Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Treaty bodies
COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS REVIEWS INITIAL REPORT OF MONACO
02 May 2006
Share
2 May 2006
The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights today reviewed the initial report of Monaco on how that country implements the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Introducing the report was Philippe Blanchi, Permanent Representative of Monaco to the United Nations Office at Geneva, who said Monaco embodied in its Constitution the rule of law and the respect for human rights for all on its territory. It was committed to these principles, which were embedded into traditions, and intended to make further progress, and desire in this regard was unflagging, as it was fully compatible with the history of Monaco and other aspects of its existence. International instruments to protect human rights went hand-in-hand with Monaco’s long-term commitment to promote and protect human rights, which was evident in the number of conventions and agreements on various human-related issues to which Monaco was a signatory.
During the discussion, which was held over two meetings, Committee Experts raised questions pertaining to, among other things, Monaco’s interpretative declarations and reservations to the Covenant; discrimination between genders, in particular in the context of nationality; social security issues and who was eligible to these; issues related to health, including drug abuse; corporal punishment; and the provision of technical assistance and food aid to other countries.
The Committee will issue its concluding observations and recommendations on the report of Monaco at the end of its three-week session on 19 May.
Other members of the delegation of Monaco included representatives of the Department of the Interior, the Department of External Affairs, the Department of Social Affairs and Health, and the Permanent Mission of Monaco to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will reconvene at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 3 May, when it will take up the initial report of Liechtenstein.
Report of Monaco
The initial report of Monaco (E/1990/5/Add.64) says that, subject to restrictions based on nationality, men and women in Monaco are equal where economic, social and cultural rights are concerned. Title III of the Constitution guarantees various economic and social rights, but confers on parliament competence to determine how they shall be exercised. In Monegasque law, provisions relating to the rights set out in international conventions prevail over the provisions of legislation in the corresponding areas. Monaco promotes enjoyment of the rights set out in the Covenant while taking into consideration certain specific factors linked to the size of the Principality and the particular context of its historical and political situation, but with a constant concern to promote harmony in social relations and offer a high level of general welfare, both for those living in the Principality and for those who work there.
Freedom of employment is guaranteed under article 25 of the Constitution. This article grants priority to Monegasque citizens in recruitment to public and private employment insofar as the person concerned possesses the necessary skills, and subject to the conditions laid down in the law or international conventions. In view of the very low rate of unemployment in Monaco, it has not proved necessary to draw up a national plan of action to ensure full employment. The economically active population living in Monaco is by some way too small to take up all the jobs generated by Monaco’s economy. With almost 28,000 cross-border workers working in Monaco, the country is contributing to the development of the surrounding economic region. Monaco also has social security schemes to protect wage earners, salaried employees and professional people.
Introduction of Report
PHILIPPE BLANCHI, Permanent Representative of Monaco to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said before joining the United Nations in 1973, Monaco embodied in its Constitution the rule of law and the respect for human rights for all on its territory. It was committed to these principles, which were embedded into traditions, and intended to make further progress, and desire in this regard was unflagging, as it was fully compatible with the history of Monaco and other aspects of its existence. Since the submission of the initial report, updated information had been sent to the Committee, and an amended version had been submitted yesterday. Various developments had taken place.
Monaco was characterised by its small size, and in population terms, was home to 120 nationalities, and nationals were a minority. Monaco constituted a point of attraction for education, as 30 per cent of children in schools were from families that did not reside in Monaco. On the health front, there was a very high level of infrastructure. Recent changes on the legal front included the conclusion of international conventions, with a constant and unflagging will to ensure the fullest protection of individuals in Monaco. International instruments to protect human rights went hand-in-hand with Monaco’s long-term commitment to promote and protect human rights, which was evident in the number of conventions and agreements on various human-related issues to which Monaco was a signatory.
Nobody could be prosecuted for expressing a political or religious opinion, but insults on racial, ethnic, religious or sexual orientation grounds were criminalized. Equal rights between men and women were guaranteed. The National Council was currently considering Bills to reform, among other things, adoption law, and to modernise rules on education, sport, and public law and order and security. Mr. Blanchi said he hoped this insight into the current situation in matters relating to the Committee had been helpful, and the delegation was ready to answer any questions the Committee would ask.
Questions Raised by Committee Experts
An Expert asked if Monaco intended to withdraw its interpretative declarations and reservations, and noted that the country had not made it clear exactly what it objected to in several areas. Reservations and declarations often limited the scope of a treaty, he said, asking what were the compelling grounds that forced Monaco to uphold these, as he could see none, and wished for an explanation. Other Experts also raised the issue of reservations, noting that these might be long-term, and that this should not be encouraged.
Another Expert asked for a clarification on the new developments. The list of replies included a section indicating that once a Convention had been gazetted, it could be invoked before the courts, and he asked whether there had been any case invoking the Covenant. The Committee on Human Rights in 2001 had indicated concern for the status of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and whether it prevailed over domestic law, and there was similar concern for the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. He also asked whether women who acquired Monegasque nationality by marriage could transmit citizenship to their children, an issue that was also raised by other Experts from other angles.
Monaco had ratified a number of international treaties in the fields of human rights, an Expert said, and was to be congratulated, but it was not yet a member of the International Labour Organization, and the reason for this needed to be elucidated. What was the role that could be played by the Covenant in filling gaps in the Constitution, including for example the right for health, as this was not included within the Constitution. Another Expert also raised the issue of the International Labour Organization conventions, asking whether they were not ratified as a matter of principle, or due to time constraints.
With regards to non-discrimination, in Monaco, priority was given to male heirs, an Expert noted, asking why women were systematically set aside. Another Expert asked whether in Monegasque law, the man was referred to as the head of the family, as this would be discrimination. Was there a law on gender equality, another Expert asked, inquiring whether there was anything in the civil code making a difference between legitimate and illegitimate children. What were the social benefits in which the conditions of residents applied, another Expert asked, noting that these sometimes could cause de facto discrimination.
Were policy-makers and the legislature aware of the provisions of the Covenant, and were they applying these during the period of transition in the current reforms, an Expert asked. How could the Covenant be invoked by private persons, he asked, and was there any case law that could be provided clarifying this. What percentage of the budget was allocated to cooperation with developing countries, and how was it organised?
Response by Delegation
Responding to the questions on reservations, the delegation said that when it joined the Covenant, Monaco had issued interpretative declarations rather than reservations. These were set out when the Covenant was adhered to, and were elaborated at the time and in the text. However, Monaco’s nationals were a minority, and to date this situation had not yet changed, with a result of making it necessary to take this fact into account. Under Monegasque law, any international convention was a legal standard that could be applied or invoked by the courts. The Constitution however took precedence over international conventions. Judges had an obligation to apply the provisions of the conventions and over-ride legislative provisions in the case of a clash, and there were rulings to this effect. Regarding provisions that were self-executing, these were observed by domestic legislation. If there was any clash, then international instruments prevailed. The courts applied the provisions of international instruments to the extent that domestic legislation applied the penalties provided for in the relevant legal texts.
On the subject of nationality and the implications with regards to marriage, at the present time, a foreign woman who married a Monegasque man did not automatically assume nationality before five years were over, a period after which she could adopt Monegasque nationality should she so choose, and if the spouses were living together. For a man who married a Monegasque woman, he could apply for naturalisation without time limit, but applications for naturalisation would only be considered after five or seven years had elapsed, the delegation said. Discussions were ongoing in the Government and Parliament regarding the legal provisions on acquiring nationality after marriage as there was a difference in treatment that appeared to favour men. On the transmission of nationality through women who had acquired nationality, an Act had been passed which allowed a woman to pass this on to her children, including those already alive and under the age of 18.
Regarding the ILO, the delegation said this was being considered in Monaco, but there were a number of obstacles, including the Geneva Declaration of 1998 relating to a number of international conventions, some of which raised problems, particularly non-discrimination on jobs, on account of the Rules of Priority in labour matters. However, the matter was being studied, and it was likely to be considered in the near future.
The Constitution contained a list of rights, the delegation said. A particular system of the courts of Monaco was that the judiciary was not under the Government, but under a separate authority, namely the Prince, although he had no part to play in disciplinary processes regarding judges. On discrimination regarding succession, there was nothing ruling out a Princess acceding to the throne, including if there was no legitimate heir. However, it was a tradition for the male to inherit, and no provisions were being considered to change that.
On overseas development assistance, or technical cooperation, Monaco had multilateral aid in the form of voluntary contributions to a number of international organizations, including WHO and UNAIDS and there were also bilateral agreements with countries with which Monaco had had long-term diplomatic relations.
Social security benefits in some situations required residency for five years, but the whole situation was very complex. Civic education included teaching on the role of men and women and their place in society. There were specific education modules for police recruits, which were called “ethical training” which ensured that police action was in respect with human rights.
The Covenant, like any other legal norm, could be invoked. Monaco was a very small state, and the administrative services were very small, and the majority were aware of the international conventions, as they were responsible for ensuring implementation of or respect for the provisions of the latter. As the country was so small, people met their elected representatives on a daily basis, and the flow of information was thus very easy, and could be obtained rapidly and easily by the public.
In follow-up questions, an Expert said he was gratified to hear that Monaco was seeking to remedy the situation of inequality between men and women with regards to nationality. Monaco did not have a problem with asylum-seekers, he noted, asking for confirmation of this fact. Another Expert asked for clarification on three issues: first the delegation had said the Constitution came first and then the Covenant, asking whether this indicated the Constitution had precedence, as this was against the Vienna Convention and other international treaties; secondly that there were gaps between national legislation and the Covenant, and could the delegation give examples where the courts had filled these gaps by referring to the Covenant; and whether there were sanctions for discrimination on account of race and had there been an enactment sanctioning this in domestic law. Equality between the genders was raised by another Expert, who asked if there was any intention or Bill under preparation to introduce legislation under this principle.
The delegation said that Monaco had an agreement with France on asylum-seekers, and any request for asylum was dealt with by the French, as they had the necessary experience. Monaco upheld the conclusions of the French. The Constitution had priority over international instruments, and this was the current hierarchy of law, although Monaco was a signatory to the Vienna Convention. On gender equality, it was true that, as in many States, there was positive discrimination for the protection of women, including on prohibition of dangerous work, and in a number of laws including on salaries.
Experts then asked further follow-up questions on such topics as positive discrimination and the status of the Convention in law, to which the delegation responded briefly.
Questions Raised by Committee Experts
On the social security system, an Expert asked whether there was social security for part-time workers, and how such workers were protected. She also asked why some social security benefits were paid under the presumption that the head of the household was a man. Social security for self-employed workers was also an issue, in particular whether they were covered for certain events. Was Monaco considering moving towards a system where the child was the one holding the rights to benefits, she asked. The issue of legitimate and illegitimate children was raised again from the perspective of social security.
Another Expert noted that Monaco was fortunate in having almost full employment, and said that the number of workers or wage earners was larger than the number of inhabitants. The large number of foreign workers made the interpretative declaration of article 6 incompatible with the situation. He also asked what was the usual labour contract, whether it was permanent or fixed-term. On the minimum wage, he said that he understood it was based on the French minimum age, asking what was the frequency of reassessment. A final question covered which bodies lacked the right to strike in Monaco.
Another Expert asked whether guest workers had the right to form or join trade unions, and what restrictions were posed on this right. Where did guest workers live, he asked.
Response by Delegation
Responding, the delegation said that Monaco had considered the issue of residency for social benefits, and was considering lowering the period of residency required before being entitled to certain benefits. On the minimum wage, there was an update every year, and on 1 July 2005, it was 8.05 euros per hour, with an average monthly rate increased by 3-4 per cent every year. Regarding social security for part-time workers, they were entitled to social coverage. Provisions for part-time work were increasingly stringent. There was no restriction or legal prohibition on the right to strike in Monaco. Generally, employment contracts were long-term contracts. A reform of the labour law was currently being discussed, but the principle would always revolve around the long-term contract basis. Regarding labour rights of foreign workers, there were no restrictions, and they could join trade unions. Some lived in Monaco, but they were probably persons who had been in Monaco for a long time. The situation on the ground was that the majority of these employees lived in France or in Italy.
Questions by Committee Experts
On food aid and technical cooperation, an Expert said that article 11 of the Covenant provided for the right to decent living standards, food, etc, and asked whether food aid was available. The report noted that there was bilateral as well as multilateral cooperation, and he asked whether there were certain criteria for eligibility for such aid, and what these were. How were recipient countries selected, he asked, and what was the procedure. What was Monaco’s share of food aid provided to the Food and Agriculture Organization, and did it earmark its multilateral aid to go to certain specific countries, he concluded.
Regarding sexually-transmitted diseases, an Expert asked for more information on the figures of transmission. The education given on HIV/AIDS was very positive, as were the steps taken to integrate it into the curricula, and the free screening offered in hospitals, he said. However, there was a need to clarify what effect these programmes had had. Further clarifications were also required on programmes for students with disabilities.
Another Expert asked for further information on the way in which Monaco dealt with the drugs issue, as the information provided said there was a policy intended to reduce risk and that syringes were provided to drug addicts. There was a need to clarify what were the penalties for those providing drugs to minors and Monaco’s role with regards to the world drug problem.
Returning to the matter of disparities in treatment between children born in wedlock and out of wedlock, an Expert noted that this distinction did exist, and a de facto discrimination also legally existed. Further clarification was required on these distinctions, and what intentions existed to modify these different situations to bring them into line with more current usage. Domestic violence was another issue, and the report contained no information on this, she said, asking whether there was a provision against offences relating to violence against women and children, and how was this sanctioned. Trafficking in women was also an issue that needed to be elaborated.
Response by Delegation
On the question on sexually-transmitted diseases (STDs) and education, statistics and prevention, the delegation said that Monaco was particularly aware of this, and was concerned to see that the most recent statistics showed a rise in STDs among the younger groups of the population, despite efforts made, which consisted of raising awareness among adolescents and young adults by doctors and social workers in schools and encouraging use of protection. A number of AIDS and STD patients came from abroad, and this distorted the statistics somewhat. The basic idea on disabled children was to keep them in mainstream education as long as possible, whilst providing extra help in the form of tutoring or extra classes.
On drugs problems, the delegation said there were activities in schools. In Monaco, the consumption of drugs was a criminal offence, and this was explained by magistrates, whilst doctors explained what was meant by addiction, and the police came to schools to show the different types of drugs and explain the risks in using them. Violence against women was a criminal offence, and there was a special police force for juvenile delinquents which also looked after women who had been victims of violence. A special structure and telephone number had been set up for women. There were also provisions against any trafficking in human beings, and this included sexual exploitation as well as labour exploitation, which were prosecuted.
Sub-Saharan Africa as well as Latin American countries received technical cooperation and other forms of aid. Monaco only had a few embassies, but had developed a large network of honorary consulates, and it was through these volunteers that it could provide assistance, which was targeted towards needs noted in the field, and was not conditional. Bilateral assistance was targeted towards precise projects, habitually food and health. A framework was being considered in order to provide targeted assistance in the field that would allow evaluating the results of that aid. There were agreements with States, the delegation said, as well as with regional bodies, with precise targets which involved monitoring not only by the beneficiaries but also by Monaco’s agents. Various types of aid were provided, including food aid
Response by Delegation
Some 0.28 per cent of the budget was consecrated to aid, the delegation said, and Monaco aimed to go up to 0.7 per cent of GDP, in line with State commitments, and this would happen in the years to come. On penalties for discrimination and legislative punishment, acts of discrimination expressed through the press or audio-visual means were punished either with imprisonment or by other means. Discrimination expressed in the work area currently had no legislative punishments, but discussions were continuing on this topic. There was no discrimination between men and women in social services provided to families. Changes would be made to move away from the head of family and towards the child as the holder of the right, in particular in families living in France or Italy and working in Monaco. Children born out of wedlock were only referred to in certain obsolete texts.
In follow-up questions, an Expert asked whether anything had been done for children born out of wedlock who did not have the same rights as other children. Further, had anything been done to remedy the situation wherein women with children found it easier to gain assistance than men with children. He also suggested that there should be public awareness campaigns on corporal punishment targeting parents as well as teachers and children themselves. Another Expert also raised the issue of the use of the terminology used to designate legitimate and illegitimate children.
Another Expert raised the issue of the age of consent, noting that this was inconsistent with the status of adolescents as children requiring protection, and yet they could not sign legal contracts. He also inquired whether same-sex marriage was acceptable and of it was being endorsed in Monaco.
Responding, the delegation said concerning work by children under 16, Monegasque education was enforced until the age of 16, and this was a process that was verified. If some school-age children were not in the school system, measures were taken. In some specific classes, however, there was vocational training, and this was alternative school/work education, which allowed the children to be prepared for future employment. There was a vocational training contract, done through the school system, and parents and teachers were involved. At 18, a person was considered as an adult. All movements of people were governed by the Schengen rules.
It was rarely mentioned whether a child was born in or out of wedlock, the delegation said. Same-sex marriage was not possible, as an article of the civil code indicated that this was not possible. People who had been residing for more than one year in Monaco and had received a residence card were provided with a limited form of social assistance. Legislation on housing protected and had always protected tenants. On corporal punishment, the criminal code contained protective provisions, as it protected against cruel and degrading treatment. Where children were concerned, a sentence could be increased, and this was covered in legislation. School services and social services had established a network of oversight to keep an eye on any event of corporal punishment, however, such events were very infrequent.
In more follow-up questions, Experts focused on various issues, such as apprenticeship; and what was the situation under criminal law when an adult had sexual relations with a young person of about 15 or 16, and whether criminal law covered this.
Responding briefly, the delegation said that if an adult had sexual relations with a minor, this person could be prosecuted. The delegation clarified that the age of consent was 18 years of age.
An Expert highlighted that the use of the different terms to describe children born out of wedlock were discriminatory as of themselves, and the delegation said that there was this distinction in terminology as it existed in law. It had only recently been removed with the reform of the Civil Code in 2001. The law also totally prohibited abortion, but there was a discussion going on for it to be allowed in certain cases.
Questions by Committee Experts
An Expert inquired as to what specific education was being offered in schools on economic, social and cultural rights, and whether free copies of the Covenant were being offered to schools. Was there any case law in connection with intellectual property and copyright? Had there been any forms of discrimination experienced by those who only spoke Monegasque, he asked. Another Expert also asked how many people actually spoke Monegasque.
An Expert asked whether the UNESCO Covenant on Non-Discrimination in Education had been ratified, and whether this was deliberate. Another Expert said he was positively affected by the high level of the State budget allocated to developing national culture, as this was very impressive. Was the principle of participation in cultural life promoted actively among citizens, he asked, noting that the Committee’s particular concern lay with those belonging to vulnerable and marginalized sectors, such as older persons, the less well off, and the disabled, and asking if there were special subsidies or programmes to encourage their participation. Another question was asked on the size of classes for children with learning difficulties.
Answers by Delegation
Responding, the delegation said the very existence of the national community resided on a long-standing tradition, and there were very specific, almost family links, between the national community of Monaco and the royal family, and the relations there were often on a one-to-one basis. Citizens wrote directly to the Prince on topics concerning them, and the Prince and the royal family were very close to many citizens. National identity and unity was very apparent. It was through the association of the different communities that this was ensured. The national language was French, and this was embodied in the Constitution. Prizes were awarded every year for the mastery of the Monegasque language. There was a concern to preserve the language and manifestations of the national culture in that sense.
The heritage of Monaco, the delegation said, was very similar to that of the Western nations in general, but the country tried to emphasise its roots, including culinary and other traditions. There were some institutions such as museums that worked to preserve and promote Monegasque traditions. There was legislation on copyright and an institution responsible for gathering revenues therefrom.
On the UNESCO Convention, the delegation said it would investigate the issue and provide either an oral or a written response.
Concluding Remarks
In concluding remarks, Mr. Blanchi said that Monaco recognised it still had some progress to make in the area of the mandate covered by the Committee, and had provided replies in different forms on different topics. Work remained to be done, and this was progressing, but Monaco needed a dialogue between the executive and the Parliament as existed in other countries in order to improve legislation and existing standards. Work was continuing to this end. Monaco was the only country in the world where nationals were a minority, and this led to difficulties, but also to a need for wisdom in targeting its legislation appropriately. Monaco was a country that was evolving, and would continue to do so. New generations were arriving with different views, and this would cause changes in the social area, and this could not be done without taking into account the fundamental values and balance that Monaco was attached to preserving.
* *** *
For use of the information media; not an official record
The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights today reviewed the initial report of Monaco on how that country implements the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Introducing the report was Philippe Blanchi, Permanent Representative of Monaco to the United Nations Office at Geneva, who said Monaco embodied in its Constitution the rule of law and the respect for human rights for all on its territory. It was committed to these principles, which were embedded into traditions, and intended to make further progress, and desire in this regard was unflagging, as it was fully compatible with the history of Monaco and other aspects of its existence. International instruments to protect human rights went hand-in-hand with Monaco’s long-term commitment to promote and protect human rights, which was evident in the number of conventions and agreements on various human-related issues to which Monaco was a signatory.
During the discussion, which was held over two meetings, Committee Experts raised questions pertaining to, among other things, Monaco’s interpretative declarations and reservations to the Covenant; discrimination between genders, in particular in the context of nationality; social security issues and who was eligible to these; issues related to health, including drug abuse; corporal punishment; and the provision of technical assistance and food aid to other countries.
The Committee will issue its concluding observations and recommendations on the report of Monaco at the end of its three-week session on 19 May.
Other members of the delegation of Monaco included representatives of the Department of the Interior, the Department of External Affairs, the Department of Social Affairs and Health, and the Permanent Mission of Monaco to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will reconvene at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 3 May, when it will take up the initial report of Liechtenstein.
Report of Monaco
The initial report of Monaco (E/1990/5/Add.64) says that, subject to restrictions based on nationality, men and women in Monaco are equal where economic, social and cultural rights are concerned. Title III of the Constitution guarantees various economic and social rights, but confers on parliament competence to determine how they shall be exercised. In Monegasque law, provisions relating to the rights set out in international conventions prevail over the provisions of legislation in the corresponding areas. Monaco promotes enjoyment of the rights set out in the Covenant while taking into consideration certain specific factors linked to the size of the Principality and the particular context of its historical and political situation, but with a constant concern to promote harmony in social relations and offer a high level of general welfare, both for those living in the Principality and for those who work there.
Freedom of employment is guaranteed under article 25 of the Constitution. This article grants priority to Monegasque citizens in recruitment to public and private employment insofar as the person concerned possesses the necessary skills, and subject to the conditions laid down in the law or international conventions. In view of the very low rate of unemployment in Monaco, it has not proved necessary to draw up a national plan of action to ensure full employment. The economically active population living in Monaco is by some way too small to take up all the jobs generated by Monaco’s economy. With almost 28,000 cross-border workers working in Monaco, the country is contributing to the development of the surrounding economic region. Monaco also has social security schemes to protect wage earners, salaried employees and professional people.
Introduction of Report
PHILIPPE BLANCHI, Permanent Representative of Monaco to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said before joining the United Nations in 1973, Monaco embodied in its Constitution the rule of law and the respect for human rights for all on its territory. It was committed to these principles, which were embedded into traditions, and intended to make further progress, and desire in this regard was unflagging, as it was fully compatible with the history of Monaco and other aspects of its existence. Since the submission of the initial report, updated information had been sent to the Committee, and an amended version had been submitted yesterday. Various developments had taken place.
Monaco was characterised by its small size, and in population terms, was home to 120 nationalities, and nationals were a minority. Monaco constituted a point of attraction for education, as 30 per cent of children in schools were from families that did not reside in Monaco. On the health front, there was a very high level of infrastructure. Recent changes on the legal front included the conclusion of international conventions, with a constant and unflagging will to ensure the fullest protection of individuals in Monaco. International instruments to protect human rights went hand-in-hand with Monaco’s long-term commitment to promote and protect human rights, which was evident in the number of conventions and agreements on various human-related issues to which Monaco was a signatory.
Nobody could be prosecuted for expressing a political or religious opinion, but insults on racial, ethnic, religious or sexual orientation grounds were criminalized. Equal rights between men and women were guaranteed. The National Council was currently considering Bills to reform, among other things, adoption law, and to modernise rules on education, sport, and public law and order and security. Mr. Blanchi said he hoped this insight into the current situation in matters relating to the Committee had been helpful, and the delegation was ready to answer any questions the Committee would ask.
Questions Raised by Committee Experts
An Expert asked if Monaco intended to withdraw its interpretative declarations and reservations, and noted that the country had not made it clear exactly what it objected to in several areas. Reservations and declarations often limited the scope of a treaty, he said, asking what were the compelling grounds that forced Monaco to uphold these, as he could see none, and wished for an explanation. Other Experts also raised the issue of reservations, noting that these might be long-term, and that this should not be encouraged.
Another Expert asked for a clarification on the new developments. The list of replies included a section indicating that once a Convention had been gazetted, it could be invoked before the courts, and he asked whether there had been any case invoking the Covenant. The Committee on Human Rights in 2001 had indicated concern for the status of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and whether it prevailed over domestic law, and there was similar concern for the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. He also asked whether women who acquired Monegasque nationality by marriage could transmit citizenship to their children, an issue that was also raised by other Experts from other angles.
Monaco had ratified a number of international treaties in the fields of human rights, an Expert said, and was to be congratulated, but it was not yet a member of the International Labour Organization, and the reason for this needed to be elucidated. What was the role that could be played by the Covenant in filling gaps in the Constitution, including for example the right for health, as this was not included within the Constitution. Another Expert also raised the issue of the International Labour Organization conventions, asking whether they were not ratified as a matter of principle, or due to time constraints.
With regards to non-discrimination, in Monaco, priority was given to male heirs, an Expert noted, asking why women were systematically set aside. Another Expert asked whether in Monegasque law, the man was referred to as the head of the family, as this would be discrimination. Was there a law on gender equality, another Expert asked, inquiring whether there was anything in the civil code making a difference between legitimate and illegitimate children. What were the social benefits in which the conditions of residents applied, another Expert asked, noting that these sometimes could cause de facto discrimination.
Were policy-makers and the legislature aware of the provisions of the Covenant, and were they applying these during the period of transition in the current reforms, an Expert asked. How could the Covenant be invoked by private persons, he asked, and was there any case law that could be provided clarifying this. What percentage of the budget was allocated to cooperation with developing countries, and how was it organised?
Response by Delegation
Responding to the questions on reservations, the delegation said that when it joined the Covenant, Monaco had issued interpretative declarations rather than reservations. These were set out when the Covenant was adhered to, and were elaborated at the time and in the text. However, Monaco’s nationals were a minority, and to date this situation had not yet changed, with a result of making it necessary to take this fact into account. Under Monegasque law, any international convention was a legal standard that could be applied or invoked by the courts. The Constitution however took precedence over international conventions. Judges had an obligation to apply the provisions of the conventions and over-ride legislative provisions in the case of a clash, and there were rulings to this effect. Regarding provisions that were self-executing, these were observed by domestic legislation. If there was any clash, then international instruments prevailed. The courts applied the provisions of international instruments to the extent that domestic legislation applied the penalties provided for in the relevant legal texts.
On the subject of nationality and the implications with regards to marriage, at the present time, a foreign woman who married a Monegasque man did not automatically assume nationality before five years were over, a period after which she could adopt Monegasque nationality should she so choose, and if the spouses were living together. For a man who married a Monegasque woman, he could apply for naturalisation without time limit, but applications for naturalisation would only be considered after five or seven years had elapsed, the delegation said. Discussions were ongoing in the Government and Parliament regarding the legal provisions on acquiring nationality after marriage as there was a difference in treatment that appeared to favour men. On the transmission of nationality through women who had acquired nationality, an Act had been passed which allowed a woman to pass this on to her children, including those already alive and under the age of 18.
Regarding the ILO, the delegation said this was being considered in Monaco, but there were a number of obstacles, including the Geneva Declaration of 1998 relating to a number of international conventions, some of which raised problems, particularly non-discrimination on jobs, on account of the Rules of Priority in labour matters. However, the matter was being studied, and it was likely to be considered in the near future.
The Constitution contained a list of rights, the delegation said. A particular system of the courts of Monaco was that the judiciary was not under the Government, but under a separate authority, namely the Prince, although he had no part to play in disciplinary processes regarding judges. On discrimination regarding succession, there was nothing ruling out a Princess acceding to the throne, including if there was no legitimate heir. However, it was a tradition for the male to inherit, and no provisions were being considered to change that.
On overseas development assistance, or technical cooperation, Monaco had multilateral aid in the form of voluntary contributions to a number of international organizations, including WHO and UNAIDS and there were also bilateral agreements with countries with which Monaco had had long-term diplomatic relations.
Social security benefits in some situations required residency for five years, but the whole situation was very complex. Civic education included teaching on the role of men and women and their place in society. There were specific education modules for police recruits, which were called “ethical training” which ensured that police action was in respect with human rights.
The Covenant, like any other legal norm, could be invoked. Monaco was a very small state, and the administrative services were very small, and the majority were aware of the international conventions, as they were responsible for ensuring implementation of or respect for the provisions of the latter. As the country was so small, people met their elected representatives on a daily basis, and the flow of information was thus very easy, and could be obtained rapidly and easily by the public.
In follow-up questions, an Expert said he was gratified to hear that Monaco was seeking to remedy the situation of inequality between men and women with regards to nationality. Monaco did not have a problem with asylum-seekers, he noted, asking for confirmation of this fact. Another Expert asked for clarification on three issues: first the delegation had said the Constitution came first and then the Covenant, asking whether this indicated the Constitution had precedence, as this was against the Vienna Convention and other international treaties; secondly that there were gaps between national legislation and the Covenant, and could the delegation give examples where the courts had filled these gaps by referring to the Covenant; and whether there were sanctions for discrimination on account of race and had there been an enactment sanctioning this in domestic law. Equality between the genders was raised by another Expert, who asked if there was any intention or Bill under preparation to introduce legislation under this principle.
The delegation said that Monaco had an agreement with France on asylum-seekers, and any request for asylum was dealt with by the French, as they had the necessary experience. Monaco upheld the conclusions of the French. The Constitution had priority over international instruments, and this was the current hierarchy of law, although Monaco was a signatory to the Vienna Convention. On gender equality, it was true that, as in many States, there was positive discrimination for the protection of women, including on prohibition of dangerous work, and in a number of laws including on salaries.
Experts then asked further follow-up questions on such topics as positive discrimination and the status of the Convention in law, to which the delegation responded briefly.
Questions Raised by Committee Experts
On the social security system, an Expert asked whether there was social security for part-time workers, and how such workers were protected. She also asked why some social security benefits were paid under the presumption that the head of the household was a man. Social security for self-employed workers was also an issue, in particular whether they were covered for certain events. Was Monaco considering moving towards a system where the child was the one holding the rights to benefits, she asked. The issue of legitimate and illegitimate children was raised again from the perspective of social security.
Another Expert noted that Monaco was fortunate in having almost full employment, and said that the number of workers or wage earners was larger than the number of inhabitants. The large number of foreign workers made the interpretative declaration of article 6 incompatible with the situation. He also asked what was the usual labour contract, whether it was permanent or fixed-term. On the minimum wage, he said that he understood it was based on the French minimum age, asking what was the frequency of reassessment. A final question covered which bodies lacked the right to strike in Monaco.
Another Expert asked whether guest workers had the right to form or join trade unions, and what restrictions were posed on this right. Where did guest workers live, he asked.
Response by Delegation
Responding, the delegation said that Monaco had considered the issue of residency for social benefits, and was considering lowering the period of residency required before being entitled to certain benefits. On the minimum wage, there was an update every year, and on 1 July 2005, it was 8.05 euros per hour, with an average monthly rate increased by 3-4 per cent every year. Regarding social security for part-time workers, they were entitled to social coverage. Provisions for part-time work were increasingly stringent. There was no restriction or legal prohibition on the right to strike in Monaco. Generally, employment contracts were long-term contracts. A reform of the labour law was currently being discussed, but the principle would always revolve around the long-term contract basis. Regarding labour rights of foreign workers, there were no restrictions, and they could join trade unions. Some lived in Monaco, but they were probably persons who had been in Monaco for a long time. The situation on the ground was that the majority of these employees lived in France or in Italy.
Questions by Committee Experts
On food aid and technical cooperation, an Expert said that article 11 of the Covenant provided for the right to decent living standards, food, etc, and asked whether food aid was available. The report noted that there was bilateral as well as multilateral cooperation, and he asked whether there were certain criteria for eligibility for such aid, and what these were. How were recipient countries selected, he asked, and what was the procedure. What was Monaco’s share of food aid provided to the Food and Agriculture Organization, and did it earmark its multilateral aid to go to certain specific countries, he concluded.
Regarding sexually-transmitted diseases, an Expert asked for more information on the figures of transmission. The education given on HIV/AIDS was very positive, as were the steps taken to integrate it into the curricula, and the free screening offered in hospitals, he said. However, there was a need to clarify what effect these programmes had had. Further clarifications were also required on programmes for students with disabilities.
Another Expert asked for further information on the way in which Monaco dealt with the drugs issue, as the information provided said there was a policy intended to reduce risk and that syringes were provided to drug addicts. There was a need to clarify what were the penalties for those providing drugs to minors and Monaco’s role with regards to the world drug problem.
Returning to the matter of disparities in treatment between children born in wedlock and out of wedlock, an Expert noted that this distinction did exist, and a de facto discrimination also legally existed. Further clarification was required on these distinctions, and what intentions existed to modify these different situations to bring them into line with more current usage. Domestic violence was another issue, and the report contained no information on this, she said, asking whether there was a provision against offences relating to violence against women and children, and how was this sanctioned. Trafficking in women was also an issue that needed to be elaborated.
Response by Delegation
On the question on sexually-transmitted diseases (STDs) and education, statistics and prevention, the delegation said that Monaco was particularly aware of this, and was concerned to see that the most recent statistics showed a rise in STDs among the younger groups of the population, despite efforts made, which consisted of raising awareness among adolescents and young adults by doctors and social workers in schools and encouraging use of protection. A number of AIDS and STD patients came from abroad, and this distorted the statistics somewhat. The basic idea on disabled children was to keep them in mainstream education as long as possible, whilst providing extra help in the form of tutoring or extra classes.
On drugs problems, the delegation said there were activities in schools. In Monaco, the consumption of drugs was a criminal offence, and this was explained by magistrates, whilst doctors explained what was meant by addiction, and the police came to schools to show the different types of drugs and explain the risks in using them. Violence against women was a criminal offence, and there was a special police force for juvenile delinquents which also looked after women who had been victims of violence. A special structure and telephone number had been set up for women. There were also provisions against any trafficking in human beings, and this included sexual exploitation as well as labour exploitation, which were prosecuted.
Sub-Saharan Africa as well as Latin American countries received technical cooperation and other forms of aid. Monaco only had a few embassies, but had developed a large network of honorary consulates, and it was through these volunteers that it could provide assistance, which was targeted towards needs noted in the field, and was not conditional. Bilateral assistance was targeted towards precise projects, habitually food and health. A framework was being considered in order to provide targeted assistance in the field that would allow evaluating the results of that aid. There were agreements with States, the delegation said, as well as with regional bodies, with precise targets which involved monitoring not only by the beneficiaries but also by Monaco’s agents. Various types of aid were provided, including food aid
Response by Delegation
Some 0.28 per cent of the budget was consecrated to aid, the delegation said, and Monaco aimed to go up to 0.7 per cent of GDP, in line with State commitments, and this would happen in the years to come. On penalties for discrimination and legislative punishment, acts of discrimination expressed through the press or audio-visual means were punished either with imprisonment or by other means. Discrimination expressed in the work area currently had no legislative punishments, but discussions were continuing on this topic. There was no discrimination between men and women in social services provided to families. Changes would be made to move away from the head of family and towards the child as the holder of the right, in particular in families living in France or Italy and working in Monaco. Children born out of wedlock were only referred to in certain obsolete texts.
In follow-up questions, an Expert asked whether anything had been done for children born out of wedlock who did not have the same rights as other children. Further, had anything been done to remedy the situation wherein women with children found it easier to gain assistance than men with children. He also suggested that there should be public awareness campaigns on corporal punishment targeting parents as well as teachers and children themselves. Another Expert also raised the issue of the use of the terminology used to designate legitimate and illegitimate children.
Another Expert raised the issue of the age of consent, noting that this was inconsistent with the status of adolescents as children requiring protection, and yet they could not sign legal contracts. He also inquired whether same-sex marriage was acceptable and of it was being endorsed in Monaco.
Responding, the delegation said concerning work by children under 16, Monegasque education was enforced until the age of 16, and this was a process that was verified. If some school-age children were not in the school system, measures were taken. In some specific classes, however, there was vocational training, and this was alternative school/work education, which allowed the children to be prepared for future employment. There was a vocational training contract, done through the school system, and parents and teachers were involved. At 18, a person was considered as an adult. All movements of people were governed by the Schengen rules.
It was rarely mentioned whether a child was born in or out of wedlock, the delegation said. Same-sex marriage was not possible, as an article of the civil code indicated that this was not possible. People who had been residing for more than one year in Monaco and had received a residence card were provided with a limited form of social assistance. Legislation on housing protected and had always protected tenants. On corporal punishment, the criminal code contained protective provisions, as it protected against cruel and degrading treatment. Where children were concerned, a sentence could be increased, and this was covered in legislation. School services and social services had established a network of oversight to keep an eye on any event of corporal punishment, however, such events were very infrequent.
In more follow-up questions, Experts focused on various issues, such as apprenticeship; and what was the situation under criminal law when an adult had sexual relations with a young person of about 15 or 16, and whether criminal law covered this.
Responding briefly, the delegation said that if an adult had sexual relations with a minor, this person could be prosecuted. The delegation clarified that the age of consent was 18 years of age.
An Expert highlighted that the use of the different terms to describe children born out of wedlock were discriminatory as of themselves, and the delegation said that there was this distinction in terminology as it existed in law. It had only recently been removed with the reform of the Civil Code in 2001. The law also totally prohibited abortion, but there was a discussion going on for it to be allowed in certain cases.
Questions by Committee Experts
An Expert inquired as to what specific education was being offered in schools on economic, social and cultural rights, and whether free copies of the Covenant were being offered to schools. Was there any case law in connection with intellectual property and copyright? Had there been any forms of discrimination experienced by those who only spoke Monegasque, he asked. Another Expert also asked how many people actually spoke Monegasque.
An Expert asked whether the UNESCO Covenant on Non-Discrimination in Education had been ratified, and whether this was deliberate. Another Expert said he was positively affected by the high level of the State budget allocated to developing national culture, as this was very impressive. Was the principle of participation in cultural life promoted actively among citizens, he asked, noting that the Committee’s particular concern lay with those belonging to vulnerable and marginalized sectors, such as older persons, the less well off, and the disabled, and asking if there were special subsidies or programmes to encourage their participation. Another question was asked on the size of classes for children with learning difficulties.
Answers by Delegation
Responding, the delegation said the very existence of the national community resided on a long-standing tradition, and there were very specific, almost family links, between the national community of Monaco and the royal family, and the relations there were often on a one-to-one basis. Citizens wrote directly to the Prince on topics concerning them, and the Prince and the royal family were very close to many citizens. National identity and unity was very apparent. It was through the association of the different communities that this was ensured. The national language was French, and this was embodied in the Constitution. Prizes were awarded every year for the mastery of the Monegasque language. There was a concern to preserve the language and manifestations of the national culture in that sense.
The heritage of Monaco, the delegation said, was very similar to that of the Western nations in general, but the country tried to emphasise its roots, including culinary and other traditions. There were some institutions such as museums that worked to preserve and promote Monegasque traditions. There was legislation on copyright and an institution responsible for gathering revenues therefrom.
On the UNESCO Convention, the delegation said it would investigate the issue and provide either an oral or a written response.
Concluding Remarks
In concluding remarks, Mr. Blanchi said that Monaco recognised it still had some progress to make in the area of the mandate covered by the Committee, and had provided replies in different forms on different topics. Work remained to be done, and this was progressing, but Monaco needed a dialogue between the executive and the Parliament as existed in other countries in order to improve legislation and existing standards. Work was continuing to this end. Monaco was the only country in the world where nationals were a minority, and this led to difficulties, but also to a need for wisdom in targeting its legislation appropriately. Monaco was a country that was evolving, and would continue to do so. New generations were arriving with different views, and this would cause changes in the social area, and this could not be done without taking into account the fundamental values and balance that Monaco was attached to preserving.
* *** *
For use of the information media; not an official record