COMMITTEE ON ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION CONSIDERS REPORT OF MOLDOVA
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has considered the combined fifth to seventh periodic reports of Moldova on its implementation of the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Olga Goncearova, General Director of the Bureau of Inter-Ethnic Relations of Moldova, said recent Government initiatives to prevent discrimination included a special decision of December 2007 to create a working group to promote international best practices in the area of non-discrimination. That working group had also recommended the elaboration of a draft anti-discrimination law, which was currently being worked on by the Ministry of Justice. Also in 2007, the Bureau of Inter-Ethnic Relations, in collaboration with non-governmental organizations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, had begun discussions to develop a strategy of linguistic integration of ethnic minorities in Moldova, and today, plans for a special linguistic centre on the teaching of the State language to members of the ethnic minorities were being considered. In terms of the integration of the Roma population into the Moldovan society, there was a 2006 Decree on the adoption of a plan of action in support of the Gypsies/Roma for 2007-2010, with specific targets in the fields of education, health, law and order, employment, and others, which sought to improve the social status of the Roma and to elevate their standard of living.
In preliminary concluding observations, Nourredine Amir, the Committee Expert who served as country Rapporteur for the report of Moldova, said that, in the construction of the unified multi-ethnic Moldovan nation, there were a number of questions. There was the question of religion and that of national ethnicity. But there was also the question of poverty, and the need to mitigate the situation of those ethnic groups that were marginalized so that their capacity to react on discrimination was strengthened.
Other Committee Experts raised questions and asked for further information on subjects pertaining to, among other things, apparent Government opposition for the draft Anti-Discrimination Law; concerns over extremely high unemployment levels and an extremely low literacy rate among the Roma; further information about the national human rights action plan, in particular the involvement of concerned groups in drafting them; more information on the situation of minorities in Transnistria; why the planned 2006 ratification of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages had not taken place; why Muslim-Tatars had been banned from forming a Muslim organization; concerns over reports of serious problems in the justice system in the country, including threats to judges and corruption; reports of police brutality in cases involving Roma and Afro-Asians; a lack of statistics on discrimination complaints; insufficient representation of minorities in Government; and a lack of prosecution of cases of discrimination and weak penalties for such crimes.
The delegation of Moldova also included representatives from the Parliamentary Commission for Legal Issues, Appointments and Immunities (Ombudsman); the General Prosecutor’s Office; and the Permanent Mission of Moldova to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will present its written observations and recommendations on the fifth to seventh periodic reports of Moldova, which were presented in one document, at the end of its session, which concludes on 7 March.
When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it is scheduled to take up the ninth to twelfth periodic reports of the Dominican Republic (CERD/C/DOM/12).
Report of Moldova
As set out in the combined fifth to seventh periodic reports of Moldova (CERD/C/MDA/7), Moldova is a multi-ethnic State, comprised of Moldovans and the minorities, mainly, Ukrainians, Russians, Bulgarians, the Gagauz, Jews, Belarusians, the Roma, Poles, Germans, Italians, Latvians, Estonians, Lithuanians, Greeks, Koreans, Tatars, Armenians, Azerbaijani, Uzbeks, Georgians, the Chuvash, Ossetins, Udmurts and people from certain African and central Asian States. Tolerance and respect for the ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic identity of all ethnic communities living in Moldova are common for Moldovan society. This is an inalienable condition of political sovereignty and civic peace in Moldova.
On 19 July 2001 the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova adopted the law on the rights of people belonging to national minorities and the legal status of their organizations. The law contributes to the creation of conditions for the preservation, development and expression of the ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic identities of persons belonging to national minorities; creates conditions for the observance of their right to education in their mother tongue; and ensures that scientific research on the history, culture and languages of national minorities is carried out. On 24 October 2003, Parliament adopted the National Human Rights Action Plan for 2004-2008, which anticipates, inter alia, the ratification of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages in 2006; bringing legislation into line with the Charter; respect for the principle of proportional representation in the executive, judiciary, military and law enforcement power structures; effective protection of the rights of persons belonging to national minorities; a guarantee of instruction in the national minority languages; and the education of the Roma. Consistent with the Law on Combating Extremist Activity (2003), the creation and operation of public and religious associations devoted to carrying out extremist activity are illegal in Moldova, as is the dissemination of extremist material and the conduct of extremist activity through the mass media, or the use of the public telecommunication network to carry out extremist activity or otherwise publishing or broadcasting materials of extremist nature. Citizens, foreigners and stateless persons who conduct extremist activities are liable under criminal, administrative and civil law.
Presentation of Report
OLGA GONCEAROVA, General Director of the Inter-Ethnic Relations Department of the Government of Moldova, said that, upon declaring independence the Parliament of Moldova had moved quickly to ratify a number of international human rights treaties, of which the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination had been the first, in 1991. The Bureau of Inter-ethnic Relations was the central public administrative body that promoted State policy in inter-ethnic relations, upheld the constitutional rights of citizens regarding the expression of their ethnic, cultural and linguistic identity and contributed to the preservation of the State language, Russian and other languages. The Bureau also coordinated activities relating to the implementation in Moldova of the European Council’s Framework Convention for the protection of national minorities.
There were a number of positive features could be pointed to with regard to implementing the Convention in Moldova, Ms. Goncearova said. Since independence, Moldova had made major strides in recognizing human rights, including the rights of minorities. The Constitution set out that all citizens were equal before the law without distinction as to race, ethnicity, and other criteria. Foreign citizens and stateless persons enjoyed the same rights, freedoms and duties as citizens in most areas including in employment and health care.
As to the status of the Convention in domestic law, Ms. Goncearova confirmed that, in the event of a conflict between the Convention and the national laws, priority would be given to the Convention as an international treaty.
Turning to a breakdown of the population, Ms. Goncearova said, according to the 2004 census, Moldova had 3,388,071 inhabitants, including: Moldovans (76.1 per cent); Ukrainians (8.4 per cent); Russians (5.8 per cent); the Gagauz (4.4 per cent); Romanians (2.2 per cent); Bulgarians (1.9 per cent); other ethnic groups (1.3 per cent).
A recent country review by the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance on the situation in Moldova had concluded that there was a willingness among the people of Moldova to participate in dialogue. It had also shown that Moldova had taken measures to expand its legal framework to address issues involving minorities. In that connection, Ms. Goncearova noted that Moldova, as an aspirant to European Union membership, had formulated a plan of action as a first step in legal, political and cooperative efforts undertaken by Moldova in conjunction with the European Community. It looked to ensure the rights of minorities in Moldova and looked at the concerns and recommendations of the Council of Europe to ensure that it was implementing the European Framework on National Minorities.
Ms. Goncearova said that the plan of action also provided for a framework to resolve the Transnistrian conflict, which continued to raise serious concern among the authorities of Moldova. Moldova had adopted a special law on the legal status of peoples living in the left bank of the Transnistrian river, aimed at providing the population with the necessary protections. While Transnistria was an integral part of the Republic of Moldova, it had declared itself to be an autonomous region, under the authority of the Supreme Council of Transnistria. Significantly, proposals made by the President of Moldova in October 2007 provided a six-point plan to resolve the situation and to address areas of economy, trade and agriculture, the development of infrastructure, education, health, and demilitarization, among others. Most recently, a seminar had been held, in which the President of the Republic had participated, on problems that had arisen with students in the Eastern part of the country (Transnistria) to establish conditions for the teaching of the Moldovan language and to improve the quality of teaching.
The latest initiatives by the Government included a special decision of December 2007 to create a working group – made up of numerous Governmental and non-governmental groups – to promote international best practices in the area of non-discrimination. That working group also carried out a number of preventive methods in the area of non-discrimination and had recommended the elaboration of a draft anti-discrimination law, which was currently being worked on by the Ministry of the Interior.
One of the conditions of successful integration of non-majority ethnic groups into Moldovan society was knowledge of the Moldovan language. A special project had been implemented to encourage the learning of Moldovan by national minorities and good progress had been made since 2005 in the seven territories of Moldova that contained concentrated Bulgarian, Gaguaz and Ukrainian populations. In 2007 the Bureau of Inter-Ethnic Relations, in collaboration with non-governmental organizations, had begun discussions to develop a strategy of national integration of ethnic minorities in Moldova. Today, plans for a special linguistic centre on the teaching of the State language to members of the ethnic minorities were being considered.
In terms of the integration of the Gypsy/Roma population into the Moldovan society, Ms. Goncearova said there was a 2006 Decree on the adoption of a plan of action in support of the Gypsies/Roma for 2007-2010, with specific targets in the fields of education, health, law and order, employment, and others, and it included measures to improve their social status and elevate their standard of living. A step-by-step programme had been outlined, in coordination with the relevant Government agencies, non-governmental organizations and the Roma themselves.
As of 2004, there were 12,271 Roma in Moldova. According to the Ministry for Information Development, as of June 2007, most representatives of the Gypsy population had received identification documents under the national passport system. Among the non-governmental organizations working in the country, those devoted to the Roma were the most prevalent, and the local authorities had registered seven local agencies dealing with their concerns. In terms of improving access of Roma youth to higher education, in 2007 a quota of 15 per cent had been adopted to promote the enrolment of disadvantaged groups, including Roma, in higher education.
In 2006 a national plan on migration had been adopted, to strengthen the national asylum system and to combat the phenomenon of illegal migration. In cooperation with the United Nations Refugee Agency, the Government had set up a new centre for asylum seekers. Moreover, many public organizations were very active in Moldova in this sphere, Ms. Goncearova noted, including a number that worked to protect Afro-Asian populations in the country.
As of today, Ms. Goncearova said there were 94 ethno-cultural minority public organizations accredited by the Bureau of Inter-ethnic Relations that enjoyed national status. There were also organizations with local status in Moldova. Most organizations were comprised of representatives of ethnic minorities such as Ukrainians, Russians, Bulgarians, the Gagauz, Jews, Belarusians, Roma, Poles, Germans, Tatars, Armenians, Azerbaijani, Uzbeks, Georgians, and others. There were also other organizations representing minorities of African and Central Asian descent. All such organizations received support, in some cases State financial assistance, as well as external contributions. Under the aegis of the Bureau of Inter-ethnic Relations, the Coordinating Council of Public Ethno-cultural Organizations operated as an advisory body comprised of all ethnic groups with established public organizations, and it issued recommendations to the Government.
Among activities being undertaken most recently by Moldova and which were related to the work of the Committee, Ms. Goncearova singled out a round table among governmental and non-governmental organizations and other civil society organizations to discuss a draft Anti-Discrimination Act; the elaboration of a draft law to assist Roma children; and collaboration between the Bureau of Inter-ethnic Relations and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, with a view to implementing the recommendations of the Committee.
Oral Questions Raised by the Rapporteur and Experts
NOURREDINE AMIR, the Committee Expert serving as country Rapporteur for the report of Moldova, congratulated Moldova on the fact that it had signed most of the international human rights treaties. In addition, the Moldovan Constitution was in line with the norms of the Council of Europe countries, and enshrined human rights as a constitutional right. Therefore the rights of minorities were fundamental and established by the primary legislation of the State. In addition, Moldova considered itself a multi-ethnic State, and recognized the contributions that its many groups made.
Mr. Amir was concerned, however, by apparent discrepancies in the statistics provided on the ethnic breakdown of the population in the report.
While Moldovan law provided for freedom of religion and protections for minority groups, it appeared that Islam was a case apart, Mr. Amir said. In 2002 a criminal law had been adopted that punished the restriction of a citizen’s rights because of their national ethnicity. But according to the report there appeared to be no special organizations or provisions that provided for Muslims. In particular, there was no school provided for the very small Muslim community, and it appeared that Moldova was content to let that small community die out.
Mr. Amir noted several paragraphs in the report that said law enforcement bodies and representatives of the authorities treated citizens belonging to national minorities, for instance the Roma/Gypsies, or people of African and Asian descent, differently because they “looked dissimilar to the rest of the population”. There were also mentions of complaints by those groups of discrimination by the law enforcement authorities in the report. How could the Government then claim that there was no racial profiling in Moldova and why was it that there had been no such cases brought to court? Was the burden of proof too great for such cases?
Another concern was a new law that punished begging. In that context, Mr. Amir underscored the disproportionate impact of poverty on minority groups, and the need for access to property and housing for ethnic minorities, in particular for the Tatar people, who had faced longstanding discrimination.
Specifically concerning the Roma, Mr. Amir drew attention to the grave discrepancies between the official statistics, which put their number at about 12,000, whereas estimates from other sources put the number of Roma in Moldova between 50,000 and 200,000.
Other Committee Experts raised questions and asked for further information on subjects pertaining to, among other things, apparent Government opposition for the draft Anti-Discrimination Law; a lack of education programmes in Ukrainian or Bulgarian for those minorities; concerns over extremely high unemployment levels and an extremely low literacy rate among the Roma; further information about the national human rights action plan, in particular the involvement of concerned groups in drafting them; more information on the situation of minorities in Transnistria; why the planned 2006 ratification of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages had not taken place; why Muslim-Tatars had been banned from forming a Muslim organization; concerns over reports of serious problems in the justice system in the country, including threats to judges and corruption; reports of police brutality in cases involving Roma, and Afro-Asians; a lack of statistics on discrimination complaints; and insufficient representation of minorities in Government.
Regarding the rights of non-citizens, an Expert noted that they were not allowed to be members of “socio-political organizations”. He wondered what that term meant, as it was used in the report, and why was it that foreigners were not allowed to be members in them, or indeed in political parties.
An Expert was very concerned by the weak responses and lack of serious penalties for crimes under the Convention. The report was full of examples of racial discrimination complaints, but it appeared nothing was being done to seriously investigate and prosecute them. For example, in a complaint made by a Roma person who had been subjected to racist treatment in a bakery, the final disposition involved the sending of a letter of complaint and a promise that the bakery would not repeat that discriminatory treatment. Regarding the prohibition of racist organizations, it appeared that the Law Against Extremism merely provided for such organizations to be suspended for a year, but did not prohibit them completely, as required by the Convention.
Specifically on discrimination against Muslims, an Expert was concerned that the Government might be equating Islam with terrorism in banning such groups as the Regional Council of Muslims of Moldova. He had also received worrying information about searches carried out by the authorities in religious sites, intervening in the middle of prayers, Saturday arrests (effectively ensuring a stay over the weekend in jail), and even reports that Muslims had been denied space to carry out burials.
Response by Delegation to Oral Questions
Addressing concerns expressed by Experts, the delegation clarified the statistics presented in the report for 2001 and the report submitted in 2005, saying the differences were attributable to the fact that the report of 2001 was based on statistical data and censuses undertaken in 1989 and the report of 2005 was based on censuses carried out in 2004. A lot of immigration had occurred in the meantime, and the total population of Moldova had actually decreased. That would account for the differences in the statistics.
As for studying in the languages of the national minorities, in particular education in Bulgarian, Ukrainian and Gagauz, the delegation said that Ukrainians basically lived in the north of the country and in the centre in dense communities. Bulgarians lived in the south and in the centre, in Chisinau. Most of the Gagauz lived in the Gagauz autonomous region. For 2007, 57 educational establishments in Moldova taught Ukrainian language, and six offered Ukrainian literature courses. In addition, Ukrainian was studied in 30 institutions in the Transnistrian region. Ukrainian education covered from nursery school through secondary school, and Moldova also had a pedagogical institute with a special faculty to train teachers of Ukrainian language and literature, with 100 graduates so far. In the Chisinau Pedagogical Institute, teachers were trained bilingually in Ukrainian and Moldovan languages.
Turning to the possibility of studying in Bulgarian, the delegation confirmed that the same situation applied. The system for continuous bilingual education in Bulgarian and Moldovan existed from nursery school through secondary school, and there was a university programme in Taraclia in Bulgarian as well. As for the Gaguaz, children could be educated in the Gagauz language, and there was also a state university in the capital of the Gagauz autonomous area where it was possible to study in Gagauz. As for the possibility of being taught in Yiddish, there were kindergartens, and two schools in Chisinau where that was possible. It should be noted that more than 50 per cent of the children who studied in those schools were not Jewish.
Under the law on education, the language for the education of children was chosen by the children’s parents, the delegation added. Monitoring was undertaken of the linguistic situation in urban areas, and surveys had been carried out asking parents about their preferences for their children’s education. The most recent results had shown that parents of the various ethnic groups did wish for their children to continue to receive education of some subjects such as their national language, literature and history.
Clarifying Moldova’s plans regarding the ratification of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages in 2006, 2006 had been set as the year of preparation for the ratification of the Charter. Moldova had committed itself to do that by 2008. The delegation said it would not hide the fact that there were still outstanding issues surrounding the ratification, including monitoring of the language situation and funding. However, the Government had engaged to have a draft bill before Parliament by 2008.
Turning to claims of discrimination based on languages, the delegation said the bulk of those claims involved situations in which individuals claimed they were harmed because they had submitted an oral or written complaint in one language and had received an answer in another, although they were entitled to receive it in the language they had used to lodge the complaint. Given the genuine bilingualism in the country, these were not serious cases of discrimination.
As for registration of the Islamic religion in Moldovan legislation, the delegation emphasized that the Government had never drawn parallels between Islam and extremism. Moreover, there were 12 different public Islamic associations in Moldova, as well as three Muslim organizations of Azerbaijani, two of Tatar, and one of the people from Central Asia, which were accredited with the Bureau of Inter-Ethnic Relations.
Regarding the rejection of registration for a Muslim organization, which the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights had recognized as inadmissible, the delegation noted that, in February 2008, that group had applied once again to the Ministry of Justice for registration. That second application had also been rejected, but purely for legal reasons: the list of participants contained not individuals, but natural persons, that is, organizations, some of which had not themselves been registered.
On concerns that the Muslims were being refused burial space, the delegation wished to explain that situation. Moldovan practice had been that cemeteries were open to the public. The case of refusing Muslims burial ground involved setting aside a separate area for Muslim burial, not of refusing Muslims the possibility of burial in the cemetery. That was contrary to traditional practice, but the authorities were studying the issue and it was still under discussion.
Concerning the Roma, the delegation said the Roma population of Moldova basically lived in settlements, with fixed homes, but part of the adult population migrated to other countries, such as Poland and Russia, to work, generally from March to October, leaving the children behind. On a recent television show a Roma non-governmental organization representative had said that the Roma could not go to school because the conditions were inadequate. That had provoked immediate consternation on the part of the population, because in the rural communities in general there was not always ideal conditions for school, but there was always facilities provided. If the Roma groups came up with their own proposals for Roma schools, the Government had rejected them because in Moldova’s view, that constituted segregation. Children should be educated together, no matter what the colour of their skin or belief.
To give another example of the difficulties in this area, the delegation related how, a few years ago, there was a meeting between the Deputy Speaker of the Parliament and the Roma population. The Deputy Speaker had suggested that Roma youth be given free training at a police academy, thereby solving two issues at one time: the children would be educated; and there would be representatives of the Roma on the police force in the future. But, unfortunately, not a single application was presented.
Despite those difficulties, today, there had been a significant increase in the number of Roma children that had received a higher education, the delegation confirmed. That was attested to, among other things, by a sharp increase in the number of Roma non-governmental organizations, led by educated Roma, in Moldova. That was especially true in the fixed Roma settlements, and there was a particularly famous music school in one of them which was widely attended by children of all national ethnicities.
On the difference between the instrument on certain measures to support Gypsies, adopted in 2001, and the plan of action to support the Roma population from 2007 to 2010, the delegation said that the first was a policy or strategy, the second was the actual step-by-step plan, the real implementation of what needed to be done. In April, the Bureau of Inter-Ethnic Relations would participate in a Government meeting to assess work done by Government ministries and departments to implement that action plan.
With reference to measures to preserve the memory of the Holocaust, the delegation noted that there was a State programme on preserving the memory of the Holocaust; children’s textbooks contained a chapter on the Holocaust; and a number of monuments in memory of the victims had been erected, for example a monument in Chisinau commemorated the memory of the Jewish victims. There had not been a request to date to establish a monument in commemoration of the Roma victims.
Regarding laws against hate speech, the delegation enumerate a few cases currently under investigation, including a criminal case involving the Redactor of “Timpul” newspaper who had made racist statements in the context of a public meeting.
Responding to claims that the police arrested Roma or Muslims on Saturdays to ensure that they remained in detention over the weekend without seeing a judge, the delegation explained that that was simply not the case. There were judges and other legal officials on duty on Saturdays and Sundays to review such detentions. The Government wished to put an end to any kind of illegal detention by the police of Roma and others
As to racial profiling and police brutality against the Roma, the delegation said that that was not evident. Indeed, any hostile attitude on the part of the police in cases involving the Roma was more likely attributable to the kinds of crimes that were involved than on the colour of the defendants’ skin. Even if such phenomena were occurring, the Government was addressing them through special prosecutors and monitoring of police activities.
With respect to issues surrounding the self-declared autonomous region of Transnistria, the Government recalled that similar issues had been resolved for the Gagauz region in 1994, when that region was accorded a special autonomous status. However, 18 years had not sufficed to solve the problem of Transnistria, and in 1992 the political conflict changed into an armed confrontation, a de facto civil war, with hundreds killed and thousands injured. There was a negotiation process in the “5+2” format with the participation of Moldova and Transnistria, as parts of the conflict, Russian Federation, Ukraine, OSCE and from 2005 the United States and European Union as observers.
Concerning ensuring the rights of the inhabitants of Transnistria, the delegation conceded that, naturally, in the present state of affairs it was possible for certain actions that infringed human rights to occur. However, there was a state administrative system, legislative bodies, and other mechanisms in place that meant that fortunately human rights violations in Transnistria were neither massive nor serious cause for concern.
The law provided for the proportionate representation of national minorities in all areas of public life, the delegation said, including in the legislative, judicial, and executive spheres, in the police and in the armed forces. In principle that law was complied with and in practically all the bodies mentioned there were representatives of nearly all the national ethnic minorities in the country. Moldova’s policy was that that proportionately should be achieved through elections, and it appeared to be working. Of the 101 members of Parliament today, 26 were national minorities and 18 were women.
Further Oral Questions Posed by Experts
In a second round of questions, an Expert asked if a solution could not be found with the Muslim community regarding burial sites on the basis of defining separate areas within the cemeteries for Muslim funerals. On the situation of the Roma in Moldova, an Expert asked for more information about the dialogue between the Roma and the Government, in particular how the Roma were involved in elaborating policies and initiatives involving them. As for the example of the offer to educate Roma youth at the police academy, which had not been taken up, what lessons had the Government drawn from that experience? While an Expert agreed that the Moldovan policy not to develop special schools for the Roma was in accord with the Committee’s anti-segregation stance, he was still curious to know the motivations of the Roma in demanding special schools. Other issues raised included progress on the development of an independent national human rights institution along the Paris Principles; and a request for more information on Afro-Asian and Muslim minorities.
Replies by the Delegation
Responding to those questions and others, the delegation noted that the Government had offered to set aside a part of the public cemetery for Muslim burials, but that offer had been rejected by the Muslim community. They wanted a completely separate site.
On the issue of judicial corruption and pressures on judges, the delegation acknowledged that there was a problem. There had been three criminal cases brought to the courts in recent years where law enforcement officials had been convicted, with more than 10 individuals convicted over the course of last year. Work was being carried on intensively in this area, and there were plans to prosecute any incident of that sort.
Regarding separate schools for Roma, the Roma’s arguments had been that their children were not as well prepared as children of other ethnic groups, that Roma children were subject to abuse by children of other ethnic groups, and that, as the parents left for part of the year, there was no where for the children to stay. The Government had investigated the matter and not found that those were compelling arguments, given the current situation of the Roma children in the schools, to justify going against its policy of not segregating schools.
Preliminary Concluding Observations
In preliminary concluding observations, NOURREDINE AMIR, the Committee Expert who served as country Rapporteur for the report of Moldova, said in the construction of the unified multi-ethnic Moldovan nation there were a number of questions. There was the question of religion and that of national ethnicity. But there was also the question of poverty, and the need to mitigate the situation of those ethnic groups that were marginalized so that their capacity to react on discrimination was strengthened. South, North, East and West the nation was filling in its ethnic, cultural and linguistic riches, but he wondered if that could not be done in institutional ways as well – not exactly in compass terms, but in a “federal” solution. In conclusion, it was hoped that the next report would contain information on questions raised by the Committee.
For use of the information media; not an official record
CERD08010E