COMMITTEE ON THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION CONSIDERS REPORT OF GEORGIA
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has concluded its consideration of the fourth and fifth periodic reports of Georgia on the implementation of the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.
The report of Georgia was presented by Zurab Tchiaberashvili, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Georgia to the United Nations Office and other International Organizations in Geneva. Mr. Tchiaberashvili said Georgia had recognized the competence of the Committee to consider communication from individuals and/or groups of individuals under article 14 of the Convention. The principles of equality and non-discrimination were enshrined in a number of national legislative acts. The Government undertook comprehensive policy changes to protect and promote the right of education teaching the state language and to provide the opportunity to be educated in minority languages. As result of two waves of ethnic cleansing from 1991 to 1993 and in 2008 in Abkhazia, Georgia and the Tskhinvali region/South Ossetia, Georgia close to half a million people were displaced. The primary responsibility for non-compliance with the provisions of the convention in these regions rested with the Russian Federation. The population was deliberately deprived of human rights, such as the right to education, cultural and linguistic rights and freedom of movement and passports, and they faced ethnically motivated violence.
In preliminary concluding observations, Ion Diaconu, the Committee Expert who served as the country Rapporteur for the report of Georgia, said the discussion had illuminated the progress made in Georgia, although there was much work still to be done. What was of interest to the Committee was the implementation of the Convention. The Government had at its disposal strategies and policies that corresponded to this objective. Some legislation needed to be adopted, but most importantly, these strategies and policies needed to be implemented
During the interactive dialogue, Committee Experts raised a number of questions and asked for further information on subjects related to, among others, disaggregated data on vulnerable groups, minorities’ knowledge of the Georgian language, the situation of the Meskhetian Reference is made throughout the discussion to “Meskhetians”, “Meskhetian Turks” or “Turkish Meskhetians” by Committee Members. Please note that the Government of Georgia does not use this terminology, but rather designates this minority as Persons Forcefully Deported (FDPs) by the Soviet Regime in the 40s of the XX Century. and their repatriation, disadvantages faced by ethnic majorities and internally displaced persons, comments made about the Committee at the International Court of Justice, the Office of the Public Defender, xenophobic and racist remarks, school textbooks and self-identification of minorities.
The delegation of Georgia included representatives from the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Internally Displaced Persons from the Occupied Territories, Accommodation and Refugees, the Office of the State Minister for Reintegration, the Ministry of Education and Science, the National Security Council, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
The Committee will present its written observations and recommendations on the fourth and fifth periodic reports of Georgia, which were presented in one document, at the end of its session, which concludes on 2 September.
The Committee will hold its next public session at 3 p.m. when it will discuss the periodic report of Ukraine (CERD/C/UKR/19-21).
Report of Georgia
The combined fourth and fifth periodic report of Georgia (CERD/C/GEO/4-5) notes that Georgia is an ethnically, culturally, linguistically and religiously diverse country where particular attention of the government is required for the development of a national minority. The Constitution guarantees the rights of persons belonging to national minorities and prohibits discrimination, including on ethnic or religious grounds. In the aftermath of the “Rose Revolution”, full integration of all ethnic minorities in Georgia remains a continuous challenge for the current government. The Office of the State Minister for Reintegration was created by the Decree of the Government of Georgia No.23, on 8 February 2008 and is tasked with promoting civil integration of all ethnic minorities residing in Georgia and coordinating relevant activities of state agencies. The Civil Integration and Tolerance Council was created on 8 August 2005 and coordinates two Councils: the Council of National Minorities, and the Council of Religions. The Council of National Minorities acts as a platform for on-going dialogue and consultation between national minorities and governmental structures. It is also authorized to react if minority rights are violated or/and conflicts occur. The main goal of the Council of Religions is to facilitate the creation of a tolerant, just, equal, peaceful environment and civic integration of the representatives of religions and confessions existing within Georgia.
On 6 June 2003, the new Article 142 of the Criminal Code of Georgia came into effect, criminalizing any action or omission committed for the purpose of instigating animosity or conflict based on ethnic or racial grounds, as well as direct or indirect limitation of human rights. Georgian legislation criminalizes illegal interference into performance of religious rights including interference in the performance of worship or other religious rights or customs by violence or threat of violence or by insulting religious feelings of a believer or a minister of religion. Moreover, the persecution for religious denomination, faith or belief is also criminalized under Article 156 of Criminal Code of Georgia. Apart from the general prohibition of any discrimination against students, the Ministry of Education and Science has elaborated a long standing practice of specialized programmes aimed to promote tolerance policy in educational system. Special programmes have been elaborated to promote enrolment of minority students in institutions of higher education. Special cultural policies to promote and assist national minorities have been run by the Ministry of Culture, Monument Protection and Sports of Georgia. Under the Law on Broadcasting, the Georgian Public Broadcaster is obliged to reflect ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious diversity in its programmes and also air programmes in minority languages.
Georgian state institutions while appointing candidates on the relevant positions do not collect information regarding their ethnicity or religious affiliation, therefore it is difficult to provide statistical information regarding involvement of minorities in public administration; though it should be underlined that minority representation is particularly high in the regions densely resided by minorities. Notably, the Ministry of Internal Affairs perceives that ethnic minorities represent the added value for the police due to their understanding of local interests and traditions. Particular attention is being paid to the enhancement of political participation and equal voting rights for national minorities in Georgia. For this particular matter, in 2009 the Central Election Commission of Georgia, with the assistance of international organizations, prepared voting bulletins, audio and video advertisements as well as relevant documentation in minority languages. A new Law on Free Legal Aid adopted by Parliament in July 2007 guarantees free legal aid without discrimination. Regarding the right to health, the provision of health protection without discrimination is stipulated in relevant legislative acts. The Government of Georgia designed the programme “On Social Assistance” via Decree in 2006, which grants social aid without discrimination on the basis of race, sex and national and ethnic belonging.
Presentation of the Report
ZURAB TCHIABERASHVILI, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Georgia to the United Nations Office and other International Organizations in Geneva, said Georgia acceded to the Convention in 1999, making it part of the State’s legal obligation. Georgia had also recognized the competence of the Committee to consider communication from individuals and/or groups of individuals under article 14 of the Convention. The principles of equality and non-discrimination were enshrined in a number of national legislative acts. The State policy against discrimination was enshrined in the National Concept for Tolerance and Civil Integration, as well as its Action Plan. Georgia had improved and strengthened legislative provisions in criminal legislation, labor law, health, and election and education systems, among others, to protect minorities. The major minorities in Georgia were Abkhazians, South Ossetians, ethnic Armenians and Azerbaijanis. All religious groups in Georgia enjoyed the right of freedom of religion. Taking necessary steps to secure equal access to the justice system for all members of the community, adequate response to all allegations related to discriminatory actions and prevention of racial discrimination in the administration of criminal justice was among the Government’s priorities.
The Government undertook comprehensive policy changes to protect and promote the right of education, teaching the state language and providing the opportunity to be educated in minority languages. More than 10 per cent of schools provided instruction in minority languages. A number of important reforms were aimed at civic integration of national minorities in pre-school, general education, high education and adult education. The news programs by Public Broadcasters were aired in six minority languages. The Central Election Commission established a special working group for translation and publication of election documents in minority languages. The number of seats held by ethnic minorities in municipal councils was commensurate with the ethnic population in each region of the country. Special attention was paid to improving the living conditions in minority communities in Georgia. Advances included renovated roads, better access to health and education facilities, high speed railways, renovated and better-equipped schools and other improvements. The Government also ran special programs aimed at supporting cultural centers of ethnic minorities. The Government had taken active steps to develop appropriate modalities of communication and dialogue between the Roma population and central and local authorities, as well as to encourage direct links and consultation between Roma and non-Roma communities. In 2007, Georgia adopted the Law on the Repatriation of the Forcefully Deported Persons, while in 2008 relevant procedures for accepting the applications were developed.
As result of two waves of ethnic cleansing from 1991 to 1993 and in 2008 in Abkhazia, Georgia and the Tskhinvali region/South Ossetia, Georgia, close to half a million people were displaced. Twenty seven thousand internally displaced persons’ families received durable housing through rehabilitation and privatization of collective centers and new residential buildings. Eight thousand of these were displaced because of the 2008 Georgia-Russia war. Georgia followed standard operational procedures according to international standards for resettlement. Most internally displaced persons surveyed rejected the assumption they were discriminated against because of their status. Georgia could not exercise effective control and lacked information to check every concrete case in the regions occupied by the Russian Government. Georgia encouraged international organizations to visit these regions. The primary responsibility for non-compliance with the provisions of the convention in these regions rested with the Russian Federation. The Russian Federation had directly participated in and failed to prevent racial discrimination through acts perpetrated by its armed forces, security and intelligence services as well as other persons falling under its authority. The population was deliberately deprived of human rights, such as the right to education, cultural and linguistic rights, freedom of movement and passports, and they faced ethnically motivated violence.
Questions Raised by the Rapporteur and Experts
ION DIACONU, the Committee Expert who served as the country Rapporteur for the report of Georgia, said that many important changes had taken place since the Committee’s consideration of the last report of Georgia. An armed conflict took place on the territory of the country, which left behind terrible consequences for many people and for the State itself. Georgia did not exercise control over two regions of its territory, therefore the Committee could not consider Georgia responsible for what happened in regions. The Committee had to look at the situation of people living on the territory under the effective control of Georgia and what the State party could do for people remaining beyond its control, but who had rights in Georgia. The Committee noted that in 2009 the Security Council adopted resolution 1866, underlining the need for parties in conflict to refrain from any act of ethnic discrimination. Treaties on human rights prevailed over internal laws and their self-executing provisions were directly applicable in Georgia. Georgia was party to most treaties on human rights. Still, the Criminal Code did not forbid racist discourse in general, the dissemination of ideas, expressions of racial hatred and incitement to racial discrimination. Associations and organisations promoting racism were not forbidden as required by Article 4 (b) of the Convention.
The State needed to provide disaggregated data on the vulnerable groups and their enjoyment of human rights. Much remained to be done to ensure the Georgian language was learned by ethnic minorities. The report mentioned the expression of stereotypes and prejudice toward ethnic and religious minorities by politicians, in the media and in textbooks. Measures had to be taken to improve the situation of smaller ethnic groups, particularly the situation of people deported from Georgia during the time of the Soviet Union, including the Meskhetians. The Committee wanted to know how many Meskhetians were located in Georgia, how many had been repatriated, made citizens and how the Government intended to solve related problems. More attention should also be given to the Roma. Members of the Azeri and Armenian minorities also suffered from lack of infrastructure, transport and communications. The State should implement projects to eliminate such disadvantages. The Committee asked for more information about the situation of Jewish, Greek, Kurdish, Qists, Judies, Ukrainians and other minority groups. Mr. Diaconu asked about acts of harassment and violence carried out by armed forces of a third country against ethnic Azeris in villages situated on the Georgian side of the border. The delegation of Georgia plainly denied such facts.
The State party faced the difficult task of taking care of a great number of internally displaced persons. The delegation was invited to inform the Committee about the situation to date and the plans for solving the remaining problems and integrating the internally displaced persons in society. Georgia needed international assistance to respond to these tremendous needs. Some internally displaced people as well as minority communities faced difficulties because they were not registered. Many reports drew attention to the low level of political representation of minorities in State bodies. The government should take appropriate measures to ensure adequate political representation and participation of minorities. The report did not present information about allegations concerning discrimination in the fields of employment and the administration of justice, nor solutions and compensation in this regard. There were also allegations of arbitrary arrests and ill treatment of members of ethnic groups and foreigners. The State party should continue efforts to train police, prosecutors, judges and other professionals on the application of the laws concerning racial offences and racial discrimination, inform the public and encourage victims to take action. The Committee wanted to know about the status of a new draft Law on Refugees and Temporary Asylum, as well as other information on the number of refugees and asylum seekers. The situation of internally displaced women was a subject of concern.
Following the presentation by the country Rapporteur, Committee Experts asked for further clarification regarding the relationship between the State Party and the Committee. Why were comments about the Committee presented to the International Court of Justice? There were a series of statements regarding how the work of the Committee was futile, weak and unnecessary for promoting and protecting human rights. Clarification on the part of the State party was required. Committee Members said Roma should be included on the police force, as establishing proper relations between the police and communities was important. Clarification regarding a statement in the report about “the Roma way of life” was necessary. What language did Roma use in Georgia? Could Roma study the written language of their mother tongue? In reference to the Turkish Meskhitians, deported people were often the subject of discrimination. Very few people in this group were able to return to Georgia. The law on repatriation was a positive step, although some non-governmental organizations had recognized that corrections needed to be made. Why did the law not cover repatriation of peoples? This was a reference to collective rights. Were the Turkish Meskhitians being considered outside the borders of Georgia? Had information on the law been disseminated? Why was there a deadline? This made the procedure difficult.
Committee Members said the Georgian State did not prosecute racial discrimination, statements related thereto and incitement to acts of racial hatred. There was no information about complaints, procedures and follow-up to crimes related to racial discrimination. The absence of complaints and the low number of cases was not necessarily a positive indicator, but could indicate a lack of information for victims of their rights, social exclusion, difficulties related to proof and other issues. This demonstrated the effective existence of access to justice. The Office of the Public Defender was deemed in accordance with the Paris Principles, but Committee Members asked how members were appointed and about their relationship with government authorities. What was the status of its independence? A European Commission report provided examples of cases of xenophobic and racist language by politicians, in the press and in textbooks. Expressions of religious and racial intolerance were noted in the report. In the report special translation of textbooks into minority languages was mentioned, but what sort of books were being translated? Were these older or more recent versions of textbooks? Did they include information about minorities in Georgia? One Expert emphasized the primacy of self-identification for minority groups. Committee Experts asked whether the Ombudsman was sufficiently funded and independent.
Response by Delegation
In responding to questions raised by Committee Members, the delegation said projects and programs to improve the situation of minority groups had not been affected by the economic crisis. After the 2008 war, the United States and European Union had provided aid, which helped the Georgian economy recovery. The economy grew 6.4 per cent in 2010 and similar growth was expected for 2011. The use of the term of forcibly deported persons by the Soviet Union, instead of the Meskhetians, was due to a policy of self-identification; Georgia did not want to stereotype or apply ethnic or religious labels. Meskhetian was a sub-ethnicity of ethnic Georgians and the use of the term Turks referred to practicing Muslims within the larger ethnic group. However, some members of the group of forcibly deported persons were Christians. Meskhetian was not a language. These people moved to and settled in many different areas, such as Kazakhstan, Turkey, the United States and other states. An information campaign was launched to provide information about repatriation. Georgian citizenship could be acquired if individuals so desired. The deadline was twice extended. Most of the applications were from Azerbaijan. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees emphasized that Georgia should ensure that there was no gap in citizenship. The Public Defender was appointed to 5 year terms by a majority of the parliament. Adequate logistical and financial resources were provided to the Office of Public Defender to ensure its independence.
The delegation said that Special Rapporteurs of the Council of Europe had traveled to a village in Eastern Georgia that was mainly inhabited by ethnic Ossetians. The Rapporteurs found that the villagers spoke Georgian, and that, rather than lamenting ethnic relations, the villagers complained about roads, water supply and transport. The 2008 report of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe found that the Georgian Government took steps to encourage the return of Ossetians and provided funds to assist families to re-attain pre-war homes. Ossetians living in Georgia spoke the state language. While there had been numerous cases of discrimination against ethnic Ossetians in the early nineties, subsequent Georgian Governments embarked on an integrative approach toward ethnic minorities. No recent individual cases of ethnic discrimination on the basis of affiliation to the Ossetian minority were known. The August 2008 war did not lead to a change in the situation of ethnic Ossetians in Georgian controlled territory or to their long-term displacement in any significant numbers. Although some persons belonging to the Russian and Ossetian minorities expressed anxiety about the increasing amount of anti-Russian and anti-Ossetian remarks, the report found, it seemed that relations between the different ethnic groups had remained stable.
The delegation went on to note that the organic law of the Public Defender deemed any action aimed at hindering the office punishable by law. It assured fundamental rights and freedoms in Georgian territory by reviewing legislation and public policy and undertaking concrete educational activities. The Office of the Public Defender had to be consulted on any legislative act that touched upon human rights and fundamental freedoms. The Office of the Public Defender had created the Tolerance Center, which housed the Council of National Minorities, and the Council of Religions, which helped to promote tolerance and prevent discrimination in Georgia. Regarding the situation of Roma, the Government had undertaken activities to promote their rights by registering the Roma population, expanding their access to education and encouraging the involvement of Roma in civil society. A program was implemented to identify the acute problems faced by Roma and engage in dialogue with local and central government representatives. Comprehensive data on people living throughout Georgia, even in rural areas, was now available and registration was ongoing. However, registration was becoming more and more difficult because Roma migrated throughout Georgia. Non-governmental organizations worked to enhance the Roma’s knowledge of their rights and their civil integration and promote their cultural heritage.
Further Questions Posed by Experts
In the interactive dialogue, Committee Members noted the paper of the Public Defender of Georgia, which proved its independent position. State shortcomings in promoting the knowledge of state language, preserving cultural heritage and improving the status of refugees were underlined by the Public Defender.
Committee Members were struck by the document submitted by the Office of the Public Defender and regretted the Public Defender was unable to attend. The document recognized the efforts of the Government to improve the conditions of minorities. It also noted the many problems in the country for minorities, including access to education, insufficient participation of minorities in public life and state services, the number of teaching hours in the Georgian language, the preservation of cultural heritage and monuments, difficulties for minority religions, registration of property, construction of religious sites and access of the clergy to prisons. There were also reports of attacks against religious minorities. The worrying situation of Roma and hate speech was also mentioned in the report. Committee Members asked for the Government’s comment on the report.
Committee Members asked how the cultural monuments of minority groups in Georgia were preserved and about the role of the Government in preserving the wider cultural heritage of cultural minorities. Refugees and internally displaced persons should be able to exercise their rights and the Georgian Government should facilitate and promote their human rights and fundamental freedoms. Reliable sources highlighted the existence of nationalist excesses, references to Russians, Abkhazians and Ossetians as enemies, stereotyping and verbal abuses in the media and school textbooks. Internally displaced persons faced dire living conditions, were impoverished and lacked jobs and other income generating activities. This was evidence of discrimination in some form, quite possibly due to ethnic discrimination. This indicated areas where the State party could attribute more efforts. Committee Members requested disaggregated statistics and indicators on internally displaced people, refugees and ethnic minorities. More information about the statements made by the State about the Committee and its Convention at the International Court of Justice was also requested. The position of the state party vis-à-vis the group deported in the 1940s was unclear and Committee Members asked for further clarification. These were not simply Muslim Georgians and according to the 2002 census, the number of minorities decreased. What happened to these minority groups? Committee Members asked the delegation whether it was applying Article 11 of the Convention. Regarding the change of name of certain villages in Georgia, what measures did the Government envisage using in this regard?
Response by Delegation
There were currently over 500 refugees registered in Georgia, the vast majority of whom came from the Russian Federation. Currently, Georgian law on refugees did not comply with the 1951 Refugee Convention and a new law had been drafted to bring it in line with international standards. Georgia provided basic schooling, livelihood opportunities, grants, vocational training, legal clubs, information and community development support to refugees. Asylum seekers also came predominately from Russia. Every 11th person in Georgia was internally displaced. Half a million people had been displaced due to the 2008 war, mostly within Georgia. Registration was ongoing, but currently 260,000 were registered as displaced. In 2008, Georgia approved a strategy and action plan to ensure the dignified and safe return, and decent and dignified living conditions for displaced people. Special attention was paid to the living conditions of minorities in Georgia. From 2006, a quarter of a billion dollars was spent on the rehabilitation of infrastructure in areas populated by Azeri and Armenian minority groups. These projects reached over 100,000 residents.
There was not a single case or criminal investigation of racial discrimination, but just because there were no inter-ethnic clashes, this did not mean that inter-ethnic relations were satisfactory. The dialogue with the Committee was important to increasing standards in this regard from year to year. After the next census, data could be available about the number of people that self-identified themselves as of an ethnic minority. However, this would not present a complete picture because doing so was optional. The State did not differentiate in collecting education, health and other statistics. The minority groups were, of course, the most vulnerable and certain projects in remote areas were aimed at improving conditions. The Ministry of Education and Science had been implementing a series of actions to improve the access to education for minorities. To improve knowledge of the state language, a number of training and teacher’s professional development center programs had been implemented. Georgian-as-a-second-language textbooks and other materials would be distributed free of charge. These should all be in compliance with the national curriculum. The multilingual language program covered over 40 schools and would be expanded in the coming year. If a textbook contained discriminatory language or other offensive remarks it would be automatically rejected. No complaints, however, had been issued in this regard. These efforts built up tolerance and understanding of diversity in Georgia.
Regarding discrimination and hate speech in political discourse, Georgia adopted a liberal law on freedom of expression and speech in 2004 which was praised as a forward-looking law. A rule of accountability had been passed to regulate media. The Georgian National Communication Commission had passed a Code of Conduct that regulated and provided guarantees against incitement to action and speech based on discrimination. The government was doing everything possible in this regard, including civic education and teaching of tolerance. Much property of religious groups had been seized under Soviet rule and this property was contested among religious groups and thus required careful investigation. Numerous religious monuments had been registered. The representation of minorities in state bodies was being encouraged by affirmative action programs and many important posts were held by ethnic minorities. Regarding the declining number of national minorities, 100,000 people had left for Greece and several hundred thousand Georgians left for Russia. People had migrated due to economic hardship, in search of jobs and livelihoods. The most vulnerable groups, those most affected by the economic conditions, of course, were the most likely to migrate. If and when the people who were forcefully deported returned, they would not be forcefully identified. When repatriated, they would be allowed to self-identify. Concerning the criminal justice system, there were a serious number of preventative measures taken to promote access to justice and effective prosecution of criminal cases. In the sphere of legal aid, the legal aid strategy outlined that free consultation and access to legal aid should be expanded in areas densely populated by minorities.
Georgia asserted that the Committee had developed an understanding that it was competent and authorized to discuss extra-territorial application of the Convention. Georgia took the opportunity to clarify liabilities in occupied regions of Abkhazia, Georgia and Tskhinvali Region/South Ossetia, Georgia. Georgia, in the context of the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, recognized that the Committee had uniformly observed jurisdictional issues in the case of reporting of a state whose territory was occupied or beyond its jurisdictional control. Georgia believed that even if Article 22 of the Convention established pre-conditions for seizing the Court, the preconditions were alternative, not cumulative and fulfillment of only one would be sufficient. The International Court of Justice did not decide on the contrary. The Government was considering all possible measures of dispute resolution in order to ensure full respect of the Convention in the occupied regions.
In response to the question of the committee regarding alleged crossings of the Georgian border by members of armed forces of a third country to harass individuals of Azeri ethnicity, the Georgian delegation noted that no such incidents had taken place, and confirmed this response with information provided through border security of Georgia. Regarding those minorities, such as Qists, that were small in number, there were no problems with their integration into Georgian areas. Many Chechens found refuge in parts of Georgia, including more than 500 with refugee status that were still located in Georgia. Georgia took note of the court judgment and would faithfully negotiate the implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. With regards to renaming villages, the procedure was to consult with the local communities regarding their names.
With regards to the individuals deported in the 1940's by the Soviet regime, the delegation stressed that these individuals could not be homogeneously represented as Muslim Georgians, and the Government's position was that they must retain their right to self-identification.
Preliminary Concluding Observations
ION DIACONU, the Committee Expert who served as the country Rapporteur for the report of Georgia, said the discussion had illuminated the progress made in Georgia, although there was much work still to be done. Bad treatment was not equal to torture; it was a much broader concept. Racial discrimination should be forbidden, not necessarily criminalized. Efforts were being made to engage minority groups in terms of education and public participation, even for those who came from regions not currently under Georgian control, and this was the way to build a multi-ethnic and multicultural society. What was of interest to the Committee was the implementation of the Convention. The Government had at its disposal strategies and policies that corresponded to this objective. Some legislation needed to be adopted, but most importantly, strategies and policies needed to be implemented. The Committee encouraged Georgia to do so.
ZURAB TCHIABERASHVILI, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Georgia to the United Nations Office and other International Organizations in Geneva, said it was a great experience to appear before the Committee because Georgia understood better its achievements and the work ahead of it. Georgia would continue to pursue progress and work to navigate between the political realities and the legal standards.
__________
1) Reference is made throughout the discussion to “Meskhetians”, “Meskhetian Turks” or “Turkish Meskhetians” by Committee Members. Please note that the Government of Georgia does not use this terminology, but rather designates this minority as Persons Forcefully Deported (FDPs) by the Soviet Regime in the 40s of the XX Century.
__________
For use of the information media; not an official record
CERD11/028E