomed that in June 2020 the National Congress appointed the head of the Public Defender's Office.
The Committee welcomed the contributions of the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism and the creation in 2020 of the Commission for the Historical Recognition of the Afro-Argentine Community. However, the presence of the Institute in the provinces was reportedly still limited and the resources allocated to it insufficient, despite a notable increase in 2021. What measures were in place to strengthen the Institute, provide it with adequate resources and extend its reach?
The Committee noted the actions undertaken by the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs, including the Community Strengthening Programme and mediation in conflicts between indigenous communities and other social actors. However, there was concern about the lack of full and systematic participation of indigenous persons in the Institute, as well as in the Indigenous Participation Council and the Indigenous Peoples' Consultative and Participatory Council. The Institute also did not have an adequate presence at the provincial level. What measures were in place to strengthen the mandate of the Institute and increase its budget and human resources?
Had the State taken steps to provide public information on the results of the first National Plan of Action on Human Rights for 2017 to 2020? Had the State developed a new national human rights plan that addressed racial discrimination? Were organizations of indigenous peoples, people of African descent, people from the Roma, and Jewish and Muslim communities participating in its development?
Argentina had not approved a National Plan against Discrimination, which was first proposed in 2005. What measures were in place to ensure the early adoption of such a plan, and what resources would be allocated to it?
The Committee welcomed the creation in 2020 of the first Inter-Ministerial Table on Public Policies for the Afro-Argentine Community, the Commission for the Historical Recognition of the Afro-Argentine Community, the National Programme for Afro-descendants and Human Rights, the National Afro-descendant Plan 2021-2024, and the National Programme for the Implementation of the International Decade for People of African Descent. What were the objectives of these initiatives and how was their coordination facilitated? What budgets had been allocated to their functioning? Had Afro-Argentine, Afro-descendant and African population organizations been consulted and actively participated in their design?
BAKARI SIDIKI DIABY, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Argentina, said the law on national education did not cover the school curriculum and did not address the culture of persons of African descent, which was often presented in a stereotypical manner. The Working Group on People of African Descent had called on the Government to involve persons of African descent in the drafting of the national curriculum and promote their culture and traditions through the curriculum. What measures had been taken in this regard?
What measures were in place to prevent the use of racist, discriminatory or stereotyped images or language in the media, television news, advertising and social networks, as well as by Government officials, political figures and public figures? The Committee took note of the establishment of the Observatory of Discrimination in Sport. However, there were reports of racist and xenophobic speeches, slogans and insults during football matches in the State party's stadiums and by Argentine football fans in other countries, especially against persons of African descent. What measures had the State party taken to prevent such racist acts and to punish those responsible? The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights had in 2018 recommended that the State strengthen the normative and institutional framework to improve access to the media for and representation of disadvantaged groups. What measures had the State party taken in this regard?
A draft law had been prepared by the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism in 2010 that aimed to reverse the burden of proof so that it would be up to the accused party to prove their innocence in racial discrimination cases. What progress had been made in implementing this draft law?
There was reportedly a lack of interpreters and translators for indigenous peoples and other minorities, and a lack of judges and lawyers specialising in indigenous peoples' rights. In addition, the Committee had received allegations of prejudice, racial discrimination and racism in the system of administration of justice, including by judicial operators. What measures were in place to improve access to justice for indigenous peoples, people of African descent, migrants, asylum seekers and refugees, including measures to eliminate racist attitudes and racial discrimination in the judicial system? Had the State taken steps to recognise indigenous peoples’ traditional justice systems and train public officials in indigenous customary law?
The Committee had received information on the persistence of racial profiling by police and other law enforcement officials against people of African descent, indigenous peoples, migrants and other minorities, which repeatedly involved police violence and resulted in the death of the victim. A recent case was that of 17-year-old Lucas Gonzales, who was murdered by police officers from the Ciudad de Buenos Aires in November 2021. Regarding this case, the National Institute against Discrimination had called on the State to analyse whether the police behaved under racist and discriminatory profiles when intercepting the car and firing shots. Other reports referred to constant identity checks by police on the streets that disproportionately affected young people of African descent, indigenous peoples and migrants. Was use of racial profiling explicitly prohibited by the State party's legislation? What measures had been taken to prevent, combat and explicitly prohibit racial profiling by law enforcement agencies? Did the State party collect information disaggregated by ethnic origin on police interventions?
In August 2020, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights declared the State party's international responsibility in the José Delfín Acosta Martínez case. The Court ordered the State to continue investigations and punish those responsible; include in the regular police training course training on the discriminatory nature of racial stereotypes and the use of racial profiling; and establish a mechanism for recording complaints of persons alleging arbitrary detention based on racial profiling. What measures had the State party adopted to comply with this judgement?
There was reportedly an increasing use of facial recognition technologies and biometric data for surveillance of public spaces in various cities of the country, including Buenos Aires. There were reports of bias in its margin of error based on colour, ethnicity and gender, the risk of violations of human rights, including the right to privacy, and the lack of clear regulation and necessary safeguards in case of human rights violations. The Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy had in 2019 raised concerns about the system’s lack of safeguards. What measures were being taken to prevent and punish human rights violations in the use of facial recognition technologies, including racial discrimination and the right to privacy?
GUN KUT, Committee Expert and Follow-Up Rapporteur, said the previous concluding observations were adopted in 2016 and a follow-up report was received in 2017. The Committee thanked the State party for its timely submission. The Committee had requested the State party to provide information on the implementation of the concluding observations. The first concluding observation concerned the appointment of the Ombudsman, who had still not been appointed. What measures were in place towards appointing an Ombudsman? The second concerned measures to ensure land rights for indigenous peoples, and the third concerned measures to prevent violence against indigenous peoples. The Committee called for up-to-date information on the implementation of these measures. The final observation concerned measures to prevent acts of intimation against human rights defenders and ensure access to justice for vulnerable groups. The follow-up report noted that cases involving intimidation of human rights defenders and indigenous peoples were still before the courts, and Mr. Kut called for up-to-date information in this regard.
A Committee Expert asked what was happening in Argentina that was causing an increase in racial hatred?
Another Committee Expert said that there was a myth that Argentina was established by Europeans, and this was perhaps the source of some racial discrimination in the country. Why had there until recently been a denial of the ethnicity of the country? Did the Constitution recognise the ethnic heritage of the State?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said there had been a political effort to include persons of African descent in Argentine society and reverse myths about the cultural heritage of the State. Argentina led a commission to combat racism against Afro-descendants in the Southern Common Market region.
A national census was held every 10 years. The most recent 2022 census included questions for self-identification on ethnicity. The State had also promoted increased awareness of ethnicity. The interim results of the census had been compiled, and the State hoped that by the end of the year the final results of the census could be published.
International conventions that Argentina was a party to were streamlined into domestic legislation, but in complex cases, such conventions could be applied directly. However, judges did not always consider racial discrimination as an aggravating factor. The executive was seeking to promote racial discrimination as an aggravating factor. Fernando Báez Sosa was beat up by a group of young men at a nightclub who had uttered clear racist slurs. Racist profiling was an issue in this case, which had moved the Argentine community to call for justice and for racial aspects to be considered. Soon, a programme would be drawn up that promoted training, reparation and reconciliation regarding issues of racism, masculinity and mental health. The programme had been launched by the family of the victim.
The National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism had called for cases in which racist judgements had been made to be reconsidered, and such calls had been upheld. The Convention had been mentioned in cases involving racism, anti-Semitism, and discrimination against indigenous peoples.
There was a need to modify the State’s anti-discrimination law, which this year turned 35. Groups subject to discrimination, such as persons with disabilities and ethnic minorities, would be addressed specifically by the revised legislation. The legislation would also reverse the burden of proof in discrimination cases to force the accused to prove their innocence. There would also be measures included to increase access to justice for marginalised groups.
The two Inter-American Conventions that prohibited racial discrimination were currently before parliament and would be adopted soon.
A joint campaign was being held with the United Nations Children's Fund to prevent the spread of fake news and stigmatisation. The date of 8 November had been declared as the National Day for Afro-Argentines. The National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism was carrying out an awareness campaign to promote the day. A federal campaign for sports free of violence and discrimination was also underway. The Government had agreements with rugby and football federations to promote awareness of and prevent discrimination. Referees were allowed to stop players from taking part in games if they engaged in discriminatory acts. Discriminatory speech led to the spread of hatred, and the Government would continue to fight it in sports and other fields.
The National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism did receive complaints, most of which were in the field of education. A national campaign to prevent discrimination in schools was underway. The Institute was a decentralised body. Society was made aware that they could send complaints to the Institute through television programmes and awareness campaigns. Data on discrimination complaints was published by the Institute at the end of each year. Complaints could be made by telephone or online. The National Institute had delegations and offices in all provinces of the country. It included persons representing vulnerable groups. Its ethnicity programmes were led by persons from the relevant ethnicity. Its budget was managed independently. The National Institute provided direct assistance and care to victims of discrimination and proper reparations as necessary through its rapid response group. The Institute’s rulings were not binding, but they were taken as strong statements by the Government. The Institute offered free legal assistance and initiated legal proceedings in some instances, including in cases involving racial discrimination.
There was no political consensus concerning the appointment of the Ombudsman. The shadow report indicated public interest in this area. Although the Ombudsman had not been appointed, its office remained very active. The Ombudsman for Children had recently been appointed.
The Government had been working with the city of Buenos Aires to implement the judgement of the Inter-American Court regarding the José Delfín Acosta Martínez case, holding the training courses required and paying the required reparations. The Government considered the full implementation of the judgement to be crucial.
The Vice-President of the National Institute for Indigenous Affairs was indigenous. The Institute visited indigenous communities that were affected by COVID-19. It was difficult for these communities to access healthcare in major cities. The Institute was working on addressing this. The Institute was also pursuing land demarcation. Agreements had been formed with the Central Government, provinces and indigenous communities regarding land demarcation. The National Institute had been strengthened to increase its staff working on land recording. Members of indigenous communities were involved in these efforts. The Community Strengthening Programme helped indigenous communities to access legal aid. In this programme, the National Institute had provided assistance in over 110 communities and over 300 cases. Most cases concerned land disputes.
The National Plan of Action for Business and Human Rights included a component that addressed discrimination, specifically of indigenous peoples. The plan would be updated to incorporate more than 40 commitments against discrimination to be implemented by the State’s various ministries.
FEDERICO VILLEGAS, Permanent Representative of the Argentine Republic to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said that Argentina did not have a system that regulated hate speech online and in the media, partly due to concerns regarding freedom of speech. Mr. Villegas called on the Committee to work with Argentina to find a solution in this regard.
The delegation said that the State party had in 2020 developed a joint study with civil society on hate speech, and planned to carry out more studies this year.
Follow-Up Questions by Committee Experts
EDUARDO ERNESTO VEGA LUNA, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Argentina , said there was much to be done to bolster training for public officials in Argentina regarding the prevention of racial discrimination. A clear strategy in this regard was needed. Further, a new law needed to be considered that covered the issues that Afro-descendants and indigenous peoples faced. Finally, the State needed to tackle racial hate speech, examining how to protect freedom of expression while monitoring and working to prevent hate speech.
BAKARI SIDIKI DIABY, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Argentina, asked whether academia was addressing historical racism and genocide against indigenous peoples and persons of African descent. Did Argentina identify perpetrators of racism in sport and prosecute them? What reparations were provided to historical victims of racism?
One Committee Expert said Argentina had a very high rate of enrolment of its general population in school. What was the rate for indigenous children?
Another Committee Expert asked for information on the rate of employment of Afro-descendants. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization was in the process of adopting a guideline on online hate speech. What was being done to engage social networks directly regarding tackling hate speech?
A Committee Expert complimented the work being carried out by the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism. What was its relationship with the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Justice? Were the decisions made by the Institute taken as being absolute in courts?
Another Committee Expert said that there was a need for global regulation of social media platforms. However, States could monitor content, flag racist hate speech, and raise civil claims regarding such hate speech. The report did not address actions to regulate hate speech online. What was the State’s position in this regard?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the State was aiming to promote training and capacity building. The National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism analysed provincial training and capacity building plans.
A judge could rule against a judgement made by the National Institute. However, international norms could be invoked in appeal if the judgement conflicted with such norms. The National Institute could start investigations into complaints as required, and provided legal support for complainants.
The Penal Code had provisions that allowed for the prosecution of hate speech. Coordinated work with civil society was needed to combat hate speech in all spheres.
Questions by Committee Experts
EDUARDO ERNESTO VEGA LUNA, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Argentina, said on structural discrimination and affirmative action, the Committee had previously been concerned about the discrimination that Afro-descendants, indigenous persons and minorities continued to suffer from, particularly with regard to their rights, and asked what measures Argentina had taken to combat these forms of discrimination. What affirmative action had the State party taken to strike a balance between the inequalities in Argentina to ensure that all rights could be enjoyed, and what had been the impact of such measures. On police violence and non-State-actor violence, the impunity of perpetrators, and that these practices went unpunished, as well as the disproportionate use of firearms by police officers, there was concern that communities and victims had not been able to achieve justice at the national level, and he asked what measures the State party had taken to prevent police violence, and what reparations had been made to victims and their family members.
The Committee had received allegations about excessive use of force committed by the police and private security agents against members of indigenous groups who were advocating for their rights, and had received information that such cases continued. What measures had the State party taken to protect the right to peaceful assembly at the local and provincial levels, including for indigenous persons who were participating in demonstrations, Mr. Vega Luna asked. The Committee had received allegations on illegal intelligence activities against the Mapuche people, and reminded the State party of the commitments it had undertaken through the Convention, asking what measures had been taken to protect the members of indigenous and minority groups from violence when seeking to gain their rights. What measures had been taken to increase their participation in public life, including for Afro-descendants and women? Had the measures to tackle the socio-economic disadvantages of these groups had any impact? The Committee had received many allegations on the violations of indigenous peoples’ right to free, prior and informed consent, in particular in certain provinces, and he asked what measures had been taken to ensure that consultation was in line with international standards, and that indigenous people were systematically consulted to ensure prior, informed, and free consent.
On the traditional lands of indigenous peoples, the Committee had recommended the adoption of appropriate mechanisms to ensure the ownership of such lands, and Mr. Vega Luna asked what measures had been taken to ensure indigenous ownership, with effective participation of indigenous peoples in drawing up laws in this regard. There had been very little progress on the land survey and recording of indigenous land, and there were still communities vulnerable to expropriation and violence by armed groups, thus he asked what measures had been taken to ensure that there was consistent implementation of the law in all provinces. Why, he asked, despite the law forbidding the expulsion of indigenous peoples, did such evictions, particularly violent evictions, continue, extending his question to inquire what had been done to prosecute these acts. Violence by armed groups, aiming to seize indigenous territories, continued, and the State party should explain what had been done to prosecute and sanction these armed groups.
With regard to hunger and food security, the Committee was, he said, concerned that existing plans had not established specific beneficiaries, pointing to the malnutrition of indigenous children, and asked how this plan could benefit indigenous peoples, Afro-descendants, and other minority groups. There was a violation of the right to inter-cultural bilingual education, Mr. Vega Luna said, asking what measures the State had taken to ensure the availability of education for migrant, Afro-descendant, indigenous, and other child groups, and what was the impact of such measures.
After education, it was the employment sector where there was the greatest prevalence of discrimination. It was difficult to obtain residency permits, and Afro-descendant, indigenous and migrant women worked in various informal sectors, without trade union representation. What measures had the State party taken in this regard. The Committee took note of the measures taken by the State to ensure access to health, but was concerned that health policies did not take into account the cultural specificities of Afro-descendants and indigenous peoples, with a lack of translators, among other factors affecting their access to health, such as a lack of awareness of traditional health practices. What measures had been taken, he asked, to reduce child and mother mortality in indigenous communities.
Complaints had been received of sexual violence committed against indigenous women and children by Creole men, Mr. Vega Luna said, and he asked what measures had been taken to combat sexual violence, including whether there had been shelters established and measures taken to prevent violence against indigenous women who were advocating for their rights.
BAKARI SIDIKI DIABY, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Argentina, said on human rights education and the representation of minorities, including indigenous peoples, what measures had been taken to include them in school curricula, and to reflect their history and participation in the State. What was their representation in the media, he asked, and what had been done to ensure that it was easier to report cases of racial discrimination. What information was provided to non-nationals about their rights? What measures had been taken to reform laws against discrimination and ensure that there was reversal of the burden of proof of victims of discrimination? What was being done to ensure access to justice for victims? Were there any bilingual public defenders? The Committee would like further details on justice access centres in regions where indigenous peoples lived. What about traditional justice systems, he asked, referring to the training of officials, including magistrates, and asking whether they received any training in this regard. What measures had been taken at the legislative level to prohibit entirely racial profiling by the police forces? Had there been any sanctioning and reparation for victims?
Regarding nationals from Mexico and other Latin American nations, Mr. Diaby spoke of the difficulty of implementing the national quota, and said information received indicated that there was differentiated treatment for persons of Southern Common Market countries, and additional requirements for those from other countries. Information that reached the Committee said it was very difficult for Haitians to be regularised, as there was a lack of access to consular services, and they had to fulfil different conditions, not being citizens of the Southern Common Market, which was an obstacle in terms of finding decent work in the formal economy, and in finding housing. What additional measures had the State party taken to regularise their situation, as well as those of Venezuelan origin, and those of other non-Southern Common Market nations.
The Committee had received allegations that the courts interpreted immigration law in a very strict manner, without taking into account humanitarian concerns, and he asked what measures the State party had taken to ensure access to justice for migrants in the context of such situations, whilst taking into account all issues, including the right to family reunion. The Committee had received information that migrant vendors, in particular those from Senegal or Haiti, were victims of disproportionate police activity, including harassment and violence, and arrests of Senegalese persons were significantly more violent.
Migrants, asylum seekers and refugees were victims of violence and discrimination, and there were challenges in their local integration, with a lack of programmes ensuring their socio-economic welfare, making it difficult for them to access social integration, leaving them excluded and unable to enjoy the advantages of such integration. Migrants were, in practice, excluded from social protection mechanisms, including universal child support and healthcare. Being a freelance worker was not recognised when applying for a work permit, and he asked what measures were being taken to include non-nationals and what efforts were being made at the State level to improve their protection, and to combat racism and xenophobia perpetrated against migrants, asylum seekers and refugees. The right to non-refoulement was guaranteed, but the Committee was concerned that those persons who needed international protection in the country were seeing their rights deteriorate, and that there might be cases where asylum seekers were not registered at borders, and there were reports of cases of refoulement at borders. The Committee needed more information on measures taken to ensure the comprehensive and non-discriminatory rights of refugees, including full respect of the right to non-refoulement, such as whether there was training for border personnel.
The Committee recognised that there was a Committee for Refugees that regulated all issues related to refugees, and that it provided aid to gain identity documents, but there were reports of delays and challenges with regard to registration. The National Commission had recognised that out of 8,500 requests received, 2,177 had been processed and over 6,000 were still pending decision on the status of refugee, and he asked what measures had been taken to ensure equitable decisions and decreased waiting time. On stateless persons, the Committee saluted the adoption of the law on the protection of stateless persons, and that measures had been taken to implement the law, and he asked how many requests had been received and how many processed, what measures had been taken to provide information on the number and characteristics of these people, and what measures had been taken to protect them. The international community was committed to reducing statelessness, and he asked whether the State party had put into place a plan to reduce this phenomenon.
In other questions raised by the Committee members, an Expert asked what was being done to make Afro-Argentinians more visible. The delegation was congratulated, and another Expert said he was thoroughly impressed, particularly by the glimpse given of the wide involvement in the protection and promotion of human rights in the country, but at the same time, listening to the plights spoken of by his colleagues, it appeared clear that the State was lagging behind in its fight to ensure this protection and promotion, and he wondered if there was not a systemic problem somewhere that needed to be identified by the State. He urged that strong measures be taken when it was identified. He spoke of cases of judges, in the exercising of their functions, expressing racism, and urged that this situation be remedied forthwith.
November 8 was a Day for Expressing Appreciation of the Culture of People of African Descent, and an Expert asked what was being done to spread the awareness of this, and what was its impact on improving tolerance among the population. She also inquired what was being done to extend the self-identification categories included in the national census, since it appeared that there were only two options in this regard, namely Afro-descendant or Euro-descendant.
An Expert asked, in the context of hate crimes, whether this racist motivation was recognised in judicial proceedings, and whether there had been any progress made in this regard.
Several Experts congratulated the delegation for their clear answers, and for the information provided on a plethora of measures and campaigns in order to combat discrimination against indigenous persons and other communities, wondering why, despite these, discrimination continued to increase. Was there an innovative strategy that could address existing discrimination?
Response by the Delegation
GRETA MARISA PENA, Comptroller of the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism of Argentina and head of the delegation, said some of the cases highlighted by Committee Experts were matters that fell within the remit of Governments that were very much shaped by the previous administration, which had amended and suspended the migration law. This was not just politicking, this was a social phenomenon that was occurring in many parts of the world: an offensive attack against groups that had been historically vulnerable. During electioneering, attacking these groups led to an increase in votes. In the past, there had been the closure of various human rights institutions, as these previous Governments believed that they sucked up unnecessary resources, and there was no need for monitoring of certain parts of the population. Provincial Governments managed the schools, monitoring bodies, and the police forces, and these provincial Governments were responsible for many of the cases that had been raised.
There had been an exponential rise in hate speech: these were events that were about annulling and discrediting identities, attacking the rights of women, gender and different sexual identities, and those who advocated for the rights of indigenous peoples. This had led to provincial Governments tweeting denials of even the very existence of certain indigenous groups, and there were even attacks on social media on members of the delegation when they were doing their work to protect the human rights of certain groups. A significant part of the judiciary was supporting this backlash in assuring rights. Argentina found itself in a very difficult, delicate moment in time: over and beyond any political gang, the very Vice-President had suffered an assassination attempt. Events such as this reopened a whole climate of political and social violence, absolutely undermining the very foundation of democracy. The Government was working to combat hate speech and fake news, and was trying to do this not just to celebrate diversity, but to ensure that it was seen as a strength. Argentina was a country of the South that had real strengths.
In further answers to issues and questions posed by Committee Experts, the delegation said there was wide validity given to the laws of Argentina by the international community, and the national institutions were in line with these international laws. The country was a federal system: for national laws to be implemented, there was a complexity and diversity at district and regional levels that had to be taken into account by provincial Governments. The necessary structure had to be put in place for laws to be implemented, but this was not the case with regard to the implementation of human rights, which had been and continued to be an additional challenge. Due to these challenges, it had been difficult to gain a legal overview of the indigenous and minority communities in the country, although there was an increase in the number of communities registered, such as in the Land Registry. It was not easy for communities to trust the State, historically, and thus the effect of the calls for registration took a very long time. However, over 900 communities were now registered. Looking at indigenous communities as static was wrong: the State needed to allow inter-culturality to be reflected in their status. Today, with self-identification, their numbers could increase further.
The mandate of the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs was not to allocate land, it was to demarcate what was the occupation of State territory. This demarcation did not solve the question of ownership - the State still required legislation of community property. Demarcation of land was a second-to-last priority. There was a difference between “territory” and “land” - in indigenous cosmo-vision, territory was linked to one’s identity, and thus the two terms were different and not related. It was necessary to adopt and enact the indigenous community law in this regard. The Government was seeking to ensure broad consensus and show the importance of indigenous communities having peace of mind and being able to live in their lands peacefully and without the fear of forceful eviction. The beginning of the process was to, along with the indigenous communities involved, demarcate the territory, following which an anthropological process would begin.
A dialogue Round Table had been established with certain indigenous communities where there had been institutional violence and debt. This had been very difficult, but had involved members from national Government institutions at the highest level with the mandate to resolve conflicts. This was an ongoing process.
On food security, food assistance to indigenous communities had a specific budget line, and resources had been put aside by different Governmental institutions. There had been over 4.6 billion pesos made available for certain indigenous communities, with children aged between 6-12. The Ministry for Healthcare managed a National Plan for Indigenous Health, which aimed to improve accessibility to healthcare for indigenous communities throughout the country from an inter-cultural point of view, covering more than 30 jurisdictions.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, funds had been provided, covering 60 per cent of the minimum wage; they had been paid to 9 million persons, with a programme for supporting businesses and employers who were then providing assistance to their own employees. More than 900,000 businesses or individuals received direct cash inputs. Unemployment benefits were also provided for 133,000 people. A universal feeding programme had benefited 2.4 million individuals, and 4 million users throughout the country. There was universal child benefit for each child, and aid was provided to pregnant women. There were territorial programmes supporting school feeding programmes, and childcare programmes. A National Rural Indigenous Agricultural Programme had been set up to support, including through financial support, these policies, promoting food security and sovereignty of people, building on indigenous knowledge and wisdom. On education for indigenous peoples, there were scholarships for indigenous people. There were many teachers trained in providing bilingual and inter-cultural education.
Institutional violence was a very real problem, and Argentina was committed to addressing it. The Government was working to remedy the situation, with a hierarchical place for the human rights institutions and bodies which intervened directly to solve the problem. There was a complaints mechanism, with legal assistance provision. Proceedings were underway in certain cases regarding the involvement of law enforcement. It was important to have specific legislation and action put in place to solve land disputes: things were changing, but there was no time to go into this in detail.
On the situation of migrants, Argentina was proud of its migration policy: it was not saying it was the best and did everything perfectly, but the relevant law was a paradigm in the human rights sector, seeing migration as a human right, and the Government sought to have it fully enforced. There was a guarantee of due process with economic, social and cultural rights. More than 1.4 million residencies had been granted, with an important system in place to tackle land planning to reach communities that could not reach the Ministry for Migration to regularise their situation, allowing for the registration of Senegalese, Haitian, Cuban and Dominican persons, regularising their situation. A significant percentage of proceedings had been initiated in the first 30 days – 85 per cent of persons who had submitted applications had managed to comply with the policy, showing its success in ensuring the regularisation of migrants within the country. More than 3,000 children from Venezuela had been given papers, and more than 9,000 had requested residency. The Migration Integration Centres were very important in this context. Argentina had full respect for the rights of migrants, and was continuing to work on resolving the various issues raised in communications received from international bodies.
The State Policy for Land and Water had been submitted to indigenous communities for free, prior and informed consent. There had been agreement between the Institute for Indigenous Affairs and other bodies to demarcate indigenous land, and a plan of action was already in progress in this regard. In terms of access to water, the State had said that 31 wells ought to be drilled and made operational, with re-distribution of water storage systems and other catchment systems. Work was being done on the water systems, as well as other measures. The State was working to put in place employment programmes to make progress with communities to ensure the rights of everybody in the territory.
On the 21 Centres to Access Justice, these provided comprehensive services throughout the territory, supporting indigenous communities in the areas they served. The rights of migrants and refugees were supported by laws and international instruments, and solutions were found through the National Institute on Migrant Affairs, which abided by the principles of non-refoulement, non-criminalisation, supporting family reunification and treating people with dignity, both refugees and asylum seekers. Border staff had been trained in general terms, including a specific chapter in this area. Work had been done in concert with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the United Nations Children’s Fund to provide training on, among others, refugees and child protection. On refugee applications during the pandemic, efforts had been made to ensure that registration and applications could continue during this period. Argentina had resettlement programmes, be it for refugees or using alternate systems, including for Syrian nationals. It also had specific programmes for refugees requiring national or international protection. The law for the recognition and protection of stateless persons had been approved since the last report.
Work was being done to promote and support indigenous women’s organizations and activism, with various programmes. There was a programme providing legal, social and psychological support for victims of sexual-based and gender-based violence. There was work underway to put in place specific measures, as part of the national plan against gender violence, one of the Government’s main areas of concern at this moment. The most vulnerable groups in this regard included migrants, and Argentina had a law recognising workers in private homes, understood as domestic work, and had put in place a policy to record their presence, aiming to reach them in the informal economy so that their employers could regularise their employment. The State paid 50 per cent of their salaries for the first six months, and ensured that they had a bank account with the National Bank, aiding them not only to leave the informal sector, but also their access to social services. With regard to carers in the country, Argentina recognised caring as employment, and had provided pension credits for each woman per child. A committee had been established to recognise the situation of the Afro-descendent community, and work was underway to ensure the recognition of their historic and cultural contribution.
Anti-discrimination policy and the recognition of racial discrimination was at the heart of the Government’s actions, which was why it was at the Committee defending the cultures of its peoples, as this strengthened the country and made its democracy richer, the delegation concluded.
Questions by Committee Experts
EDUARDO ERNESTO VEGA LUNA, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Argentina, said yesterday a question had been raised about demographic composition, and the use of racial self-identification in surveys, and asked for more information on this. There was a need to criminalise discrimination that was not based on the provisions of Argentine law. Hate speech in the race for digital space needed to be criminalised. How did indigenous representatives participate in the Advisory Council for Indigenous Persons, and how did the Government guarantee that there was full and effective participation by indigenous persons in this and other bodies. What was behind the new plan for human rights and would it be upheld or modified further? Was the new law on discrimination adopted yet, and if not, when would it be adopted? What concrete measures had been taken to reverse the stigmatisation and prosecution of persons who were not Argentine for so-called terrorist activities? What was being done with regard to a national law that would make the provinces act in a uniform manner when it came to consultation with indigenous persons? What was being done to stop indigenous evictions? Were there any statistics on food security, and had programmes improved malnutrition, in particular among indigenous children?
BAKARI SIDIKI DIABY, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Argentina, asked what measures were in place to combat racial profiling in the police force? Could the authorities stop the cases themselves?
Concluding Remarks
EDUARDO ERNESTO VEGA LUNA, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Argentina, said the Committee appreciated the work of the delegation: this had been a sincere dialogue with a lot of cordial discussion. This was a work of cooperation between different agencies in Argentina. The key word was structural discrimination, which still affected the indigenous, people of African descent, and other minorities, including migrants. The Committee recognised that there would be need to tackle the issue from a different point of view in order to tackle structural discrimination. This was a very critical moment. There was a need for important significant changes. The Committee called upon the State party to do a bit more to reduce the distance between what the Government was doing and what the provincial Governments were doing. Things could definitely be done to improve the situation of migrants and persons of African descent.
GRETA MARISA PENA, Comptroller of the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism of Argentina and head of the delegation, said the Government was waiting for the final outcome of the census, with regard to demographic composition. A lot had been done: many Ministries were including demographics, such as ethnic and religious criteria in their programmes, with a lot of affirmative action for persons of African descent and indigenous communities. The National Body for Social Security had a multilingual staff in the different territories, ensuring access to social welfare, serving the original communities in their own languages. Additional studies were being planned. On article 4 of the Convention and the relevant law on discriminatory acts, it was reflected in the various Bills that there was a need to reflect this law, but domestic law required further examination to make sure that it was fully in line with article 4, as the current law was over 35 years old and did require updating. The Institute did receive complaints of racial discrimination over the Internet and in social media, and did give opinions in this regard, also addressing, in the context of hate speech, violence against women.
The delegation also made further comments, saying that the Institute on Indigenous Affairs and the National Institute against Discrimination and had made statements expressing concerns on legal, political and judicial issues which seemed to target indigenous land rights regarding which it had received complaints, and this had led to attacks in the media, on social media, and even on the political front. Working and addressing discrimination in sports was also a high priority, with legislation that criminalised all discriminatory acts.
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
CERD23.004E