COMMITTEE ON THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION DISCUSSES SITUATION IN GERMANY AND DENMARK WITH NGOS
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination this morning heard from representatives of non-governmental organizations from Germany and Denmark ahead of its review of their country reports this week. There were no non-governmental organizations present from Sudan, whose report will also be considered by the Committee this week.
Non-governmental organizations from Germany said that the implementation of the Convention in the country was inadequate and that the narrow and incomplete understanding of racism as a mere expression of individual prejudices allowed for unintentional, indirect and institutional forms of racism to be inadequately addressed. Muslims and people of African descent faced growing hostility and discrimination; the core concerns in this regard were racial profiling, violence and the use of deadly force by the police, as well as discrimination in the education sector. Religious discrimination was another issue of concern. Church-based organizations, which provided social welfare services to the general population, were the second largest employer in the country; the law allowed that vacancies require a belonging to the Church, which made those jobs non-accessible to non-Christians, particularly Muslims.
In Denmark, the situation over the years had changed: at first the challenge was to make the authorities aware of the Convention and the effective remedies. Today, the problem was not only the failure of authorities to take responsibility, but that the State Party itself was discriminating. There was a lack of effective remedies due to the failure of the incorporation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms Racial Discrimination and other international law in the national legislation. The Government was in denial of hate crimes, while other issues of concern were racial profiling, the family reunification law, and discrimination against Eastern Europeans, particularly people from Romania, who faced great levels of hostility even if they had Danish citizenship.
The following non-governmental organizations spoke in today’s meeting: the Social Service Agency of the Protestant Church of Germany, Office for the Implementation of the Equal Treatment Act, Initiative by Lawyers and Non-governmental Organizations, who spoke on Germany, and the Documentation Centre for Racial Discrimination who took the floor in the discussion on Denmark.
The Committee will next meet in public at 3 p.m. this afternoon to start its review of the combined twelfth to sixteenth periodic report of Sudan (CERD/C/SDN/12-16).
Statements by Non-governmental Organizations from Germany
Social Service Agency of the Protestant Church of Germany presented a parallel report which was the outcome of a collective project by several civil society organizations in Germany. There was an inadequate implementation of the Convention in Germany and the State report exemplified a narrow and incomplete understanding of racism as a mere expression of individual prejudices whereas unintentional, indirect and institutional forms of racism were inadequately addressed. The lack of data was particularly problematic in the areas of racial profiling and other forms of institutional discrimination, such as in education and housing where disparate effects on groups protected under the Convention were observable. The conceptual framework of crime statistics needed a reform to include offences motivated by racial discrimination other than hate speech. Muslims and people perceived as Muslims faced growing hostility and the number of attacks on persons and places of worship was on the rise. Germany was still unable to provide a systematic account of the demographics of Black people or the discrimination they faced. The core concerns were racial profiling, violence and the use of deadly force by the police, and discrimination in the education sector. People seeking asylum faced growing levels of hostility, and there was a surge in anti-refugee rhetoric in parts of public and policy debate. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Questioning and Intersex persons of colour experienced heightened levels of discrimination, abuse and assault; they experienced specific discrimination by the police in the form of intersecting cases of racial and sexual profiling, and faced specific vulnerabilities in the asylum process.
Office for the Implementation of the Equal Treatment Act raised the issue of religious discrimination in Germany and said that there was a noticeable increase in the Muslim population in the country who was largely naturalized and had German citizenship. The unemployment rate of the people of immigrant background was double that of the general population. Social welfare services in Germany were largely provided by religious organizations: Caritas and Diakonia were the second largest employers in Germany, right after the State, and ahead of the car industry. All employers in Germany expected loyalty, including church-based organizations, and this was expanded in job adverts where belonging to a Church was a requirement in job vacancies. This had implications for non-Christians in the country, particularly Muslims, who would have trouble applying for the vacancy and being offered a job. Welfare organizations and services were largely supported by the State. Muslim organizations were not in a structural possibility to apply for the legal recognition which would make them eligible for public subsidies for the provision of social services. The Equal Treatment Act allowed individuals to file complaint against another individual for acts of discrimination. The Act did not cover acts of institutional discrimination, for example by the police or in education, which led to problems related to racial profiling.
Initiative by Lawyers and Non-governmental Organizations took up the issue of institutional racism and said that there were structural defects within the security apparatus which led to racial discrimination and inadequate addressing of instances of racial violence. This was exemplified in the treatment of the National Socialist Underground (NSU), a terrorist group which targeted immigrants; many cases were not investigated and prosecuted, and some were not even registered. The NSU had carried out its terrorist activities for more than 14 years without any repercussions or fear of legal consequences. The State report claimed that NSU acts were investigated in all possible directions, but this was not true as the racist dimension of those crimes was overlooked. The trial of those NSU members indicted for killing of two persons in Nuremberg had failed to address the issue of institutional racism.
Discussion on Germany
A Committee Expert asked the non-governmental organizations to expand on their understanding of institutional racism, and to provide concrete examples of the structural defects in the administration of justice and the administration in general. What were adequate responses to racial profiling by the federal police and what concrete examples of inadequate application of the Convention could be cited?
Representatives of non-governmental organizations said that inadequate application of the Convention could be seen in murky definitions of xenophobia, including in statistics, as well as in the definition of groups which were protected under the Convention. Diversity in the workforce in the church-based organizations existed in terms of ethnicity, but not in the area of religion. The law on racial profiling was the result of a political agreement and was difficult to implement because it was unclear in terms of procedure. What was clear was that the people of colour were the targets and that federal police officers received very little training on racial profiling.
Committee Experts asked about the data collection system and what methods could be used to work around the current gaps in the system; whether the collected data was made public; and about the lack of an official complaint office and what other institutional changes would be important. It was noted that special measures were not used on the ground of race, but they were used in connection with gender; why was that? Experts asked the representatives of non-governmental organizations to provide evidence that discrimination on the basis of religion was in fact racism in many instances, and about the reasons for which racist motives behind the crimes, particularly by NSU, were often not brought up.
In response, a non-governmental organization said that neo-Nazis infiltrated the police, some were even police officers themselves, and had the advance information about raids. There was a long-standing discussion between the State and non-governmental organizations about the number of racially-motivated murders; non-governmental organizations claimed that more than 180 had been registered. Germany was more attuned to crimes of Nazism rather than to the ideas of racism and discrimination, which came through the European Union. Also, there was very little perspective on the victims of crimes of racial discrimination, who tended to be neglected.
As for data, the problem was to achieve the level of segregation which would allow for the effective protection of groups defined by the Convention. Voluntary gathering of data could be a way forward, even if some groups preferred not to be categorized and have their data collected. Racial profiling by the police must be documented by the police and a form on the incident should be given to the person questioned. The ghost of history should inspire a full and open debate and eliminate the reluctance to specifically name racial discrimination in the Government discourse, which continued to use terms such as hatred or xenophobia. An independent police complaint mechanism must be put in place to allow all persons to file their complaints on any ground, not just racial discrimination, and so allow the police force to improve.
In a further series of questions, Experts asked about the difference between the situation in Germany and in the United States, and whether the Patriotic Europeans against the Islamisation of the West (PEGIDA) was a recognized political movement.
Responding, the representatives of non-governmental organizations said that it was important to recognize racism and to introduce the grounds of racism, and not use any other terminology that would take attention away from racism. Also, it was important to examine the right of citizenship in Germany versus those in the United Kingdom or the United States; those who obtained citizenship by birth were not considered by some to be the real Germans.
Statement by Non-governmental Organization from Denmark
Documentation Centre for Racial Discrimination said that over the years, the situation in Denmark had changed: at first the challenge was to make the authorities aware about the Convention and the effective remedies. Today, the problem was not only the failure of authorities to take responsibility, but that the State Party itself was discriminating. There was a lack of effective remedies, due to the failure of the incorporation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms Racial Discrimination and other international law in the national legislation. The Government was in denial of hate crimes, while other issues of concern were racial profiling, the family reunification law, and discrimination against Eastern Europeans, particularly people from Romania, who faced great levels of hostility even if they had Danish citizenship.
Discussion on Denmark
Committee Experts wondered how the place of birth was registered in Danish passports of people born in foreign countries.
In response, the non-governmental organization said the procedure of recording the place of birth in passports had been recently changed without any explanation; in case of people of Romanian origin, Romania was now recorded as a place of birth. This had an impact on Danish citizens of foreign origin, particularly in the context of the fight against terrorism, money laundering, or the police stop and search activities.
Committee Experts asked about what was going on in Denmark and why the situation was alarming, whether it was in an isolated case or a systemic pattern of discrimination, and who was targeted, citizens of Romania or Roma.
In 2002, the law on family reunification granted it until the age of 24; over the age of 24 there was a need to demonstrate that the couples’ aggregate links to Denmark were stronger than links to another country. The age was now raised to 26, but it would not change the fact that it was discriminatory to Danish citizens of non-Danish origin. The fear was about the lack of protection of minority rights and the non-incorporation of the Convention.
An Expert noted that the Convention was not directly enforceable in Danish courts. It was recognized as a source of law and Denmark had in place the Anti-discriminatory Statute. The representative of the non-governmental organization said that this was a very difficult discussion in Denmark and noted that this too had been the case with the European Convention on Human Rights, which had made great impact on the law since its incorporation. There was no evidence of the use of this and other international conventions in the courts, simply because they were not incorporated.
For use of the information media; not an official record
CERD15/007E