COMMITTEE ON ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION CONSIDERS REPORTS OF TURKMENISTAN

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has considered the initial to fifth periodic reports of Turkmenistan on its implementation of the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Introducing the reports, Rashid Meredov, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan, said that pursuant to Turkmenistan's international commitments and obligations, the Government unswervingly applied a policy of cooperation with the United Nations which was a strategic party for that country in the system of international relations. One convincing sign of this was the presentation of the report today. As the report was drafted, Turkmenistan had endeavoured to bear in mind as far as possible the recommendations and general guidelines of the Committee. A working visit had been paid by representatives of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to Turkmenistan so as to provide technical assistance. The basis of the report was material from the Ministries and departments of the country responsible for guaranteeing human rights, adopting any measures in this regard and avoiding any cases of racial discrimination based on ethnic or other causes.

Committee Expert Tang Chenyuan, who served as Country Rapporteur for the reports, said in preliminary remarks that it was rare that the Minister for Foreign Affairs of a country came to the Committee to reply to questions, and Mr. Meredov was very familiar with the situation in his country. In the dialogue it was not felt that this was a situation where there were two different views that were confrontational. The Committee was discussing issues. The Minister had made a great contribution to the fruitful dialogue, and his replies had clarified many issues. Among the questions raised, part of them concerned legal issues, another part concerned the implementation of international law in the domestic situation; a third part was on the implementation of the Convention and specific expectations and requests of the Committee. The information received would be useful to understand the situation of the country better, but there was a need for this to be continuously and further updated.

During the discussion, which lasted over two meetings, Committee Experts raised questions and issues, including that some of the articles of the Constitution were not fully in line with the Convention; a request, repeated by several Experts, for additional information on the ethnic make-up of the country; whether there were restrictions on the right of the freedom of movement of minorities, and whether there was a forced assimilation movement of these minorities; issues related to the Balouch minority, who were apparently subjected to police intimidation; the participation of minorities in the Government, the armed forces, law enforcement, or other Governmental employment; and the apparent contrast between the positive situation shown in the report, and information coming from United Nations organizations, regional organizations, NGOs and others which told of ethnic problems which were a cause for concern.

The Committee will present its concluding remarks on the report of Turkmenistan towards the end of the session, which will conclude on 19 August 2005.

Also in the delegation was a representative of the Department of the International Organizations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The Committee will meet at 3 p.m. on Friday 12 August 2005 to discuss issues under its early warning and urgent action procedure. The Committee had been scheduled to consider the fourteenth to eighteenth periodic reports of Nigeria but that will be postponed to next week because the delegation was held up by a strike in London.

Country Reports

The initial to fifth periodic reports of Turkmenistan (CERD/C/441/Add.1) are based on information received from the Turkmen ministries and departments responsible for upholding citizens’ rights and freedoms and taking steps to prevent any manifestation of discrimination on racial or ethnic grounds, on national statistics, on specially commissioned research, and on information from voluntary organizations engaged with the issues dealt with in this report.

In its reports, Turkmenistan explains that it condemns racial discrimination and pursues a policy of common understanding among peoples and prohibition of any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, descent, national or ethnic origin. The policy of non-discrimination consistently pursued by independent Turkmenistan is rooted in the mentality of the Turkmen people and its age-old history and traditions in relations with other peoples. The Turkmen mentality is essentially internationalist, centred on the human being as the supreme value, and based on openness, religious tolerance, respect for the cultures of other nations, and innate aversion to conflict.

The whole course of Turkmenistan’s development since independence has predisposed the country towards a policy of peace and consensus. Turkmenistan guarantees equal rights and liberties to all citizens, and the equality of all citizens before the law irrespective of ethnicity, origin, wealth, official position, place of residence, language, attitude to religion, political views or membership of a political party (Constitution, art. 7). Turkmen laws and regulations based on international instruments prohibit discrimination in any form. Turkmenistan has introduced the principles and norms established in international human rights instruments into practically all its laws and regulations concerning human rights.

Turkmenistan has statutorily proclaimed its commitments to the international community in the sphere of human rights, including the commitment to protect its citizens against any form of discrimination. Incitement to ethnic or racial hatred, strife or scorn, or recourse to violence on ethnic, racial or religious grounds, renders the culprit civilly, criminally and administratively liable.

Introduction of Reports

RASHID MEREDOV, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan, said Turkmenistan, pursuant to its international commitments and obligations, unswervingly applied a policy of cooperation with the United Nations which was a strategic party for that country in the system of international relations. One convincing sign of this was the presentation of the report today. As the report was drafted, Turkmenistan had endeavoured to bear in mind as far as possible the recommendations and general guidelines of the Committee. A working visit had been paid by representatives of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to Turkmenistan so as to provide technical assistance.

The basis of the report was material from the Ministries and departments of the country responsible for guaranteeing human rights, adopting any measures in this regard and avoiding any cases of racial discrimination based on ethnic or other causes. The report contained history, demographic, economic and social information. In the period since the ratification of the Convention, there had been many important steps and measures taken to implement its provisions. In the 15 years since independence, the leadership had implemented measures that ensured the well being and prosperity of the nation, and peace and harmony among the different ethnic and racial groups.

Sixty per cent of the State budget was used for social objectives. The report showed the most important indicators of economic growth in the country, Mr. Meredov said. However, when the social focus of the economy was mentioned, one crucial factor should be noted - since 1993 the State had been providing a whole series of social and economic guarantees for the citizens, including free gas, water and electricity, and it had created the conditions for free medical assistance and free education. Many charges were merely symbolic. Almost every year the State increased the level of salaries, grants for students, and pensions, so that the citizens enjoyed more benefits. There were special benefits for large families, war veterans, and invalids.

The report also contained detailed information on the structure of the State and the political structure thereof, which was based on the Constitution, adopted in May 1992. The political system of the country involved trade unions and different associations and clubs which were highly active in developing the economic and social way of life.

Turkmenistan condemned racial discrimination, and advocated tolerance between all groups. Its policy was based on the integrity of its society and its long history of good relations with other peoples. Within the territory, it was forbidden and viewed as a crime to spread racial hatred or call for violent acts against any kind of ethnic, religious or racial group. Civil structures and the State were constantly vigilant to this effect. All citizens were equal, notwithstanding their sex, race, age, ethnicity or religion, and enjoyed the benefits guaranteed by both domestic and international law.

These fundamental objectives had been developed in the new Constitution of Turkmenistan and in all legislative and regulatory acts of the country. The laws of Turkmenistan guaranteed equal rights and freedoms for all, and the equality of all before the law, irrespective of their origin, wealth, beliefs, or other considerations. Any organization that propagated ideas of ethnic hatred or that discriminated against another group was forbidden.

In response to a question asked in writing by the Country Rapporteur on the definition of racial discrimination in domestic law and whether this precisely agreed with the provisions of the Convention, Mr. Meredov said the definition in the Convention was a fundamental one for Turkmenistan. What was very important was that article 6 of the Constitution of Turkmenistan said clearly that it recognised the primacy of recognized norms of international law. Criminal liability was adjudged for the crime of fomenting religious hatred, although no cases had been held until today in the courts. Turkmenistan had a strict and serious attitude towards this matter with the aim of ensuring inter-faith and inter-ethnic harmony. The Constitution acknowledged the priority of international law, and thus the article of the Convention defining racial discrimination was higher in the hierarchy than domestic laws.

International human rights instruments and provisions were reflected in all of Turkmenistan’s laws. The core democratic rights and liberties guaranteed by international instruments to all on the basis of the international conventions were also guaranteed in Turkmenistan. Alongside legislative measures, there was a major awareness-raising campaign to teach tolerance and mutual understanding; educational establishments had a special course for working with young people to ensure they adopted non-discriminatory principles; and teachers and educational staff had been retrained. Young men and women from Turkmenistan studied in many educational institutions in many countries.

The Government paid great attention to circulating information on the principles and provisions of international law on human rights and fundamental freedoms in particular, Mr. Meredov said. Long-term human rights programmes were carried out to teach the population about the contents of human rights documents in the international sphere. The texts of international conventions were widely circulated; the contents were mentioned and explained in the media. A series of training courses, international seminars and conferences had been initiated; at the core of the topic of the rights of the individual was the relationship between the State and security and the rights of the individual. All of these aimed to eliminate racial discrimination and to ensure harmony.

Some 20,000 refugees had entered the country over a specific period from countries such as Tajikistan, and the Government had provided them all with the possibility of working, and with all they needed to live and survive in the country. Once the situation in Tajikistan had normalised, about 7,000 of these persons returned. About 12,000 decided to stay on permanently, and now lived in Turkmenistan where they enjoyed the same rights as any Turkmen citizen. A resolution had been signed granting citizenship to some 16,000 refugees living in the territory, and giving permanent residence status to a smaller number. Turkmenistan had carried out an unprecedented humanitarian action for refugees in this context. These very practical measures had been supported and welcomed by many international organizations and bodies.

Regarding the implementation of article 3 of the Convention, Turkmenistan clearly condemned racial segregation and apartheid, and banned all practices of this nature. On measures to give effect to article 4, it was forbidden and was a crime to disseminate any ideas based on racial superiority or incitement to any acts of violence towards any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin, Mr. Meredov said. Regarding the issue of equal treatment by the courts, protection by the State, political rights, and others included in article 5, some of the measures adopted to give effect to this deserved extra attention, in particular those regarding civil and political rights.

Any citizen could freely leave the country at any time. There was no restriction on civil rights. In the sphere of civil rights, Turkmenistan had a Constitution stating the regulations for acquiring and losing nationality, which was the same for all citizens, irrespective of their race or ethnic origin. Nobody could be deprived of their nationality, although citizens could change it. No Russians had been asked to leave the country rapidly, this was a lie perpetrated by people now hiding abroad. No individual Russian or Turkmen national was forced to leave the country, and this was the official position, Mr. Meredov said. A bilateral agreement had been entered into with Russia. Regarding a question alleging the forcible displacement of persons belonging to an ethnic minority, these rumours had no foundation at all.

There were many religious groups operating in Turkmenistan, including Russian Orthodox, the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Baha’i group, the Baptist Evangelical Group, the Hari Krishnas, and others. All religious groups desiring to operate had to register. On whether Turkmenistan intended to establish a national human rights institution, Mr. Meredov said a National Human Rights Institute had been installed in 1991, which worked as a centre for the individual’s rights and freedoms, and actively participated in drafting legislation and often initiated the law-making process for those acts of legislation aimed at promoting and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms. It was also instrumental in forming human rights programmes and projects. Today in Turkmenistan, in general schools provided teaching in Russian as well as in Turkmen.

Discussion

TANG CHENYUAN, the Committee Expert serving as Country Rapporteur, said the high level of the delegation showed that Turkmenistan and the Committee had very good cooperation, and that the former was quite sincere in its attitude. Turkmenistan won its independence in 1991. The population was only about 6.3 million, with more than 40 ethnic groups. In 1994, it had acceded to the Convention. This first report, which in effect combined five periodic reports, was very detailed, introducing the general situation in Turkmenistan.

The Committee reviewed the implementation of the Convention in Turkmenistan in 2002, at which time there was no report from the Government. The Committee had received information at that time from other sources, and not from the State party. Two major concerns then had been over the discrimination against minorities in employment and education; and against religious personnel, and interference in religious activities.

Articles 14 and 8 of the Convention were of interest, and Turkmenistan should consider the possibility of individuals making complaints. Turkmenistan had made a lot of effort in terms of harmonising domestic law with international standards. The Constitution reflected the spirit of the Convention, and there were clear legal stipulations and acts enacted guaranteeing the rights of citizens, including civil rights; those violating the spirit of the Convention were to be punished.

Concerning refugees, an Act had been passed in 1997, including a regulation determining refugee-status rules. Turkmenistan recognised the primacy of international law over its domestic system and worked to guarantee the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination by incorporating the principles of international conventions into its system, amending laws where necessary. A lot of work had been done to raise awareness and to develop the spirit of national solidarity and tolerance.

Questions posed by Mr. Tang were on general knowledge which some attached great importance to. It was unclear as to whether problems of racial discrimination really existed in Turkmenistan. He also said he was very happy with the answers that had been given so far. There were a few things to improve, such as the registration system for organizations. He also asked whether it was true that police and other officials abided strictly by the law. No country could say that there were no mistakes and that there were no cases of disharmony between people. The issue of citizenship was also addressed by Mr. Tang.

Other Committee Experts then raised issues and made further comments on varied topics including if the Convention could be applied directly and invoked by the Courts; a request for the elaboration of which laws banned racial hatred; that some of the articles of the Constitution were not fully in line with the Convention, and could the delegation comment on this; a request for additional information on the ethnic make-up of the country; whether there were restrictions to the right of the freedom of movement of minorities, and whether there was a forced assimilation movement; issues related to the Balouch minority, who were apparently subjected to police intimidation; the participation of minorities in the Government, the armed forces, law enforcement, or other Governmental employment; and the apparent contrast between the positive situation shown in the report, and information coming from United Nations organizations, regional organizations, non-governmental organizations and others which told of ethnic problems which were a cause for concern.

Questions were also raised regarding the alleged closure of minority languages schools, the alleged forced displacement of ethnic Uzbeks, the use of minority languages in the media, and some speeches made by the President of Turkmenistan in relation to ethnic minorities.

Response by Delegation

Responding to the questions posed by the Committee Experts, Mr. Meredov said the registration of religious groups was carried out regardless of the religion and the number of adherents to the group. There were nine non-Muslim religious groups currently registered, some of which were quite small, of about ten or twelve people, and no obstruction had been posed to their registration. In total, there were 112 religious groups registered. The State ensured all the rights of those who wished to create a religious group or organization, and there was a special group under the Ministry of Justice which worked to ensure the rights of those belonging to a religious organization. It was claimed that some Muslim organizations, especially Shi’a Muslim organizations, had not been registered, but this was not the case. Questions had been posed on the registration of the Armenian Orthodox Church. Any group which submitted documents for registration in line with the laws of Turkmenistan was considered seriously. No request for registration from that particular group had been received, but once it was, it would be considered in line with the law and registered accordingly.

An Expert had said that representatives of the Armenian minority had been living in Turkmenistan for a long time. This minority faced no problems whatsoever. All rights that were enjoyed by the Turkmen citizens were enjoyed by all minorities and other nationalities in the country. The Armenians participated in the work of Government structures, and there were no problems. On the possibility of obtaining educational training in other languages, the delegation had tried to reflect on this detail the day before, but had heard questions again on the closure of schools and the difficulties in obtaining such education. Mr. Meredov stressed that in Turkmenistan primary education was carried out in the State language as well as other languages, for example in Russian, and one could not say that there was only one school in the Russian language. The Government of Turkmenistan was trying to do everything possible for education in the best conditions.

The spiritual and cultural ties between Turkmenistan and other nationalities living in the country were very close, and every opportunity was given to them to develop their own national feelings. There were very interesting mutual projects also being worked on with neighbouring countries related to joint cultural activities and events in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and other Central Asian Republics. Very interesting conferences were held regarding the history, literature and culture of the Central Asian Republics. The information related to the closure of schools and the lack of language opportunities did not correspond to reality, and Mr. Meredov said if the Committee required more information, they should address the Foreign Ministry directly, and any information that was needed would be provided in detail and very rapidly. When such information was received, the Committee should remain actively engaged in contact with the Government and representations abroad of Turkmenistan.

Regarding the functioning of Government institutions and agencies, representatives of different nationalities worked in the State apparatus at high levels, including Ministers, heads of Parliamentary Committees, heads of newspapers, heads or deputies of different bodies of the executive, and other places including local authorities. When seeking employment, information had to be given regarding the national background going back years. If there was a case alleged where employment was denied on ethnic or origin grounds, Mr. Meredov asked the Committee to inform the Government directly. He said such cases had never occurred. The Committee could request to visit the country to see for itself. It was not the first time the question had been heard, and those who had visited the capital changed their views completely. Without visiting the country and viewing the situation on the ground, it was incorrect to make such statements and allegations. Turkmenistan was open for contact, and was ready to work with the Committee and provide it with all the information it required. Any person also had the freedom to study, and there was no need to apply to anyone for this, and any allegations to the contrary were also wrong.

Some questions related to the situation of the Baluch had also been raised, Mr. Meredov said. This minority had been living in the country for decades as citizens of the country, enjoying all the rights, and it had never had any problems. The Baluch were a hard-working people, living in rural areas and cities. They were fluent in Turkmen, despite what the Committee had said, and there were cultural events with local representations and dances, and there were no special issues related to them. Another question had been raised related to the movement of Uzbeks to other regions of Turkmenistan, and Mr. Meredov asked for further clarification, as there was no evidence of such a move. The State created opportunities so that people, on a voluntary basis, could obtain land and move there in order to work, and he wished to stress the voluntary point. There were no transfers of population. Fertile lands with infrastructure including housing had been opened up, but if people did not wish to move to rural areas, they could stay where they were. If the Committee had specific information, it should give examples. Unfortunately, this type of information was being spread by people with dubious intentions - there was no official information on this topic, and Mr. Meredov said he hoped the dialogue today would help the Committee to have an objective view of the country, which was ready to work from a point of open dialogue.

Requests for additional information on refugees and displaced persons had been heard, Mr. Meredov said, and in line with article 2 of the Convention, Turkmenistan had taken specific economic, political and social measures to protect their rights. The Government had delegated necessary financial resources to ensure that these refugees had adequate living conditions. After the improvement of the situation in Tajikistan, many refugees had decided to return home and had been aided by the Government to this effect. Those who had stayed in Turkmenistan had been granted citizenship and residence permits where appropriate, and these included several different nationalities including Tajiks, Uzbeks, Russians, and others.
On paragraph 115 of the report, related to property purchased by foreign citizens and the right to inheritance of this property, this right was ensured, and any owner of property had the right to give it to a descendant. Regarding the difference in salaries for men and women, such differences did not exist, and for the same job and profession, men and women received the same level of remuneration for their work. On the issue of the application of the Convention, and whether it could be directly invoked, all the provisions of the Convention were reflected in national legislation. Legal protection was carried out regardless of social status, racial or national background.

On a set of questions related to legislation and the norms of the Convention, there were laws that covered punishment in the case of violations; these laws were contained in the Criminal Code, which held provisions for punishing incitement of religious hatred; for genocide; crime on the basis of social, national or religious or racial hatred; direct harm on the basis of social, national or religious hatred; and others. Additional information on this could be sent in writing if required.

On the issue of access to the mass media, Mr. Meredov said today in Turkmenistan newspapers were published in Turkmen and Russian; national television had a special channel that included programmes in six foreign languages, and this channel worked around the clock; and more than 20 foreign press agencies were accredited and working in the country. There were no limitations, and people could receive radio and TV signals from stations across the world.

On the topic of dual citizenship, this was a matter for each country to decide how to manage. Mr. Meredov said the information that people who no longer had Turkmen citizenship had to leave the country within two months was incorrect, these people had the opportunity to stay, and were still in Turkmenistan and working there. They also kept their rights, including the right to inherit property. On the issue of history and its teaching, the education curricula were drawn up on the basis of mutual respect and of different cultures. The history of Turkmenistan, Greece, Rome, Russia and other countries were studied, as was literature.

Committee Experts then asked further questions and made comments on various topics, including a discrepancy in figures of minorities as stated in the report and available from Government sources; issues linked to educational opportunities as offered to children from Turkmenistan in countries outside; the involvement of children in cotton-harvesting during the academic year; the training of Government functionaries in the context of human rights; the process of dialogue between civil society and the Government, as there was a considerable gap between the views of the situation on the ground; the issue of the deportation of 2,000 people, as the information of the Committee on this topic was based on the report of the OSCE Rapporteur on Turkmenistan; the contrasts in the information that had reached the Committee; the reported ongoing discrimination of the Government against ethnic minorities in the field of education, employment, forced displacement, marriage, exit of the country and others as noted by the United Nations General Assembly and in a resolution of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights; and that only the Orthodox Church and the Sunni branch of Islam were recognised according to official channels of information.

It would be interesting, an Expert said, for the delegation to say what had been done more recently to remedy the situations that had been denounced in these documents.

Responding to these questions, Mr. Meredov said the Ruhnama, written by the President, contained the historic traditions, customs and spiritual values of the Turkmen people. It was an important work that was studied with great respect and was included in school curricula, as it incorporated the foundations of the general human values and bases of Turkmen society, and advocated respect for different peoples.

On the Roma population, there were no representatives of this group in the country, although there had been some during the Soviet period. On human rights education for people in law enforcement agencies, human rights were taught in educational institutions, with special courses on humanitarian education. On the topic of cotton-harvesting, child labour was prohibited by the laws of Turkmenistan.

If information had been received, Turkmenistan was ready to discuss it, and to provide objective information. Regarding the report of the OSCE Rapporteur, a detailed response had been provided to all the issues raised. Any international organization or official representing one could come to Turkmenistan and review the situation on the ground, and could meet anyone and visit any agency or ministry freely.

Education was available to all those living in Turkmenistan, regardless of their ethnicity, nationality or origin. Regarding statistical data, Mr. Meredov said percentages would be made available to the Committee on how many Turkmen students were studying abroad, and this would be part of the continuing dialogue.

Mr. Meredov also responded briefly to the other questions raised by the Committee Experts, and said Turkmenistan remained open to an ongoing dialogue.

The Experts then asked further brief questions, including whether Turkmenistan was ready to receive a visit from the Coordinator on the Follow-up to Recommendations in order to bridge the gap between information received and allegations made, to which questions the delegation responded, also briefly.

Preliminary Remarks

TANG CHENYUAN, the Committee Expert serving as Country Rapporteur, said in considering the report, more than forty questions had been raised, and detailed replies had been given. The dialogue between the Committee and Turkmenistan had been fruitful. It was rare that the Minister for Foreign Affairs of a country came to the Committee to reply to questions, and Mr. Meredov was very familiar with the situation in his country. In the dialogue it was not felt that this was a situation where there were two different views that were confrontational. The Committee was discussing issues. The Minister had made a great contribution to the fruitful dialogue, and his replies had clarified many issues. Among the questions raised, part of them concerned legal issues, another part concerned the implementation of international law in the domestic situation; a third part was on the implementation of the Convention and specific expectations and requests of the Committee. The information received would be useful to understand the situation of the country better, but there was a need for this to be continuously and further updated.

The dialogue was in keeping with the purpose of the Convention, namely to implement all of its provisions, in the light of the specific situations of the different countries. The Minister understood this intention, and had made efforts in this direction. Many colleagues had raised the issue of how to implement the provisions of international law within the country. The questions were useful for the country to further study and carry out follow-up activities. Some of the issues however had not been clarified, and there were some areas that still needed to be improved in practice. The report also did not contain enough concrete cases and examples allowing to be seen clearly how the Convention was implemented in reality, and this should be taken into consideration when formulating future reports.

Some laws and regulations required further study in conjunction with actual practices so as to enhance implementation of the provisions of the Convention. A lot of his colleagues had proposed some ideas about how Turkmenistan could further improve its publication and information campaign among the public on the Convention, and how to increase the human rights training for law-enforcement personnel in order to avoid problems for the implementation of the Convention. Work in this respect should be increased. He hoped that the future would see a strengthening of cooperation and dialogue between the Committee and the State party.

For use of the information media; not an official record

CRD05029E