COMMITTEE ON ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION CONSIDERS REPORT OF ARGENTINA

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has considered the combined nineteenth and twentieth periodic report of Argentina on its implementation of the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Presenting the report, Alberto Dumont, the Permanent Representative of Argentina to the United Nations Office at Geneva, noted that on 1 November 2006 Congress had approved the Act recognizing the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications from individuals within Argentina's jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the State of the rights set out in the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. That Act also established the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism as the competent body to receive and consider such communications.

Continuing to present the report, Claudio Morgado, President of the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism, said that the purpose of the Institute was to draw up national policies and practical measures to combat discrimination and racism and to foster and carry out initiatives to that end. In particular, the Institute was entrusted with the task of coordinating implementation of the proposals for a National Plan against Discrimination, adopted in 2005.

Daniel Fernandez, President of the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs, also providing information on the report, noted that the Institute was the national agency responsible for creating intercultural channels for the implementation of the rights of indigenous peoples enshrined in the National Constitution. The Institute was a decentralized body with indigenous participation whose main functions were to ensure the registration of indigenous communities in the National Registry; to coordinate the recognition of the communities’ possession and ownership of the lands they traditionally occupied; to coordinate programmes in support of intercultural education; and to foster mediation and indigenous involvement in areas impacting on the interests of those communities.

In preliminary concluding observations, Régis De Gouttes, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the report of Argentina, noted as positive that Argentina had accepted the procedure for individual communications of the Committee and the establishment of a whole set of programmes to assist in waging the fight against discrimination. It would be interesting to know more about how all those institutions would work together. He hoped the next report would concentrate more on racial and ethnic discrimination, without extending to other types of discrimination, and would provide new information on the exact number of indigenous persons, as well as those of African descent and from the Roma community. Also appreciated would be information on concrete legal cases of discrimination brought by indigenous persons.

Over the course of the two meetings, other Committee Experts also raised questions and asked for further information on subjects pertaining to, among other things, results achieved so far under the National Plan against Discrimination; the number of indigenous students receiving scholarships; concerns about possible negative implications for indigenous communities which did not register with the national registry service; and why a member of the Defensoria del Pueblo, the Nation Human Rights Institution, was not present to give a presentation. Experts also asked for more information on the social and economic situation of the 2 million Afro-descendants identified by the Oxford University Foundation in a survey, as well as the criteria that had been used for identifying this seemingly "invisible" minority. An Expert was extremely concerned about the situation of the indigenous peoples, in particular the Chaco, who continued to be evicted from their lands and who were reportedly living in subhuman conditions. The Committee had received information that a recent violent eviction had led to one person's death, and yet there had so far been no land restitution and no compensation for victims.

The delegation of Argentina also included representatives from the Ministry of External Relations, International Trade and Religion and members of the Permanent Mission of Argentina in Geneva.

The Committee will present its written observations and recommendations on the combined report of Argentina at the end of its session, which concludes on 12 March.

When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it is scheduled to take up the combined eighth to thirteenth periodic report of Cambodia (CERD/C/KHM/8-13).

Report of Argentina

The combined nineteenth and twentieth periodic report of Argentina (CERD/C/ARG/29-20) notes that the National Statistical and Census Institute carries out complementary surveys focusing on indigenous populations, persons with disabilities and international migration covering migration from neighbouring countries only, so that disaggregated data on the nationality of all foreign nationals in Argentina are not available. Similarly, no data are available on Argentines of minority group origin. According to the results of the Supplementary Survey on Indigenous Peoples, there are 600,329 people who are recognized as being members and/or first-generation descendants of members of the indigenous population. Information on this population is provided below based on the two classification criteria used for identification (self-identification and first-generation descent).

All persons living in the country have access to a free publicly available telephone line (to report discrimination). The service is active every day of the week, including public holidays, on a 24-hour basis. In 2007, a total of 1,450 calls were received on the 0800 line. In dealing with a case that refers to any one of the acts described, the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism adopts an interdisciplinary approach. If the action taken immediately does not succeed, a complaint is filed with the organization. This complaint is substantiated by the Institute’s legal advisers, with the help of assistants of the Law Faculty of the University of Buenos Aires. This procedure leads to the drafting of a technical opinion. The Free Legal Advice service offered by the National Institute against Discrimination was set up in November 2006, in response to the significant increase in the number of consultations and/or complaints received after the service was launched. Since the scheme was launched, a daily average of 5.5 consultations were received and a monthly average of 165.5. A total of 1,107 cases were dealt with from the beginning of the year to 31 July. From 2006, the Complaints Centre’s workload doubled, rising from a monthly average of 55 complaints in the period January-August to a monthly average of 121.5 complaints in the last four months of 2006. In 2006, the Institute's budget was 1,954,000 pesos; in 2007, 4,271,000 pesos; and in 2008, 10,197,000 pesos.

Presentation of Report

ALBERTO DUMONT, the Permanent Representative of Argentina to the United Nations Office at Geneva, highlighting the main developments over the past few years with regard to legislative and institutional changes, noted that on 1 November 2006 the National Congress had approved the Act recognizing the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals within Argentina's jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the State of any of the rights set out in the Convention. That Act also established the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism as the competent body to receive and consider such communications.

Outlining a number of other international law developments, Mr. Dumont noted that, on 15 November 2006, the National Congress had passed an Act approving the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, which recognized the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women to receive and consider communications by or on behalf of individuals or groups of individuals claiming to be victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in that Convention. Additionally, on 21 February 2007, Argentina had ratified the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, and just a few days ago Argentina had presented its first periodic report to the Committee associated with that Convention.

CLAUDIO MORGADO, President of the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism, continuing to present the report, said that the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism was a decentralized agency that operated under the authority of the Ministry of Justice, Security and Human Rights. Established by Act No. 24515, its purpose was to draw up national policies and practical measures to combat discrimination and racism and to foster and carry out initiatives to that end. In 2005, the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism was transferred from the Ministry of the Interior, of which it originally formed part, to the Ministry of Justice, Security and Human Rights.

Under the terms of Decree No. 1086/05, the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism was entrusted with the task of coordinating implementation of the proposals for a National Plan against Discrimination. It stipulated that the provinces, the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires and provincial municipalities be encouraged to contribute to the research and action necessary to formulate that Plan. In fulfilment of the aforementioned mandate, the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism ran a local management structure with offices in the provinces of Buenos Aires, Catamarca, Chaco, and many others.

As had been mentioned, the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism was also the body within the national legal system that was competent to receive and consider the communications by individuals claiming to be victims of violations by the State of their rights under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

In September 2006, the President and Vice-President of the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism had introduced a new management structure with a view to federalizing management, revitalizing or setting up the Institute’s offices throughout the country; improving care for victims of discrimination by providing a comprehensive advisory and guidance service, including through the launch of a toll-free helpline and allowing consultations via a website; developing and strengthening civil society forums that coordinated management of the various discrimination-related issues; raising social awareness of the problems caused by discrimination; and formulating public policies that had education for diversity as their immediate goal.

In October 2001 the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights had visited Argentina to promote the implementation in the country of the conclusions of the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. In that context, Argentina had made a commitment to elaborate a National Plan against Discrimination, which would follow up the proposals and conclusions of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. The work of designing, preparing and implementing the project had been carried out between 2002 and 2004 with the support of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr. Morgado said. The guiding principle behind the project was that the plan should be developed on the basis of a nationwide consultation with sectors affected by those practices, with government departments, non-governmental organizations and universities.

In 2005, on the occasion of the visit of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, the President of Argentina, Néstor Kirchner, had approved by Decree No. 1086/05 the National Plan against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism. The objective of the National Plan against Discrimination was to elaborate specific proposals whose implementation would lead to reducing and/or eradicating discriminatory social practices current in Argentine society.

Since September 2005, many of the proposals put forward in the National Plan against Discrimination had been implemented and many had been redrawn and broadened by the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism and other government bodies at the national, provincial and municipal levels, Mr. Morgado observed. Among recommendations adopted were the recognition of the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to consider individual communications, which was a significant advance in the broad implementation of the Convention.

DANIEL FERNANDEZ, President of the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs, said the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs was the national agency responsible for creating intercultural channels for the implementation of the rights of indigenous peoples enshrined in the National Constitution. It had been established in September 1985 under Act No. 23302 as a decentralized body with indigenous participation. The National Institute of Indigenous Affairs reported directly to the Ministry of Social Development.

The main functions of the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs were to ensure the registration of indigenous communities in the National Registry of Indigenous Communities. To that end, it coordinated with provincial governments and carried out training workshops with the communities for the purpose of facilitating formalities. It was also tasked with coordinating all available mechanisms to comply with the constitutional requirement to recognize the communities’ possession and ownership of the lands they traditionally occupied and to regulate the grant of other lands adequate and sufficient for human development, and encouraged indigenous participation in the formulation and implementation of identity development programmes, providing the necessary technical and financial support. The National Institute of Indigenous Affairs also coordinated programmes in support of intercultural education and fostered mediation and indigenous involvement in areas impacting on the interests of communities, including natural resources, biodiversity and sustainable development.

Response by the Delegation to Written Questions Submitted in Advance

Responding to the list of issues submitted by the Committee in advance, the delegation said that, with regard to ethnic statistics on the population, it was believed that there were no people of African descent from the colonial era in Argentina. However, the next census would include a question on people of African descent, for the first time in 115 years, since the 1885 census.

The delegation said the indigenous reality of the country was being uncovered. The next national census, to be held in October 2010, contained a self-identification question. That would be the basis that would allow them to make progress in terms of gathering demographic and socio-economic data.

In the report the terms aboriginal and indigenous had both been used, the delegation agreed. There was no real distinction between the terms. That had only been done because the Ministry of Education had used the term aboriginal in a decree on education. However, it was understood that the term indigenous should be used.

The Convention could be directly invoked before Argentine courts, the delegation said. The new Constitution of 1994 specifically stipulated that international treaties had primacy over domestic law. The Supreme Court of Justice of Argentina had pointed out that the State had to ensure that it strictly abided by ratified international treaties and that its courts relied on them. There were seven rulings that had relied on the Convention. As examples, in one case, the New Triumph Party was disbanded because it denied membership to certain persons because of their race; in another, persons were found guilty of incitement to racial hatred.

The Federal Council for Public Anti-Discrimination Policy had been established by the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism with a view to implementing the National Plan against Discrimination, the delegation said. The Federal Council had representation from each province and from the Municipality of Buenos Aires, as well as from the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism, in order to coordinate anti-discrimination policies. The main functions of the Council were to propose policies and measures with a view to implementing the National Plan against Racism; to ensure the effective implementation of the Plan; to receive and evaluate proposals with regard to specific local situations in regard to the Plan; and to ensure effective coordination of action with the related public institutions.

Among laws stemming from the National Plan against Discrimination were many that had been cited already, such as on the adoption of the Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers, as well as the law on environmental protection for native forests; on ownership of native lands; holistic protection of the rights of children and adolescents; on the protection of refugees; and on the protection of cadastral land registration and the suspension of dispossession by indigenous persons of their lands.

The delegation said that there had been 47 complaints lodged regarding discrimination on the basis of ethnicity or skin colour or physical characteristics in 2008, and 57 complaints of ethnic discrimination in 2009. The majority of those complaints were split fairly equally between complaints of anti-Semitism and discrimination against indigenous peoples, but there were also complaints of discrimination on the basis of Afro-descendants, Islamophobia and others.

Among research activities of the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism, the delegation noted that the Institute had begun drawing up its first discrimination map in December 2006. That survey looked into practices and perceptions in order to provide a more rigorous picture of discrimination in each of the provinces of the country. The network of researchers on discrimination sought to bring together researchers working on different areas relating to discrimination in the country. The network was established by the website of the Institute, which provided information on the research groups, their work, and the individual researchers.

With regard to indigenous land issues, the delegation said that, starting in 2003, the National Government had undertaken a policy of recognition of the possession and property rights of lands traditionally occupied by indigenous peoples. By Act No. 26160 a four-year state of emergency was declared in order to halt the eviction of indigenous peoples, to permit territorial resettlement and to regularize their communal property. The law established the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs as the implementing agency for the first three years, and the Institute had in turn established a special fund of 30 million pesos to that end. The President had also issued a decree on Argentina's bicentenary (2010) so that measures would be taken to accelerate devolution of lands in the hands of the State, universities or other public bodies.

Oral Questions Raised by the Rapporteur and Experts

RÉGIS DE GOUTTES, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the report of Argentina, noted that the report contained much information concerning the issue of discrimination in general, but was concerned that it did not concentrate specifically enough in terms of racial or ethnic discrimination. For example, it contained information on issues such as discrimination on the basis of health, disability, sexual orientation or gender.

Another concern was that the report did not contain enough information on the ethnic and racial breakdown of the population, in particular with regard to the Afro-descendant community, which was only mentioned as making up 6 per cent of the population according to a study by a foundation with the University of Oxford. More details were needed to accurately assess the situation, Mr. de Gouttes felt. Today the delegation had stated, as had been set out in the report, that there were no longer any people of Afro-descent from the colonial period in Argentina. However, in the face of information that 6 per cent of the population were Afro-descendants, he felt that statement needed clarification.

There was also insufficient information on measures taken to fight against anti-Semitism, in particular for a country where the Jewish community was large. Details of cases involving anti-Semitic acts and sanctions applied would be appreciated.

Mr. de Gouttes further observed that little information was given regarding the role that could be played by the Defensora de Pueblo, the National Human Rights Institute accredited to the United Nations, in the fight against racial discrimination.

In terms of the competence of the Committee to receive communications from individuals, Mr. de Gouttes asked for details of how the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism, which was responsible for receiving such complaints, was supposed to work with the Committee. Could that body directly pass on such a complaint to the Committee, for example, or did the complainant have to do so himself if he failed to obtain satisfaction from the National Institute for his complaint?

In terms of indigenous peoples, Mr. de Gouttes asked about the Indigenous Coordination Councils, which were supposed to consult with the local communities. Non-governmental organizations had raised questions about the effectiveness of those councils and in particular the election process that was supposed to guarantee indigenous participation. He asked for more information.

Mr. de Gouttes asked for more information about the law on education, which was supposed to guarantee bilingual multicultural education. The Committee had received information that the implementation of that law was often hampered by a lack of funds, appropriate textbooks and adequately trained teachers.

Other Committee Experts raised questions and asked for further information on subjects pertaining to, among other things, more information on exactly what information was included in the discrimination maps being drawn up by the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism, and in particular whether information from the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs was included; what results had been achieved so far with the National Plan against Discrimination; information on the social and economic situation of Afro-descendants; statistics on how many students had benefited from scholarship programmes for indigenous communities; concerns about possible negative implications for indigenous communities which did not register with the national registry service; and a lack of representation by women on the delegation. Similarly, it was asked why a member of the Defensoria del Pueblo, the Nation Human Rights Institution, was not present.

Other concerns raised by Experts included how the indigenous and minorities would be involved in carrying out the census, and what awareness-raising would be undertaken to make them aware of its importance; whether there was a disparity in access to justice for those coming from rural as opposed to urban communities; more information on the provision of free legal assistance, including the criteria for granting such assistance; and the seeming "invisibility" of ethnic minorities in Argentina, including the 2 million afro-descendants living there. On the latter issue, an Expert wondered how the Oxford foundation found these 2 million people. Where did they live? How were they identified? By self-identification or was it the Foundation that had termed people to be Afro-descendant even if they only had a very small amount of African blood.

An Expert was extremely concerned about the situation of the indigenous peoples, in particular the Chaco, who continued to be evicted from their lands and who were reportedly living in subhuman conditions. While that situation was not the fault of the Government, the State had the responsibility to act. So what was happening? Was the State simply overlooking this situation? What actions had the State taken to prevent violent evictions and to punish those responsible for them? The Committee had received information that a recent violent eviction had led to one person's death, and yet there had so far been no land restitution and no compensation for victims.

An Expert observed that, despite a number of cases on indigenous issues in the report, as well as cases of discrimination on other grounds, the report lacked information on specific cases of racial discrimination brought in Argentina.

An Expert lauded the approach taken by Argentina on the rights of migrants and their status. Indeed, Argentina had advanced legislation in a number of areas related to the fight against discrimination. The concern was that those laws needed to be implemented throughout the country.

Experts also asked for a breakdown of the complaints made to the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism, by geographical area, socio-economic status and other criteria, to allow the Committee to get a better handle on patterns of racial discrimination in the country. There was also a concern that legal help provided to those making complaints was in a very hi-tech form – that is, it required access to telephones or the Internet. Did that match the reality of farmers living in remote rural areas?

An Expert asked about the country's own perception of its racial makeup. Outsiders saw Argentina as largely made up of European migrants with a small indigenous community. Was that how Argentina saw itself and had things changed in recent years? Further, what was meant by intercultural education as used in the report? The issue was that such education implied an equal exchange of cultures, but could often, in reality, be subsumed by the culture of the majority group. Multicultural education was more clear-cut as it emphasized the mutual nature of the exchange.

Noting that Argentina had ratified International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention No. 169 on indigenous and tribal peoples, an Expert asked how Argentina's legislation had been changed in order to take the provisions of that convention into account. Were there criminal penalties for trespass on or usurpation of indigenous lands?

Response by Delegation to Oral Questions

Addressing questions posed by Experts, the delegation, with regard to the criticism that there was no woman on the delegation, noted that Argentina was headed by a woman, that there were more women than men in the house of deputies, that Argentina had a quota for women in political office and that the head of the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs was a woman. Indeed, there were many women in decision-making positions in Argentina. So the fact that there was no female representative on the delegation was something of an anomaly.

As to the issue of including information in the report on other forms of discrimination, the delegation noted that the competent bodies for drawing up the report had been the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism, the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs, the National Women's Council, the National Council on Persons with Disabilities and the National Council on Justice, Security and Human Rights. Indeed, they had made a conscious choice to include information on other forms of discrimination, as they believed that was relevant and intertwined with the issue of racial discrimination.

In terms of Argentina's self-perception, the delegation said Argentina promoted a model of social inclusion, but that did not mean that it denied racial and ethnic differences. There had been a great deal of racial mixing. In that connection, the National Government had been taking a number of measures since 2003 to strengthen the role of the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism and to focus on the indigenous land issue. Rhetoric was not enough. Without the return of the lands to the indigenous peoples they could not build "real" rights. That was a Government priority.

The delegation said that the Constitution recognized the legal personality of indigenous communities. Those included groups of families that recognized themselves as coming from families that had occupied certain lands when the colonial regime had been established. Legal personality was established by registration, with regard to the benefits for those communities, on the national list of communities. The national register was governed by the Social Development Decree, which changed the register into a simple statement of declaration. A community registered by signing a request for registry identifying the name which they wished to be called by, where their lands were, and, usually, how they were organized and who their leaders were. The technicians of the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs then went out and verified those statements and then, technically speaking, the registry was complete. It did not have to present any further proof. If one compared that process with the civil registry, it was much simpler.

It was important to note that the Argentine Provinces had their own register for lands, which protected indigenous land as well. It was quite a complicated issue, and the national Government was working to harmonize those overlapping systems, the delegation added.

In the nineteenth century, many Argentines had seen a denial of their identity, because they came from losing factions in the war. Today, there was a reassessment going on of Argentine history, part of a larger regional reassessment and change going on in Latin America. The situation in Argentina with regard to indigenous peoples was also blurred because – unlike in other countries of the region – many of the indigenous groups had migrated to the cities. The vast majority of the population – 90 per cent – lived in urban centres.

Turning to the status of the land restoration process, the delegation underscored that more than 4 million hectares had already been handed over and were now in the hands of the indigenous communities. The clearest case was the province of Jujuy, in the northwest on the border with Bolivia. There, significant territories were in the hands of the indigenous communities.

The process of restoration, which started with Act No. 26160, was ongoing. There were no traps and no delays in that process. However, it was not an easy process, the delegation conceded. The first thing that was done was to bring together the indigenous community to ensure their agreement, including through mapping by the community of their lands, and then a technical group was sent out to formalize that mapping. The finalizing of the mapping was carried out hand-in-hand with the community and had to be approved by them.

The National Institute of Indigenous Affairs had also set up a community-strengthening programme so that communities could better defend their rights to land and to ensure they had proper documentation of their lands, which included some 1,000 communities. There were more than 35,000 families today that had been helped by the law preventing eviction from their lands. There had been cases of expropriation. But there had also been many families that had benefited from Law 26160, and that law had recently been extended for another four years. Only one province in the country had voted against the extension of that law.

As for penalties for those who evicted persons from their land, the delegation noted that there had been a death of one man in the context of an eviction in Tucuman Province. The perpetrators of the death had not been actual State agents, but former police officers. The perpetrator of the death in Tucuman had been immediately arrested. The State had also expressed serious concern about that issue, and had decided to include training on indigenous matters for local justices of the peace and others. In other preventive measures, the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs did try and intervene and provide legal support for those families that had not benefited from the law on restoration of lands yet.

In areas where there were unresolved land issues and disputes with local governments, as was the case of the Mapuche community, the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs was working with the communities and the local authorities to try and resolve those situations. There were also cases in which the Institute was working with the local communities and the national government to carry forward land surveys despite the opposition of the Provincial Government.

For those indigenous communities that did not register as such, they were still considered indigenous and recognized as indigenous. The law covered all indigenous persons whether they were registered or not, whether they lived in rural or urban communities. The only benefit that they did not receive if they were not registered was the right to establish communal lands. Communal lands could only be identified through registration, the delegation said.

On the issue of multicultural bilingual education, the law provided for that in accord with the Constitutional recognition of the indigenous people and their rights in the Constitution. At the Indigenous Communities Development Unit measures were being taken to ensure that the indigenous did have access to such education, inter alia, through support to teachers. Bilingual education was perhaps the weakest link in that programme. But work was going ahead. In one province the Guaraní language was recognized as the second language, and Chaco Province was moving in that direction as it prepared to recognize the three indigenous languages of the communities living there.

The delegation said that between 9,000 and 10,000 indigenous children were receiving education grants from the Ministry of Education to ensure that they stayed in school. Those scholarships came in addition to the child benefit that each child in Argentina received. There was also a literacy programme, which some 2,000 children participated in. Currently, there were 323 bilingual teachers working in various communities in the schools and the Government was working to broaden that number so that they did not just tackle educational issues but also social protection issues, which was primordial.

The Indigenous Peoples Council elections were held in all the provinces and were organized by the indigenous peoples themselves. However, it was a process that was still under way and was not yet completed. There were provinces that had not yet sent representatives. The process had started over two years ago. There had been setbacks, but the process had begun to pick up momentum. However, there was full representation of indigenous peoples, the delegation insisted.

The Coordinating Council was responsible for drafting public policy on the indigenous, and that contained membership from various bodies, including the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism, as well as from indigenous communities, but also other minority communities. However, the Indigenous Peoples Councils were strictly indigenous bodies, the delegation clarified.

In addition to Jujuy, the two provinces with the biggest indigenous populations were Chaco and Salta. The National Institute of Indigenous Affairs had numerous programmes to strengthen the indigenous communities in those areas with regard to education, health and nutrition and land recovery.

On ILO Convention No. 169, the delegation noted that that Convention had led directly to the land survey and was a source for the indigenous participation and representation councils. Were there cases of violation? Of course; but there was also a firm will in place to implement ILO Convention No. 169 and it was at the heart of these measures taken by the State.

Regarding efforts to combat anti-Semitism, the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism did have civil society representatives on its directorate, including two representatives of the Jewish community, a representative from the Arab community, and a representative from the national human rights institution. The National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism worked on the development of policies to prevent anti-Semitism, as well as following up on that issue. Argentina was also a member of the Task Force for International Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance and Research, established in Stockholm in 1998 – the only country in Latin America to join that group. In addition, there was also a commission established in 1997 to investigate Nazi activities in the country since the Second World War. A final report of the commission was available on the Ministry for Foreign Affairs website.

The National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism worked in close cooperation with the Defensoria del Pueblo (the national human rights institution), and the Institute was the source of all discrimination complaints referred to the Defensoria. The Institute had indeed just signed cooperation agreements with the Defensoria offices in the cities of Rosario and Santa Fe. As to a lack of participation by the Defensoria at the meeting here, the delegation noted that the post of Defensoria was currently unfilled, which had led to some complications.

Regarding legislative developments, the delegation said there was currently a bill before Congress to broaden the definition of laws prohibiting discrimination, for example, to include discrimination against persons because of their sexual orientation. It also sought to change the legal burden of proof so that victims did not bear an undue burden to prove discrimination.

Turning to questions about the Afro-descendant community in Argentina, the delegation noted that the study carried out by the Foundation at the University in Oxford had not been ratified by the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism; the Institute wanted to move beyond those data. The 2010 census would include a question on Afro-descendants, which would provide new information on that group. The question was drawn up with the cooperation of organizations of African descendants from the four pillars of the Afro-Argentine community: those descended from the slave population; those from the Cape Verde communities; those of Caribbean descent; and those who were part of the new African migration.

The basic text of the census question asked if the responder or anyone in the household had ancestors of African descent, with the possibility to indicate "yes", "no" or "don't know". It was hoped that that self-identification process would work against the denial process. Another strategy to encourage self-identification had been to undertake awareness-raising activities, including through television spots. African history would also be included in textbooks for primary and secondary level education in Argentina, which were being produced with the help of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and the African communities themselves. Argentina was further working with Colombia to declare 2011 the year of Afro-descendants.

Turning to migrant issues, the delegation said the National Directorate of Migration had established a series of rules to implement the new migration law, which sought to do away with the various barriers and red tape that migrants had to face. With regard to child migrants, the rules held that the child's rights always had primacy and there could be no migrant child considered as illegally present in the country. The Directorate had a migrants counselling service with telephone and e-mail support, as well as a migrants assistance unit, tasked with providing help to migrants so that they could enjoy their rights. The law also specifically prohibited collective expulsions, with each case to be decided on an individual basis.

The Patria Grande Programme did provide for positive discrimination to foreigners coming to Argentina from the Southern Cone Common Market (MERCOSUR), the delegation said. The residency agreement under that programme was one of the main pillars for the economic union of the area.

Migratory flows had changed in Argentina in recent years and new sources of refugees were being seen. For example, Argentina was experiencing an influx of Senegalese migrants over the land border with its neighbour. Whereas in recent years there had been a number of refusals of refugee status for Senegalese asylum-seekers, the delegation stressed that Argentina had one of the most advanced asylum systems in the world, and was seen as a model of best practices in this area.


Preliminary Concluding Observations

In preliminary concluding observations, RÉGIS DE GOUTTES, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the report of Argentina, thanked the delegation for the frank dialogue. Enumerating some positive aspects from the exchange, he noted that Argentina had accepted the procedure for individual communications of the Committee with the competence of the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism to receive such complaints. Also highlighted was the establishment of a whole set of programmes to assist in waging the fight against discrimination. It would be interesting to know more about how all those institutions would work together.

For the future, Mr. de Gouttes hoped the next report would concentrate more on racial and ethnic discrimination, without extending to other types of discrimination. They should also attempt to bring more non-governmental organizations into the preparation process. The report should provide new information from the census taking place this year, hopefully providing the exact number of indigenous persons, as well as those of African descent and from the Roma community.

The federal State needed to obtain from the provinces the implementation of international instruments and to ensure that they more effectively protected human rights in line with international standards, Mr. de Gouttes felt, in particular their right to access to justice, the right to food, consultation and participation in decision-making and to stop evictions of indigenous persons from their lands, in spite of the law in that regard. Also appreciated would be information on concrete legal cases of discrimination brought by indigenous persons.

With regard to migrants, information should be provided in follow up to the revision of the migration law in 2004 and the revision of migratory status, as well as on the implementation of the law on refugees and asylum-seekers as well. Finally, Mr. de Gouttes would like to see more information in the next report regarding intercultural education, bilingual education, and the prevention of all messages of a racist nature that could arise in the media or in the political sphere.

For use of the information media; not an official record

CERD10/005E