COMMITTEE ON ELIMINATION OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN CONSIDERS REPORT OF FRANCE

The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women today considered the sixth periodic report of France on how that country is implementing the provisions of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.

Valerie Letard, Secretary of State in charge of Solidarity at the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Solidarity of France, introducing the report, said France had made efforts to give full effect to the Convention, but still had challenges to meet. In line with its commitments, France, in its foreign policy, gave explicit protection to the rights of women. Gender mainstreaming had received new impetus in France, with the adoption of the Charter on Equality between men and women. An assessment of the Charter had shown that three years after its adoption, three quarters of the commitments had been or were being achieved. France had given itself very complete laws to protect women from discriminatory practices and behaviour, and this would be added to by a draft law which concluded the integration into French law of several European directives.

Among questions and issues raised by Experts were whether there was direct application of the Convention through the courts, and what was the main obstacle to this direct application; whether the Government intended to review legal provisions that could act as a deterrent to women reporting incidents of sexual harassment; the need for specific legislation which named and penalised female genital mutilation; what were the civil and penal procedures for violence against women, and whether there were shelters for women and their children; whether there was a prohibition of discrimination against part-time employees and temporary employees; and whether in the future article 4.1 on temporary measures would be used for higher management echelons so that more women were in these positions.

In concluding remarks, Joelle Voisin, Head of the Service for Women’s Rights and Equality, Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Solidarity of France, said France was very sensitive to the requirements of the Convention, and committed itself to making it better known, and to disseminating the concluding observations of the Committee. The next report would have an annex on the overseas territories. Consultations would be held on withdrawing the reservations to the Convention. France would keep a close eye on the situation of migrant women and their descendants, and would help them to have access to their rights and to law, and to have proper protection, as well as helping them to achieve success. France realised that today, equality of rights was enshrined in law, but was not yet fully implemented in practice, but would work to achieve this.

Also in concluding remarks, Dubravka Simonovic, Chairperson of the Committee, said it had been a very constructive dialogue, with progress seen, but a lot remained to be done with regards to full implementation of the Convention. It was hoped that the reservations would be withdrawn in the future. The Committee would assess the situation and put forward its recommendations. Parity in Government was a milestone for France, but it was also a great responsibility.

Among the delegation of France were representatives of the Permanent Mission of France to the United Nations Office at Geneva, as well as several representatives from the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Solidarity.

The next public meeting of the Committee will be at 3 p.m. on Monday, 21 January, when it will hold a meeting with non-governmental organizations on the countries that it will be reviewing during the rest of the week.


Report of France

The sixth periodic report of France (CEDAW/C/FRA/6) says since France’s last hearing before the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, on July 3, 2003, fresh impetus has been given to national policies aimed at promoting women’s rights and equality between men and women. These policies are in line with the provisions of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. They are a response to certain concerns expressed by the Committee in 2003, especially regarding the situation of immigrant women and women born of immigration and efforts to combat the violence of which they are victims (forced marriages and sexual mutilation, in particular); regarding harmonization of the legal age at which boys and girls can marry; differences in pay for men and women; or women’s access to decision-making; and the parity objective. They also aim to fulfil the commitments undertaken at the World Conferences on Women.

For several years now, France has expressed its determination to adopt effective measures to combat all forms of discrimination in employment. Particularly in cases of discrimination based on sex, the strengthening of legal provisions and concrete steps taken by the authorities have led to significant progress. In 2003, the Government stepped up efforts to mainstream a gender perspective in France, as advocated in the Beijing Platform for Action. Numerous consultations were conducted to that end with the players contributing either locally or at the national level to greater equality between men and women. Those efforts culminated on 8 March 2004 in the official presentation to the Prime Minister of the Charter on the Equality of Men and Women, which, in a sense, constitutes the agenda and “roadmap” of all those who have subscribed to it.

The question of the role and place of immigrant women and women born of immigration in French society has taken on a new dimension in recent years as awareness grew that these women had acted as vectors of integration and yet, if they failed, were also the principal victims of it. In the area of violence, the Government has, in particular, set about implementing the legislative proposals set forth in the report entitled “Femmes et immigration: assurer le plein exercice de la citoyenneté, à part entière, à parts égales”. Indeed, on December 15, 2005, the National Assembly unanimously adopted, at the first reading, a bill proposed by the Senate (and adopted by the Senate unanimously at the first reading on March 29, 2005) aimed at strengthening the prevention and suppression of marital violence and acts of violence against minors. Some of the provisions adopted at this stage - the bill is still being debated in Parliament - contain measures specifically targeting women born of immigration.

Introduction of Report

VALERIE LETARD, Secretary of State in charge of Solidarity at the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Solidarity of France, introducing the report, said France had made efforts to give full effect to the Convention, but still had challenges to meet. In line with its commitments, France, in its foreign policy, gave explicit protection to the rights of women. Gender mainstreaming had received new impetus in France, with the adoption of the Charter on Equality between men and women. An assessment of the Charter had shown that three years after its adoption, three quarters of the commitments had been or were being achieved. This mainstreaming had also given rise to gender budgeting, and since 2000 this had been given form in a Budgetary Yellow Paper. A number of positive actions had been implemented to correct persisting inequalities.

Until recently, France had a reservation under the Convention on social protection of rural women, and the procedure for the official withdrawal of this had been undertaken. With regards to the transmission of the family name to children, this could not yet be withdrawn as French law was not yet in conformity with this element of the Convention. However, a lot of progress had been made in this regard. The service of women’s rights and equality was an institutional mechanism, with a central service and a de-localised network of regional delegates and departmental elements.

France had given itself very complete laws to protect women from discriminatory practices and behaviour, and this would be added to by a draft law which concluded the integration into French law of several European directives including on the equality of treatment between men and women with regards to access to and provision of goods and services, and explicitly condemned sexual harassment. The High Authority to Fight Against Discrimination and for Equality had been set up in 2004, and could be applied to by any person victim of discrimination. In several years, it had become a key player in action against discrimination. The French Government had been engaging in positive action in particular with regards to the specific situation of immigrant women. No traditional custom could justify the violation of human rights and human dignity, and therefore there was a law on the prevention and repression of domestic violence and violence against minors, which sought to make more efficient the repression of genital mutilation. The age of legal marriage was in line with that of boys, namely eighteen years of age. Marriages could be annulled if they were not freely consented to. On stereotypes linked to gender and sex, France had brought the penalties for this into line with those for racist comments. Work had also been done to reduce trafficking and exploitation of women through prostitution. The Convention also fully applied to the overseas territories, and work was also being done in those regions in all areas.

Questions by Experts

Questions and issues raised by Experts on articles one to four of the Convention included that of France’s reservations to the Convention and the need to withdraw or narrow these; if the reporting process also involved Parliament and the need to do so if this was not the case; whether the concluding comments of the Committee were widely broadcast, including to Parliament; whether there was direct application of the Convention through the courts, and what was the main obstacle to this direct application; whether the Government intended to review legal provisions that could act as a deterrent to women reporting incidents of sexual harassment; the need to study what were the reasons for the low usage of the Institute on Gender Discrimination by women, and whether women in overseas territories were aware of its existence; whether there was a facility for immigrant women to apply to should they suffer from gender discrimination; whether women were afraid of retaliation in the case of complaints despite the law allowing this; the situation of women in the partly-autonomous overseas territorial units and what was the situation of the implementation of the Convention there as this did not appear to be satisfactory; and whether there could be special temporary action to ensure that women of non-European origin could be represented at the highest levels of the political world and the public sector.

Response by Delegation

Responding to these issues and others, Ms. Letard said that when France ratified the Convention in 1983, it made a number of reservations, and this was allowed by international law. When it was last before the Committee in 2003, the main reservations remained. One of these would be withdrawn very soon, on the social protection of rural women, as the situation had changed. With regards to the other, on passing on the surname, this should not disguise the progress made in the law of 2002, although France acknowledged that this law required further publicising. The issues would continue to be discussed internally.

On the direct effects of the Convention on French law, Ms. Letard said France had to avoid the absence of a concrete effect. Direct effect was decided by the national judge, who examined article by article whether the stipulations were unconditional and sufficiently precise. The Government could not influence the judge, due to the separation of powers, and the judiciary had not yet reported on this issue, as no cases had been brought before the courts in the context of the Convention - this was because judges were not free to arbitrarily raise an international convention during consideration of a case. Lawyers and solicitors were the ones who could raise this, and France would make more efforts to sensitise them to the existence and provisions of the Convention. The Convention was, however, applied by national jurisdiction, and there were several decisions by the Council of States indicating this. The Convention enjoyed the same status as all other texts in French law, and its provisions were covered by domestic and community law, which was why lawyers did not usually raise it, preferring to use national law.

With regards to dissemination and the Parliament, Ms. Letard said that the sixth report brought together contributions from all Ministries involved and the authorities of overseas communities. It had also been submitted to the National Human Rights Institution for comments, and to civil society organizations, including feminists. These comments had been considered by the Ministries. It had been submitted to a body of the National Assembly. The final conclusions would be disseminated to Parliament, delegations of organizations on women’s rights, the National Assembly and the Parliament. There was a pamphlet on the High Authority on Women’s Rights to Combat Discrimination and Promote Equality which was distributed in order to make women aware of its existence. The Authority also helped victims and promoted good practice to make sure this became mainstream. It studied cases, helped to investigate and prepare them, and could undertake measures to bring discrimination to an end, promote equality, and had the power to inflict financial sanctions. It offered victims mediation, without excluding recourse to courts, and offered assistance free of charge to help victims provide testimony.

DNA tests were currently a new aspect of French law, and the authorities were determining what its current effect was, before making them a permanent part of the law, Ms. Letard said. These tests were only carried out at the initiative of the holder of a residence permit, and only on the father, not the mother. This was carried out with assistance in order to determine the provision of residence papers. On the Ministry that was responsible for women’s rights, this was not always necessarily the same, depending on the Government. The Government wished women’s rights to be a subject of concern in every Ministry, as it was an inter-Ministerial topic. The role of the Secretariat of State was to ensure coordination in this regard. With regards to the access to rights of immigrant women, all foreigners who were legally entering France were welcomed by a Government institution, and signed a contract of integration which recalled, among other things, equal access to education, the illegality of forced marriage, and others. The State provided language teaching, and had guides on women’s rights particularly in the context of family law.

On the overseas territories, various measures had been taken, including, in recent years, the suppression of polygamy. The gender equality policy for the overseas territories was, the delegation said, intended to ensure continuity between what was being done in France and overseas. There were of course cultural differences, and this gave rise to a need to work harder to ensure that the new gender provisions were accepted. In the overseas territories, the problem of employment was the most sensitive issue. Work was being done to encourage women to take decision-making posts, and there was a need to re-educate them in this regard.

The Charter on Equality had been signed in 2004, the delegation said, for a period of three years, and it had been extended since. The Charter was an achievement, as in three years three quarters of the commitments had been achieved. A more rigorous phase was now being entered upon, as the issue of credits was now being taken up. One of the points of the Charter was to disseminate and publicise the Convention, and it was thought that this had not yet been entirely achieved, and was therefore ongoing

Questions by Experts

Among questions and issues raised by Experts on articles five to nine were what was being carried out to combat the persistent sexist stereotypes and images of women in media and advertising; the need for specifically targeted measures to combat the marginalisation of older immigrant women and to deconstruct her image; the need for specific legislation which named and penalised female genital mutilation; what were the civil and penal procedures for violence against women, and whether there were shelters for women and their children; what was being done to raise awareness among women that they could launch complaints under the Optional Protocol to the Convention; what had been missed in terms of cooperation between the different actors working in the field of prevention of violence against women in the past; the need to make a difference between trafficking and prostitution, as not all prostitutes were trafficked; whether France worked with countries of origin on rehabilitation and reinsertion on return of the victims; whether France recognised that there were victims of trafficking that were not prostituted; what was the status of the Office on trafficking in persons, its mandate, personnel, effectiveness and progress, if any; and whether the situation with regards to prostitution had not in fact got worse since the last report.


Response by Delegation

Responding to these questions and others, Ms. Letard noted that nobody had been sent away at the border for wearing a headscarf. However, in State schools, as there was the lay system, the wearing of signs or clothing which demonstrated a religious affiliation was forbidden. This was to protect girls, not to punish them. Only a very limited number of girls had been excluded from State education for this reason. The law protected girls, as it allowed them to choose later on how they wished to express their religion. The law covered all religious signals and religions, not just Islam. On the immigration policy, recent French laws had emphasised the need for work-based immigration. France was part of the European Convention to safeguard human rights and fundamental freedoms, and this guaranteed all on French territory, including legal aliens, the right to normal family life and family unification. It was up to judges to say how this was applied in terms of domestic law. With regards to stereotypes, and preventing the negative image of women in the media, one of the priorities in combating violence against women was a letter sent to a wide range of professionals urging them to consider the role and portrayal of women in the media, so that a process could begin in which all worked together to improve the image of women in the media.

France was working hard to help women in immigrant families in various fields, including equality at work, part-time work, and domestic violence, and had held a conference, which resulted in the adoption of a number of measures to help women, including prevention and education. There was progress towards the elaboration of a plan for the suburbs and the population living there in order to improve the situation, with positive discrimination to favourise the under-privileged sectors of the population and to help their integration into society, Ms. Letard said. Inter-ministerial work was being done to promote gender mainstreaming in the education system, with the participation of seven Ministries and one Secretariat of State. This included commitments up to 2011 on the issue. Work would begin as early in the education system as possible, so as to encourage more girls going into the scientific disciplines as possible.

For retirement, the President of the Republic had stated that there were several difficulties: women were penalised as they had small pensions. Today the President wished to intervene at four levels: increasing the pension rate; increasing the minimum old-age pension; improving the retirement pensions for people in agriculture and crafts; and providing retirement pensions for home-makers who had not worked professionally. With regards to female genital mutilation and forced marriages, France worked to combat all forms of violence - nothing could be justified by tradition. There was a law to combat these phenomena. There were several measures with regards to female genital mutilation, and it should be possible to conduct criminal prosecution if this was performed outside France. There were brochures, education and social workers working on this issue, Ms. Letard said.

Currently there was no penalty for a client of an adult prostitute; however, if the prostitute was a minor or particularly vulnerable due to age, disability, pregnancy or disease, then there was a penalty. Work was being done to make people aware that prostitution was not a necessary evil. There was also a programme to educate clients in this regard. Work was being done at many levels, including with police officials and doctors, with regards to domestic violence. A major public awareness campaign would be launched shortly, and further measures taken in the field to examine what a victim went through and to simplify the procedure by providing a single social worker to deal with the process. There was a pamphlet and a hotline providing advice for battered women, Ms. Letard said.

On parity in political life, there was a need for further progress in the area, and further work was required. Work was being done to reconcile family and political and business life, and France was working with Sweden in this regard. On prostitution and trafficking, it did not seem advisable to change the law to make it possible to issue residence permits to victims of trafficking without them first submitting a complaint, as the police needed to be informed in order to be able to dismantle trafficking networks, and to be able to undertake deterrent measures. The examination of requests for residence papers was done on a case-by-case basis, and local authorities had the right to refuse for specific reasons. There had been 38 condemnations for trafficking in 2006 after witnesses testified.

Questions by Experts

Among questions and issues raised by Experts concerning article ten were the need for more information on where foreign and migrant workers were placed and the kinds of programmes that were put in place for them; and whether there had been any studies as to the long-term effect on girls’ education with regards to the ban on head-scarves.

Response by Delegation

Responding, the delegation said that the Government had no statistics on origins, and was unable to determine the levels of satisfaction with schooling, and their results as related to the economic background. However, some statistics from individual schools had shown that immigrant children had better results in school, in particular when they were given support to overcome disadvantages. Since 2005 there had been fewer and fewer cases of pupils coming to school wearing a religious symbol. There had been one expulsion in 2007, of a pupil over compulsory school age. The law was increasingly obeyed.

Questions by Experts

Among questions and issues raised by Experts on article eleven were economic and employment disparities between men and women, and what results were gained by initiatives aimed at reducing these; whether part-time workers had a statutory right to increase their working hours before employers took on new staff; whether there was a prohibition of discrimination against part-time employees and temporary employees; whether the voluntary and involuntary negotiation process included salary-negotiation for directors; whether in the future article 4.1 on temporary measures would be used for higher management echelons so that more women were in these positions; whether there were restrictions for women wearing headscarves in certain roles, such as in the diplomatic world and on television; and whether legislation on civil and labour rights applied in the same way to women in France and women in overseas territories.

Response by Delegation

Responding, the delegation said women received assistance to employment through associations that aimed to boost their confidence and improve their skills. Other associations and non-governmental organizations worked to help women reintegrate into the work force. There was also a brochure on the disadvantages of temporary work. A parental leave benefit was paid on a pro rata basis, on the basis of time not spent working. Further consideration was being given to the remuneration of maternal leave, and child care. The imposition of part-time work was also an issue of concern. The Labour Code stipulated that on replacement of a part-time post by a full-time post, the person already in the job had priority consideration for that post. As of 2010, companies that did not have a plan to redress wage inequalities would have to pay a fine. This money would be used to help companies redress the gender imbalance.

Work would also be done on the structural factors which caused the wage inequalities, the delegation said. Work had to be done on the gender stereotypes that were so prevalent in society, and to provide gender guidance encouraging girls to study certain matters, as well as encouraging companies to recruit women for non-stereotypical female posts. There was a clear need for more and better childcare facilities if women were to be encouraged to work full-time. Parenting needed to be shared more equally between parents. An increasing number of fathers were taking parental leave, and further work would be done to encourage this.

There were no accurate statistics on disabled women, but their employment varied with regards to the type of employment, and it was clear that there was more unemployment among disabled women than disabled men. Regarding the overseas territories, the French constitutional principle of indivisibility of the Republic allowed for a single recognition of citizenship. It was true that the overseas communities had autonomous status to various extents, and there could be measures governing people which were based on custom, and which could cause problems with regards to the implementation of the Convention. However, care was taken that the principles of the Republic were not undermined, and that practices which violated women’s rights were eliminated, and that there was equality of rights between women in the overseas territories and on the mainland. The employment situation was more difficult overseas, simply as there was not the same economic situation, without the manpower resources, and still some traditional activities such as fishing, agriculture, and tourism. There was a need to attract more investment in the overseas territories. Precarious employment was known by women to a greater extent than on the mainland. The problems were not the same in the Caribbean as in the Pacific territories.

It was a criminal offence not only to engage in gender discrimination but also in harassment. There was a difference between sexual and moral harassment in the Criminal Code, the delegation said. Sexual harassment was punishable by one year in prison and up to 15,000 euros fine. Today sexual harassment could be deemed to be acts of any nature, and there was no need for a subordinate link between the victim and the perpetrator. For discrimination committed against persons who had refused to be subjected to harassment or testified against such actions, the European Commission had criticised France for the fact that some of the directives on this had not yet been fully translated into national law, and that there was a lack of a proper definition of sexual harassment including a single act. The Government had drawn up a draft law which was being studied. It contained cross-cutting general provisions covering all the situations which were dealt with by the various European directives.

Questions by Experts

Among questions and issues raised by Experts on articles twelve to fourteen were whether access to contraceptives was restricted as in spite of mass campaigns on contraceptive use, use was still very low; a request for information on maternal mortality and abortion; whether women from sub-Saharan countries who were infected by HIV/AIDS had the right to free medical care and medicines; how sexual education was working in the context of reports of abortion being used as a contraceptive method; what guidance was given to couples and schoolchildren to allow them to choose in a responsible manner the appropriate method of contraception; and the need for more information on the situation with regards to HIV/AIDS in the overseas territories, particularly in the Caribbean, and for pregnant women.

Response by Delegation

Responding, the delegation said that on contraception, it was clear that there was still a lot of progress to be made. Efforts were being made to educate women as well as men as to contraception. It was much used, but it was not always the right kind of contraception. France knew, however, what should be done, and was working on the issue with the Ministry of Health. Emergency contraception appeared to be widely used among the young, and this was following a programme to educate the young as to its availability and advantages over abortion. Classes on contraception in schools were mostly given by independent organizations, and not by teachers. There were mass campaigns organised in the overseas territories to educate women on contraception, however, there were various traditional and cultural barriers that needed to be overcome.

Laws had been passed which helped to improve the basic pensions of women, in particular rural women doing agricultural work, the delegation said. Real progress had been made in this area, and further efforts would be made to improve their living conditions in rural areas, including transport. There were no statistics broken down covering women in rural areas. There was more on offer in terms of health services for women than for men in rural areas, as there were childbirth and maternal health clinics. However, there was a problem in France, as doctors were leaving the countryside and going to towns, and some rural areas had created health centres to try to attract young general practitioners. One of the problems was that doctor’s wives did not want to go to the countryside, as they knew it was difficult for women to live there.

Questions by Experts

Among questions and issues raised by Experts on articles fifteen to sixteen of the Convention were the issue of the adoption of a surname for a child and whether a mother who had been abandoned by the father and was raising the child herself could apply for the name to be changed to her own; how a property was divided after the death of a husband among his wife and children; how many complaints of domestic violence had been received by the police since January 2005 and how many of these went to court; what penalties were being meted out to individuals guilty of coercing others into marriage; and what situations had been identified as serious grounds to a derogation to the minimum age for marriage.


Response by Delegation

Responding, the delegation said the system on the surname had entered into force in January 2005. Children born since that date could have the father’s, mother’s, or both surnames. The father’s name was the default name. If there was no declaration, and simultaneous establishment of paternity and maternity, then the father’s name was given. In France, the majority preferred to take the father’s surname - unless this was strange, funny, or foreign, in which case the mother’s name was preferred. If the father abandoned the child, then there could be a request to change the name. The change was not a right, unless there was a legitimate reason, including abandonment of the family.

On polygamy, from 1993 onwards, this was explicitly prohibited by law. A polygamous marriage abroad could not, however, be annulled in France. Immigrants were given information in their country of origin with regards to polygamy. France had now nearly left behind the transition process, and had no statistics, as it did not know how many were living in polygamous unions, as this was no longer allowed.

On domestic violence, the delegation said that measures were being assessed to see how they were working, and the Minister of Justice would be carrying this assessment out shortly. This was a civil rather than a criminal measure. If a spouse was a victim of violence, then there could be a complaint before the court, and a request to evict the violent spouse if there were serious risks for the victim or for children. Statistics on court decisions made it difficult to identify this procedure as distinct from other procedures in the Criminal Code. The Ministry of Justice had, however, launched a statistical study for all courts, asking them to look at all complaints and judgements, in order to determine the situation in the field. There were other urgent measures in the context of divorce allowing the victim to leave the matrimonial home if they required protection. Changes had been made to extend these provisions to cover unmarried couples.

With regards to forced marriages, the delegation said there were no statistics. The law of 2006 had set the age of marriage at 18 for both sexes. The derogations were very marginal - reasons invoked could include the pregnancy of the young woman involved. Some of the aspects of local customary status in the overseas territories could be archaic and run against the provisions of the Convention, but efforts had been made over recent years to eliminate these. The repudiation of women was no longer allowed - the divorce procedure was required.

Responding to brief follow-up questions, the delegation said in the case of family regrouping, the family that was to rejoin the spouse was to be tested on the language and knowledge of the Republic. This law was very recent, and if an assessment showed that it was necessary, then training was given for free in the country of origin. However, in no case was it a barrier to come to France. On other matters, penal mediation had been much questioned by non-governmental organizations. The 2006 law did limit its use. There had been discussions with the Ministry of Justice on the subject, and the aim was to confine its use to situations of conflict but not of violence.

Concluding Remarks

In concluding remarks, JOELLE VOISIN, Head of the Service for Women’s Rights and Equality, Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Solidarity of France, said the discussion had been dynamic, constructive, and very valuable for France. The Committee was to be thanked for its many questions, which had been specific, relevant, and showed the interest in France’s application of the Convention. France was very sensitive to the requirements of the Convention, and committed itself to making it better known, and to disseminating the concluding observations of the Committee. The next report would have an annex on the overseas territories. Consultations would be held on withdrawing the reservations to the Convention. France would keep a close eye on the situation of migrant women and their descendants, and would help them to have access to their rights and to law, and to have proper protection, as well as helping them to achieve success. France realised that today, equality of rights was enshrined in law, but was not yet fully implemented in practice, but would work to achieve this.

Also in concluding remarks, Dubravka Simonovic, Chairperson of the Committee, said it had been a very constructive dialogue, with progress seen, but a lot remained to be done with regards to full implementation of the Convention. It was hoped that the reservations would be withdrawn in the future. The Committee would assess the situation and put forward its recommendations. Parity in Government was a milestone for France, but it was also a great responsibility. The Committee hoped that the next report would give a full picture, and show progress in the overseas territories.


For use of the information media; not an official record

CEDAW08007E