COMMITTEE ON ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION HOLDS THEMATIC DISCUSSION ON PREVENTION OF GENOCIDE

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has held a thematic discussion on the prevention of genocide during which Representatives of States parties, United Nations entities and non-governmental organizations expressed their views about actions needed to thwart genocide.

Addressing the discussion, which was held over two meetings, was the Secretary-General’s Special Advisor on the Prevention of Genocide, Juan Mendez, who said the prevention of genocide required both early warning and early action. Early warning should be clearly distinguished from early action, even though, politically, it could already be a form of early action in itself, he added. Moreover, early warning should always be accompanied by practical proposals and recommendations that enabled the international community to act in a timely fashion.

Agha Shahi, the Committee Expert who first proposed the holding of the discussion, recalled that for more than a decade the Committee, acting under its early warning measures and urgent action procedures, had drawn the Security Council’s attention, through the Secretary-General, to a number of systematic and massive violations of human rights in danger of escalating into genocide. Recalling the tenth anniversary of the Rwanda genocide in April 2004, Mr. Shahi referred to the Secretary-General’s Action Plan which emphasized the need for swift and decisive action, including military action in extreme cases, to halt genocide.

The Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, Doudou Diene, said the time had come to consider the cultural and historical roots of genocide. In order to prevent genocide, one must recall past events of similar magnitude. This could be done through education and awareness raising, among other things. Mr. Diene said it was imperative to respect and defend multicultural practices in order to prevent genocide from occurring.
While referring to the genocide which took place in his country a decade ago, the Representative of Rwanda said the best agents of prevention were capable States, exercising their sovereignty responsibly, dealing with internal dangers before they threatened others, and acting collectively with other States or with the United Nations to meet threats on a global scale. The principle of non-intervention in internal affairs could not be applied to protect those who committed genocide, he added.

During the discussion, several participants supported the strengthening and enhancement of early warning mechanisms to prevent genocide and the importance of the essential task of information gathering as a key to making such mechanisms a reality. Several speakers also expressed support for the Secretary-General’s Special Adviser in carrying out his mandate and for the Secretary-General’s Action Plan which bore the duty to prevent genocide.

Speakers agreed that the incitement of racial hatred in the media was a sign of prevailing trouble. Others expressed support for the International Criminal Court and noted, in particular, the urgency to put an end to impunity in Darfur for those responsible for carrying out acts characterized as genocide. Participants affirmed the need to carefully analyze past events where genocide had occurred and to determine what may have been done better or more efficiently to better prepare for similar situations. Moreover, the need to identify indicators for preventing genocide was stressed as a matter of importance.

Among the other points of interest raised during the discussion were the importance of examining the situation of minorities and vulnerable groups in terms of genocide; the promotion and dissemination of a culture of tolerance worldwide; the role of education campaigns against racial hatred; the strengthening and promoting of national norms and encouraging specific laws on eliminating racial discrimination; and the role of the media in order to promote peace building.

A speaker noted that often the lack of political will resulted in too little too late and therefore the focus must lie on preventing human rights violations before they occurred.

A member of the Committee also proposed that the international community conduct a study on genocidal aspects of economic globalization.

When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it will begin its review of a periodic report of Australia (CERD/C/428/Add.2)

Statements

AGHA SHAHI, Committee Expert, said since the Committee was central to combating xenophobia, racism and racial discrimination and related intolerances that were the root causes of internal conflicts that may result in genocide, it was the Committee’s responsibility to take the initiative in holding the thematic discussion on the prevention of genocide. For more than a decade the Committee, acting under its early warning measures and urgent action procedures, had drawn the Security Council’s attention, through the Secretary-General, to a number of systematic and massive violations of human rights in danger of escalating into genocide.

Recalling the tenth anniversary of the Rwanda genocide in April 2004, Mr. Shahi referred to the Secretary-General’s Action Plan which had emphasized the need for swift and decisive action, including military action in extreme cases, to halt genocide. The treaty bodies, special rapporteurs, experts, civil society groups, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and the Special Adviser of the Secretary-General for Genocide were well placed to sound the alarm as an early warning, he said. The Rwanda genocide stood out as the most "horrific example" of the failure of the United Nations system to heed and correctly evaluate early warnings of the planned extermination of the Tutsi minority, Mr. Shahi added.

Mr. Shahi, among other things, recalled the first international conference on the prevention and punishment of genocide since the adoption of the Genocide Convention in December 1948, which was held in Stockholm last January. He called on the international community to equip itself with the capacity for rapid deployment of peacekeeping forces under a Security Council peace enforcement mandate to halt genocide when prevention failed. While referring to the statement made last week by the High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour, Mr. Shahi also drew attention to the report of the Commission of Inquiry on the situation in Darfur, Sudan which Mrs. Arbour recently presented to the Security Council. The Commission had concluded that directly or through the militias under its control, the Government of Sudan was responsible for crimes against humanity and war crimes that may be no less serious than genocide.

JUAN MENDEZ, Special Adviser to the United Nations Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide, recalled that his mandate involved gathering information, providing early warning and presenting appropriate recommendations to prevent genocide from occurring. The creation of the post of the Special Adviser, he added, was part of the Secretary-General’s Action Plan initiated at last year’s tenth anniversary of the Rwanda genocide. The mandate had to be seen in the context of the United Nations’ efforts to create a culture of prevention and previous discussions regarding the prevention of massive violations of human rights and humanitarian law.

Prevention required both early warning and early action, Mr. Mendez said. It was crucial not to miss important developments that may in their early stages gather broad public attention. Early warning should be clearly distinguished from early action, even though, politically, it could already be a form of early action in itself. Moreover, early warning should always be accompanied by practical proposals and recommendations that enabled the international community to act in a timely fashion. Mr. Mendez recalled that his Office had thus far issued such notes on the situations in Darfur, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Cote d’Ivoire.

The impact of certain events on the prevalence of the casual factors in a particular country required thorough analysis based on the genocide literature, Mr. Mendez said. He added that his Office should act as a focal point for early warning information coming from any source inside and outside the United Nations system. The Office of the Special Adviser had agreed on how to define possible situations that merited its attention and the particular role the Special Adviser should play. Additional precipitating or external factors served to determine those countries in which immediate involvement was necessary. One precipitating factor to look for was the prevalence of expressions of hate speech directed at certain populations at risk, Mr. Mendez said.

In conclusion, Mr. Mendez said his Office could benefit from cooperation with the early warning measures and urgent action procedures of the Committee. The possibility of joint field visits in connection with the procedure could be considered as a concrete form of cooperation.

DOUDOU DIENE, Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, asked why the practice of genocide was spreading like wild fire from country to country. The time had come to consider the cultural and historical roots of genocide. What had made genocide possible was that the United Nations had not been in a position when these practices had occurred to name them as such; one example was Rwanda. The problem of semantics and the definition of genocide was a major political obstacle in this case, he added. There was a need to rethink the question of discrimination in the context of the degree of discrimination. Moreover, in order to prevent genocide one must recall past events of similar magnitude, this could be done through education and awareness raising, among other things.

While referring to the Holocaust, Mr. Diene said the memory of genocide should be understood on a global level. There was also a need to review how history had been reflected in text books in order to portray with accuracy past genocidal practices. The role of the image was also a matter of importance in preventing genocide as was multiculturalism. In closing, Mr. Diene said there was an absolute need to respect and defend multicultural practices. Without understanding this, the prevention of genocide could not be achieved.

The Representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees said although UNHCR had no direct mandate to assess whether a situation observed in a particular country amounted to genocide, it had according to its humanitarian mandate an important role to play when efforts on a national and international level to prevent serious human rights violations, including genocide, had failed; thus the life and freedom of persons could only be secured through the granting of international protection. UNHCR had met with Mr. Mendez soon after his appointment as the Secretary-General’s Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide.

The linkages between UNHCR’s mandate and efforts on the prevention of genocide were multifaceted. Among the manifestation of these linkages were: genocide and the need for international protection of refugees; refugee out-flows as an early warning indicator of the potential risk of genocide; and improved early warning and contingency planning for refugee emergencies.

UNHCR had taken careful note of the report of the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur to the United Nations Secretary-General and had actively assisted the Commission in conducting its work. All actors involved, whether belonging to the humanitarian sphere or to the United Nations human rights machinery, would have to carefully analyze what may have been done better or more efficiently and, as a result, what lessons could be learned in preparation for a similar crisis.

The Representative of Rwanda said the concept of genocide was well known in his country. In the backdrop of genocides which had occurred in Rwanda dating back to 1959, and more recently in 1994 when over one million people had died, the Government of Rwanda had taken measures to ensure that never again would there be genocide in its territory. The political inclusion of everybody in Rwanda was guaranteed and there was no more impunity for those who had participated in the genocide of 1994. Moreover, laws had been introduced to severely punish anybody who tried to divide the people of Rwanda on the basis of ethnic groups, regions or religions. Rwanda believed the best agents of prevention were capable States, exercising their sovereignty responsibly, dealing with internal dangers before they threatened others, and acting collectively with other States or with the United Nations to meet threats on a global scale. The principle of non-intervention in internal affairs could not be applied to protect those who committed genocide, he added.

The Representative of Luxembourg, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said the European Union supported the strengthening and enhancement of early warning mechanisms to prevent genocide and believed that the Secretary-General’s Special Adviser played an important role to that end. The mandate of the Special Adviser made it clear that information gathering was key to making this a reality. To this effect, the European Union was interested in hearing more from the Special Adviser on how his mandate was being implemented and more specifically on steps taken to define indicators for the prevention of genocide. The incitement of racial hatred in the media was frequently a sign of prevailing genocide. The European Union stressed that all measures designed to gather information on preventing genocide were very useful and attached great importance to these efforts. Moreover, the European Union committed itself to promoting international support for the International Criminal Court and noted the importance of putting an end to impunity in Darfur for those responsible for carrying out acts characterized as genocide.

The Representative of Argentina said his country attached great importance to the thematic discussion which was very relevant and timely. Argentina was a party to the 1948 Convention on Genocide which had been enshrined into its Constitution. The concepts of impunity and combating international crime were also matters of utmost importance. Managing the definition of prevention had not been done sufficiently and needed to be developed and recognized both nationally and internationally. The basic framework to combating genocide was historical memory which could be a deterrent. Argentina restated its commitment to upholding all efforts to prevent all acts of genocide and similar practices. Early warning measures and a study of the situation of minorities were also key factors to studying the phenomenon of genocide.

The Representative of Turkey recalled that his country became a State party to the Convention on Genocide in 1950, one year before its entry into force. As stipulated in the Convention, crimes against humanity including genocide had been incorporated into the Turkish Penal Code. Turkey believed it was high time for the Convention to be universal. Moreover, Turkey welcomed the appointment of the Special Adviser of the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide as a complementary step towards the effective implementation of the Convention. Turkey also believed that the promotion and dissemination of a culture of tolerance worldwide was of utmost significance.

The Representative of Sweden said the terrible events during the last decade in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, and presently in Darfur, showed the need for intensified efforts to develop preventive measures and better coordination, within the United Nations system, as well as with other actors. The problem lay with the international community which needed to reach an understanding of complex situations, and to act in time with the right measures. Often the lack of political will resulted in too little too late. The focus must lie on preventing human rights violations before they occurred. The Committee could play an important role in monitoring such situations as its mandate to take early warning measures including discrimination based also on ethnic origin and religion. The international community needed to cooperate more and to develop new strategies and instruments to improve its capacity to intervene at an early stage in difficult situations, thus enhancing its possibility of preventing genocide.

The Representative of Azerbaijan said as a country whose population on several occasions during the last decade had been subjected to the practices of ethnic cleansing, Azerbaijan well understood the importance of the task of making sure that genocide and related practices were not repeated. Azerbaijan therefore supported all measures to improve mechanisms aimed at ensuring that the international community lived up to its obligations to prevent genocide. The prevention of discrimination, in particular violence against minorities, should be seen as an effective means of preventing genocide. Azerbaijan was of the view that the best way to prevent genocide was for States to deal with and to eliminate the root causes resulting in the eventual committing of an act of genocide, such as policies of racial discrimination.

The Representative of Guatemala said his country had proposed to implement a systematic practice against genocide based on the policy of eliminating racial discrimination, using education and taking into consideration all relevant international instruments. Guatemala had experienced 36 years of armed internal conflict and therefore it understood well the issue of genocide. The acts of violence in that armed conflict had reached a point which could be qualified as genocide and most of the affected victims had been the indigenous people. The role of education campaigns against racial hatred was key to creating a harmonious multicultural State. Strengthening and promoting national norms and encouraging specific laws on eliminating racial discrimination, among other things, were also in line with the aims of preventing genocide.

The Representative of Mexico said the complexity of genocide called on the international community to reflect on the lack of action taken in certain situations. Mexico was of the view that prevention mechanisms must be developed to combat situations that led to discrimination. Mexico supported upholding and respecting the human rights of all minorities and agreed that a mechanism was needed to centralize information coming from the human rights treaty bodies to make it possible to detect information which might trigger genocide; it was also necessary to improve the coordination between these bodies. The mechanism responsible for monitoring could provide an early warning for preventing genocide.

The Representative of Israel said the international community had learned over the years that attempts to ignore the phenomenon of genocide were futile. The challenge facing the international community today was how to prevent conflicts from reaching the genocidal stage and how to intervene effectively when necessary. Israel believed it was necessary to create an international early warning mechanism which would report on activities that may constitute genocide in an expeditious manner. Forces that were dispatched to guarantee the safety of endangered civilians must be given the logistical and political support to accomplish these goals. Moreover, the political and military leaders who instigated and supervised genocide must be put on notice, at the earliest possible instance, that they would be held responsible for their actions. Civil society should also raise its voice in condemning clearly and loudly the behaviour of the perpetrators in order to rouse the international conscience.

The Representative of Syria said the rule of law and equality was a fundamental principle in Syria and there was no type of ethnic or racial discrimination in the country. Legal deterrents have been put in place in Syrian national laws which were aimed at punishing anyone who deprived another individual of his or her human rights. The crime of genocide was unknown in Syria. Israeli practices, vis a vis Arab citizens in the occupied territories, was a violation of the Convention on Genocide.

The Representative of South Africa noted that last year’s tenth anniversary of the Rwanda Genocide had also marked the tenth anniversary of freedom for South Africa. South Africa believed that the international community had the responsibility to complement the Secretary-General’s Action Plan which bore the duty to prevent genocide and to address the factors that triggered such a tragic eventuality as identified by the Secretary-General, namely armed conflict, the protection of civilians in times of war, ending impunity, heeding early warnings of genocide and acting decisively if and when genocide occurred. It was now more than ever incumbent on the international community to summon the political will to make sure that genocide became history.

The Representative of Hungary said her country was of the opinion that the prevention of genocide was a lengthy process which involved a peaceful coexistence of various ethnic and national communities. Full participation of all groups in a society as well as recognition of different identities helped to build a society of harmony. Hungary was confident that the new mandate of the Special Advisor would provide an early warning system to protect vulnerable groups. She added that there was a need to strengthen existing United Nations machinery.

The Representative of the Minority Rights Groups International and the International Movement against All Forms of Racial Discrimination said this discussion was a unique opportunity, not only to share ideas about the Committee’s role in genocide prevention, but also to look at how different United Nations bodies could coordinate their work in this area more effectively. The Committee’s specific role in examining state law, policy and practice, and the activities of non-state actors, with regard to racial discrimination, meant that it was well placed to identify early indicators of genocide. These indicators included the use of identity cards for identify specific groups; the exclusion of groups from positions of power and the phenomenon of segregation and forced relocation.

A system for following up on the urgent procedures and early warning measures, once they have been triggered, was extremely important with regard to genocide prevention, the speaker said. Moreover, there was a need for a procedure that would be operative throughout the year and not just during the sessions of the Committee, particularly with regard to monitoring the urgent and early warning procedures. Moreover, consideration should be given to a possible inter-sessional procedure. Furthermore, the Committee should consider forwarding information on certain situations to the Special Advisor, which needed the urgent attention of the Secretary-General and the Security Council.

The Representative of United Nations Watch said the international community could fight incitement to genocide only if it could learn from the lessons of history and translate them into action. The Holocaust did not begin with the gas chamber, it began with words, the speaker said; words that described the Jews as "a parasite". The genocide began with words in Cambodia and in Rwanda too. United Nations Watch recommended that instituting media monitoring in potential genocidal zones could be a way to curb such words. This task could be added to the mandate of the Secretary-General’s Special Adviser. Additional thought should also be given to the Secretary-General’s recommendation to establish a Genocide Alert Committee.

The Representative of the Anti-Racism Information Service outlined three particular points with regard to the discussion: effective early warning systems; obligation to prevent genocide; and education for prevention. In order to create a culture of prevention, signs of developing conditions, which could lead to genocide actions, must be identified, recognized and believed. In order to advocate the obligation to prevent genocide the international community should make use of existing international instruments. The International Criminal Court, in particular its deterring effect, could be emphasized further when it came to prevent genocide. Among other things, the media should engage in "positive reporting" in order to promote peace building and journalists should be trained in responsible journalism.

The Representative of Bournemouth University said an effective instrument was needed for a rapid reaction mechanism when genocide was in the making. Investigation mechanisms and improving legal expertise, among other things, were also areas which needed to be enhanced in order to prevent genocide from occurring.

The Representative of the Foundation for Aboriginal and Islander Research Action said indigenous people had been subjected to genocide around the world since the early sixteenth century although the crime of genocide had only been defined since 1948. An early sign of genocide was an incitement of violence and hatred against a particular group of people. Discrimination against indigenous people, in particular, centered upon the taking of lands and territory and resources. The Committee should prepare comments and recommendation setting indicators for the polarization of societies. An improved coordination between the Commission on Human Rights and the High Commissioner for Human Rights would be of great benefit for indigenous people.

The Representative of Indigenous Peoples of Crimea Foundation noted that 60 years had passed since the Crimean Tatars had been deported from Crimea, however genocide had not passed. The deportation had targeted the full destruction of the Crimean Tatars. Among the forms of genocide against this group was the transfer of children from one ethnic group to another. Presently, there were some 276,000 Crimean Tatars residing in Crimea and about 250,000 still in places of exile with no opportunity to return.

The Representative of the Lutheran World Federation, also speaking of behalf of the General Secretary of the Lutheran Church of Rwanda, said during the 90 days of the genocide in Rwanda he had witnessed human suffering in refugee camps in neighbouring Tanzania. Recalling this genocide, he said there were two indicators which seemed important at the State level. First, when there was state-sponsored hate propaganda and identification of "undesirable groups" who were targeted, not because of the actions, but because of their ethnicity or religion or group affiliation, this was an urgent warning signal that must be heeded. Second, the United Nations must listen to its own staff who were in-country and must trust their recommendations. In order to teach and educate people about the prevention of genocide, one must build trust with people who were the perpetrators of hate. Moreover, the United Nations and its agencies must also take initiatives to identify and empower community organizations and individuals that were having success at conflict transformation, reconciliation and reconstruction in communities in crisis and after crises occurred.

Discussion

While underlining the importance of non-governmental organizations and civil society groups to pressure their governments to strengthen their commitments to preventing genocide, a Committee Expert emphasized that the real problem was the lack of political will by the international community.

Another Expert recalled the calls made by the United Nations coordinator in Sudan last March indicating that ethnic cleansing had been occurring in the Darfur region which perhaps could escalate to the degree of the Rwanda genocide. Among other things, the Expert called for an effective and universal functioning of the International Criminal Court; support for the early warning and urgent action mechanisms whereby the Security Council could be informed of the risks of genocide; the establishment of the United Nations rapid reaction forces to act to prevent genocide; a reform of the veto right in the Security Council to make it more effective when dealing with emerging cases of genocide; and an extensive use of pubic information on the nature of genocide in order to form public opinion.

A Committee Expert proposed that the international community conduct a study on genocidal aspects of economic globalization. While addressing that point, he outlined that among the key aspects leading to genocide through economic globalization was selective direct foreign investment, dispossession of land, reduced bargaining power of labour and discrimination against indigenous groups.

Hate speech, another Expert stated, laid the groundwork for genocide when coupled with other factors; it dehumanised, demeaned and diminished individuals and groups. While underlining the important role the Convention played in condemning any language on superiority, he said the Committee had paid great attention to hate speech and was well placed to read the symptoms of a healthy or unhealthy society. Moreover, the work of the Committee was directed to conflict prevention in the sense of facilitating the understanding of the principles of the Convention which would contribute to maintaining a peaceful society.

Another Expert recalled that genocide also included ethnocide which often failed to attract the attention of the international community since the numbers of those affected in ethnocide were usually small. He drew attention to the fact that over the years the Committee had adopted over 20 decisions and statements under its early warning measures and urgent action procedures and noted that the Committee, interacting with numerous institutions, had prevented violent conflicts which could have escalated into genocide, although the system stood to be strengthened and improved. He added that the Committee could play a crucial role by providing information to the Secretary-General’s Special Adviser on laws and practices which may indicate discrimination and thus demonstrate early signs of potential genocide.

A Committee Expert underlined that the principle role of the Committee in addressing the question of the prevention of genocide was to provide early warning signs, although it had no operational mandate to intervene.

In a brief intervention, the Secretary-General’s Special Adviser on the prevention of genocide Juan Mendez noted that the African Union peacekeeping mission in Darfur needed strengthening in order to halt further atrocities from occurring.

Another Expert said the recommendations made by the Special Adviser on the prevention of genocide in relation to the conflict in Darfur should be used as a blueprint for future action in areas where there was a potential of genocide of occurring; these recommendations included the strengthening of peacekeeping missions to deal with such crises. Additional human rights monitors should be deployed to areas of concern and there should be an increased capacity to investigate crimes to prevent such acts from occurring again.

For use of the information media; not an official record

CRD05010E