COMMITTEE AGAINST RACIAL DISCRIMINATION CONSIDERS SITUATION IN MALAWI AND SEYCHELLES UNDER REVIEW PROCEDURE

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination this morning discussed the situation in Malawi and the Seychelles under its review procedure for countries whose reports are seriously overdue.

Presenting a situation analysis report on Malawi, Gertrude Lynn Hiwa, Chief Parliamentary Draftsperson of the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, noted that the report was in response to the issues raised by the Committee and was primarily to initiate a dialogue between the Committee and Malawi; it did not remove Malawi’s obligation to submit the overdue periodic reports. Malawians did not exhibit any racial discriminatory tendencies towards other races or among themselves, but there had been allegations of racial discrimination perpetrated against Malawians by persons of other nationalities or races living in Malawi.

Reporting on the situation in Malawi, Committee Expert Nourredine Amir proposed providing technical assistance to the delegation of Malawi to assist it in drafting its periodic report, as technical difficulties had been put forward as one of the major reasons for the State party’s failure to submit its report.

Experts raised questions and made comments on various subjects including the need for Malawi to address a number of questions in its report, including the question of remedies for acts of racial discrimination and the subject of human rights education; the legal protections refugees had under Malawian law; and the independence of the justice system and what influence professionals had in that system.

Following the discussion, it was agreed that Malawi would request technical assistance from the Office of the High Commissioner, and the Committee would await the submission of its periodic report.

The delegation of Malawi also included representatives from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation and the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs.

Concerning the Seychelles, Committee Expert Raghavan Vasudevan Pillai recalled that the Seychelles had ratified the Convention in 1978, and the last periodic report by that country had been considered in August 1988. Even that report had been considered in the absence of a State party delegation. In that connection, it had been raised at the time that the Committee could meet in New York to discuss reports of smaller States parties that did not have delegations in Geneva.

As a result of the discussion and the proposals made by the country Rapporteur and Experts, it was decided to send preliminary confidential observations to the Seychelles. A letter was to be drafted requesting the United Nations Resident Coordinator, in his capacity as the representative of the United Nations system in the Seychelles, to intervene on behalf of the Committee (in the absence of a country office of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights). The High Commissioner for Human Rights was to be contacted to discuss facilitating the follow-up methods for those delegations whose periodic reports were seriously overdue and which did not have missions in Geneva. The President of the Human Rights Council was also to be contacted by the Secretariat to discuss establishing more effective cooperation with the Council. Letters to the High Commissioner and to the President of the Human Rights Council would be drafted as a result of those contacts, as needed.

When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it will consider the situation in Namibia and Saint Lucia under its review procedure and will also discuss its early warning and emergency action procedures.

Situation in Malawi

Presentation of Situation Analysis Report

GERTRUDE LYNN HIWA, Chief Parliamentary Draftperson of the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, noted that the situation analysis report, which had been submitted to the Committee, was in response to the issues raised by the Committee and was primarily to initiate a dialogue between the Committee and Malawi; it did not remove Malawi’s obligation to submit the overdue periodic reports to the Committee. Malawi had become a State party to the Convention in 1996 and had five outstanding periodic reports.

Ms. Hiwa said that Malawi was divided into three administrative regions North, Central and South and its peoples came from different tribes. There were also communities of people of Asian and European origins in Malawi, especially in the urban centres. So far, Malawi had not had any significant issues relating to racial discrimination.

Ms. Hiwa noted that the Constitution – the supreme law of the land – expressly prohibited discrimination of any kind. Other laws, such as the Employment Act and Labour Relations Act also prohibited discrimination. The Constitution ensured and protected the civil, political and social rights of all Malawians regardless of their race, culture or religion. The Constitution also established several institutions that promoted and protected human rights, including the judiciary, the Malawi Human Rights Commission and the Office of the Ombudsman. However, Malawi had not yet passed any legislation specifically to implement the Convention fully at the domestic level.

Although Malawi had not yet removed its reservations to the Convention on the Status of Refugees, for the last 10 years refugees in Malawi had had access to health care, education and employment, Ms. Hiwa affirmed. The refugees were sometimes granted the right to reside outside the camps. The Government had not deported Ethiopians and Somalis seeking asylum without proper examination of their claims.

Malawians did not exhibit any racial discriminatory tendencies towards other races or among themselves, but there had been allegations of racial discrimination perpetrated against Malawians by persons of other nationalities or races living in Malawi, Ms. Hiwa concluded.

Questions by Country Rapporteur

NOURREDINE AMIR, the Committee Expert serving as country Rapporteur for Malawi, said that they had been waiting a long time to see the delegation and he welcomed its presence today. He noted that the situation analysis report submitted today was in response to the Committee’s questions, and was not a periodic report.

Mr. Amir said that he would like to propose technical assistance to the delegation to assist it in drafting its periodic report, as technical difficulties had been put forward as one of the major reasons for the State party’s failure to submit its report.

As far as the Committee was concerned, Mr. Amir said the Committee should ask further questions in order to help the delegation with the drafting of the report. He noted that the State party had never reported to the Committee. In August 2003, the Committee had examined the situation in the State party under its review procedure and had adopted concluding observations. Those conclusions had already been sent to Malawi. He himself had sent some additional comments on the situation. In August 2005 and June 2006 the Committee had received written responses to those questions.

Mr. Amir reminded the Committee that the Special Rapporteur on Prisons and Conditions of Detention in Africa, appointed by the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights had visited Malawi in June 2001. Recommendations had been made and sent to Malawi on those conditions.

Mr. Amir drew attention to the fact that the penal code criminalized discrimination and that Malawi had established a human rights Ombudsman.

Officially, Mr. Amir observed, there were no Malawian refugees in other countries. However, Malawi had some 1,000 refugees on its territories coming from Rwanda, Ethiopia, Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and other countries

Mr. Amir said he could not but note that there were some ethnic tensions and antagonisms within Malawi. However, those antagonisms had been reduced since 1994. They would have to wait for the report of Malawi before making a global determination on the situation of discrimination in that country.

Response of Delegation

Ms. Hiwa said that the delegation welcomed the proposal to provide technical assistance to Malawi to draft its report.

Further Questions and Comments Raised by Experts

Experts raised further questions and made other comments on various subjects including the need for Malawi to address a number of questions in its report, including the question of remedies for acts of racial discrimination and the subject of human rights education; what legal protections refugees had under Malawian law; and the independence of the justice system and what influence professionals had in that system.

Following the discussion, it was agreed that Malawi would request technical assistance from the Office of the High Commissioner, and the Committee would await the submission of its periodic report.

Situation in the Seychelles

RAGHAVAN VASUDEVAN PILLAI, the Committee Expert serving as country Rapporteur, presenting the situation in Seychelles, said that in the absence of a periodic report from the State party and in the absence of any response to its letters, the Committee had decided to send a list of questions to the State party. The President therefore wrote to the Permanent Representative of the Seychelles in New York in August 2005 seeking a response by 31 January 2006. The Ambassador was informed that in the absence of any response from Seychelles on that date that the Committee would adopt preliminary observations on the situation in the country.

Mr. Pillai recalled that the Seychelles had ratified the Convention in 1978, and the last periodic report by that country had been considered in August 1988. Even that report had been considered in the absence of a State party delegation. In that connection, it had been raised at the time that the Committee could meet in New York to discuss reports of smaller States parties that did not have delegations in Geneva.

Mr. Pillai drew attention to the preamble of the Constitution of Seychelles, which stated that the people were aware and proud that as descendants of different races they had learned to live together as one nation and could serve as an example of a harmonious multi-racial society. It was appropriate therefore that the Seychelles had ratified the Convention in 1978, shortly after its independence.

While the State party had been remiss in the submission of its periodic reports to the Committee, Mr. Pillai observed, on the other hand, during that period it had ratified a number of core international human rights instruments, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention against Torture, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. It had even ratified Article 8 of the discrimination Convention in 1998, and had ratified the Migrant Workers Convention in 2003.

With reference to the initial report submitted by the Seychelles to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, Mr. Pillai noted that the Seychelles had referred to the richness of its population as reflected in the mixture of its many ethnic groups, which continued to grow through intermarriage, and that there were no indigenous groups in the country.

Concluding, Mr. Pillai suggested that the Committee adopt preliminary, confidential concluding observations and send them to the Seychelles.

Committee Experts then raised various issues, including whether the Committee could use the assistance of the United Nations Development Programme to encourage the State party to respond to the Committee and the provision of technical and financial resources to the State party to assist in the drafting of its report.

A number of Experts supported the notion that the Committee should consider, once again, the possibility of holding an extraordinary session in New York to follow up on those State parties who did not have delegations in Geneva and for which it was clear their lack of response was linked to their lack of financial capacity.

An Expert noted that the question of follow up should be addressed by seeking cooperation and coordination with the other arms of the human rights system. For example, the High Commissioner should be contacted to discuss the holding of extraordinary follow-up sessions in New York. Similarly, the President of the Human Rights Council should be contacted to discuss the topic, in particular so that rapporteurs working on similar topics could collaborate on such meetings.

As a result of the discussion and the proposals made by the country Rapporteur and Experts, it was decided to send preliminary confidential observations to the Seychelles. A letter was to be drafted requesting the United Nations Resident Coordinator, in his capacity as the representative of the United Nations system in the Seychelles, to intervene on behalf of the Committee (in the absence of a country office of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights). The High Commissioner for Human Rights was to be contacted to discuss the facilitating follow-up methods for those delegations whose periodic reports were seriously overdue and which did not have missions in Geneva. The President of the Human Rights Council was also to be contacted by the Secretariat to discuss establishing more effective cooperation with the Council. Letters to the High Commissioner and to the President of the Human Rights Council would be drafted as a result of those contacts, as needed.