SUB-COMMISSION CONTINUES DEBATE ON PREVENTION OF DISCRIMINATION

Sub-Commission on the Promotion and
Protection of Human Rights
55th session
12 August 2003
Morning



Expert Presents Report on Working Group
on Indigenous Populations




The Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights this morning continued its debate on the prevention of discrimination around the world, hearing from a series of non-governmental organizations as well as from one of its Experts on the work of the Working Group on indigenous populations.
Miguel Alfonso Martinez, Sub-Commission Expert and Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on indigenous populations, introduced his report, saying that new ideas had been formulated as well as new proposals for the methods of work of the Working Group. A serious discussion had been held on the link of the Working Group to and cooperation with the two other specific bodies created by the Economic and Social Council on indigenous issues. This year, for the first time, a new work methodology had been introduced including the stimulation of a much more vital, dynamic and interactive debate with the presentation of experts, government delegations and members of indigenous groups themselves.
Sub-Commission Expert David Weissbrodt said he had watched with great interest the continued work of the Working Group on indigenous populations. The new approaches undertaken were useful; the Group might want to consider that when an indigenous community came before it, the Group could encourage dialogue between the Government and the indigenous peoples; and that kind of mediation role could be very useful and could provide an answer to the Working Group as it redefined its work.
Sub-Commission Experts Asbjorn Eide and Antoanella-Iulia Motoc also spoke on the work of the Working Group.
Contributing statements on the prevention of discrimination were the following non-governmental organizations: Minority Rights Group International speaking on behalf of African Society of International and Comparative Law; Lutheran World Federation speaking on behalf of Minority Rights Group International; Baha'i International Community speaking on behalf of Minority Rights Group International; Dominicans for Justice and Peace speaking on behalf of Franciscans International, Pax Christi International and International Catholic Peace Movement; Association for World Education; Indian Council of South America; Japan Fellowship of Reconciliation; Transnational Radical Party; Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation; International Islamic Federation of Student Organizations; International Confederation of Free Trade Unions; International Organization for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; Indian Movement "Tupaj Umaru"; International Association of Democratic Lawyers; All for Reparations and Emancipation; International Educational Development, Inc.; International Indian Treaty Council; European Union of Public Relations; Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights; and World Union for Progressive Judaism.
When the Sub-Commission reconvenes at 3 p.m., it will conclude its debate on the prevention of discrimination: racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia; prevention of discrimination and protection of indigenous peoples; and prevention of discrimination and protection of minorities.

Presentation of Report on Working Group on Indigenous Populations and Discussion
MIGUEL ALFONSO MARTINEZ, Sub-Commission Expert and Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Indigenous Populations, presented his report (not available in English) on the work of the Working Group on indigenous populations. The Working Group’s session this year had included the formulation of new ideas as well as new proposals for the methods of work of the Working Group. Participation this year had been as high as last year, with about 1,000 people participating. A serious discussion had been held on the link of the Working Group to and cooperation with the two other specific bodies created by the Economic and Social Council on indigenous issues. It had been assumed that ECOSOC would conclude its review of indigenous issues this July; however this issue had been left pending until next year. The definitive situation on the working mechanisms on indigenous issues would therefore only be known next year. It was important to be aware that this decision would determine the very survival of the Working Group.
Mr. Alfonso Martinez said that this year, for the first time, a new work methodology had been introduced including the stimulation of a much more vital, dynamic and interactive debate. Experts had been present, Government delegations and members of indigenous groups themselves. The procedural dynamics had changed with the setting up of a specialization group with the aim of drawing up new discussion points. One of the discussion points had been the impact of globalization on indigenous peoples. The conclusions and recommendation reflected these new methods. The basic issues analyzed in the discussion included the problem of land and natural resources; the impact of globalization on the daily lives of indigenous peoples; the enjoyment of the culture and intellectual products of the culture of indigenous peoples; and the use by non-indigenous sources of indigenous land for military activities. This summed up the general topics of the debate of the Working Group. It had also been decided that the emphasis must be on developing a standard setting document with legal provisions on issues related to prior consent to development plans. Ms. Francoise Jane Hampson had also suggested further focus on peoples living in areas whose existence was threatened due to global warming and rising sea levels.
ASBJORN EIDE, Sub-Commission Expert, said that he was the first Chairperson of the Working Group on indigenous populations and he was delighted to see the progress made on indigenous issues under Ms. Daes and now under the chairmanship of Mr. Alfonso Martinez. He appreciated the work and encouraged him to continue with his efforts. The work done on the rights of indigenous peoples was encouraging.
DAVID WEISSBRODT, Sub-Commission Expert, said he had watched with great interest the continued work of the Working Group on indigenous populations, and said that the new approaches undertaken were useful. In addition, the Working Group might want to consider that when an indigenous community came before it, the Group could encourage a dialogue between the Government and the indigenous peoples. This kind of mediatory role could be very useful and could provide an answer to the Working Group as it redefined its work.
ANTOANELLA-IULIA MOTOC, Sub-Commission Expert, said that the development of standard setting in the Working Group on indigenous populations was a good start. Further conceptual aspects of indigenous issues should also be developed. The dialogue in the Group should continue.
MIGUEL ALFONSO MARTINEZ, Sub-Commission Expert and Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Indigenous Populations, thanked the Experts who spoke in favour of the work done by the Working Group on indigenous populations. Once the Group completed its work, it would set international legal standards towards indigenous populations. Concerning the work of Ms. Daes, he thanked her for the excellent work. It was essential to connect the issue of sovereignty and the right of indigenous peoples concerning their natural resources. All peoples and nations were party to the principle of the doctrine of development. Even if the principle of self-determination was applied to a specific case, one should not forget that isolated cases could create precedence. The bibliographical cases laws involving indigenous issues should not be based on non-indigenous sources. The interpretation of some cases might not affect the principle of self-determination. The administration by the indigenous people of their natural resources could not contradict States policies. He also said that the speaker from the World Union for Progressive Judaism did not mention in his statement the policy of Zionism applied by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory.

General Debate on the Prevention of Discrimination
CHRIS CHAPMAN, of Minority Rights Group International speaking on behalf of African Society of International and Comparative Law, said that some States in Africa were not paying sufficient attention to the rights of minorities. Those States appeared to have concerns regarding the use of the term “minority”, as elaborated at the international level, to refer to marginalized ethnic, linguistic and religious groups in Africa. In order to secure the rights of minorities, the challenge today was to accommodate ethnic diversity, to promote the richness of ethnic groups’ values and to combat political, economic and social exclusion, in line with their fundamental rights as articulated in international law. That led to the protection and promotion of human rights, constructive co-existence and conflict prevention, and served as a means of countering the manipulation of ethnic identities for political purposes. Despite the attention given to the terrible ethnic conflicts that continued to mar African history, there had been little international attention given to traditional African methods that successfully mediated between ethnic groups, resolved conflicts and strengthened relations.
PETER PROVE, of Lutheran World Federation, speaking on behalf of Minority Rights Group International, welcomed the working paper on discrimination based on work and descent. The first working paper had covered such discrimination in Asia. This paper included a broader geographical scope. Discrimination based on work and descent had been attracting an increasing level of attention by the international community, including United Nations bodies and specialized agencies such as the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination; the Working Group on contemporary forms of slavery; the International Labour Organization and UNESCO. These recent developments in addressing various manifestations of discrimination based on work and descent within the United Nations system underlined and provided additional support for the important role that the Sub-Commission could play in further examining this type of discrimination and elaborating recommendations for measures to be taken towards its total elimination. Future work on this issue must focus on an examination of legal, judicial, administrative, and educational measures taken by governments concerned, as well as identifying additional communities affected by discrimination based on work and descent, including diaspora communities. The Federation also supported the elaboration of some sort of guidelines which could provide guidance to all relevant actors, not only national governments but also local authorities as well as the private sector, schools, religious institutions and other public places where discrimination often occurred.
BANI DUGAL, of Baha'i International Community speaking on behalf of Minority Rights Group International, said that next year, the tenth year of the tragic Rwanda genocide would be remembered. The problem of Rwanda was not a failure of information but a failure to act upon the information obtained. The independent inquiry of the UN concerning the Rwanda genocide had underlined coordinating efforts among the monitoring bodies and a share of information. The gathering of information on a situation where tension prevailed was also useful in preventing conflicts similar to that of Rwanda. Diplomatic prevention of conflicts would be essential in order to avoid any form of conflict to ignite, particularly conflict among ethnic groups. The international community should be cable to prevent the occurring of incidents of genocide by increasing its vigilance.
PHILIPPE BLANC, of Dominicans for Justice and Peace speaking on behalf of Franciscans International, Pax Christi International and International Catholic Peace Movement, said one example of religious discrimination was found in Pakistani legislation that promoted a culture of intolerance, division and extremism. The legislation was the Blasphemy Laws of the Penal Code which dealt with offenses pertaining to religion. The offenses carried the death penalty for their violations. The laws had resulted over the years in religious intolerance and violence against Christians, Hindus and members of the Ahmadiye community, the imposition of discriminatory and repressive laws against religious minorities and extremist attacks against religious minorities, especially Christians. Furthermore, the application of the death penalty under any circumstances was an extreme form of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and a violation of the right to life. The organizations strongly urged the Government of Pakistan to assume its full responsibility and take immediate and comprehensive action to end discrimination against Christians and other religious minorities and promote and protect human rights for all. The Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion and Belief was encouraged to visit Pakistan and the Government was recommended to take even stronger measures to protect the lives, property and honour of minorities, as well as creating a culture of tolerance.
DAVID LITTMAN, of the Association for World Education, said that in his address to the seminar held in Vienna on Human Rights Methodology and Anti-Semitism on 17 June 2003, the Acting High Commissioner for Human Rights stressed that the role of education for human rights was absolutely crucial, adding that programmes should be considered for educational activities that could help deal with that phenomenon. He recognized that the United Nations’ relationship to anti-Semitism had been at times uneasy. The task of the Office of the High Commissioner was to assist Special Rapporteurs. Non-governmental organizations could make statements at the Commission and the Sub-Commission “concerning anti-Semitism in those parts of the agenda dedicated to fighting racism”. He stated categorically that denial was not an option; many people would like to deny the reality of anti-Semitism.
ADELARD BLACKMAN, of Indian Council of South America, said that indigenous peoples of the Buffalo River Dene Nation in Canada were being discriminated against on the basis of their right to land and life. In today’s world, through the legislation and policies set by the Canadian Government, jurisdiction and control over the indigenous territory and resources could take place without free, prior and informed consent. It must be understood by the international community that indigenous peoples must gain justice for what was rightfully theirs; otherwise indigenous peoples would become extinct. Everyday, they faced the reality of outright discrimination in many different forms. How could the Canadian Government sit here and blatantly say that they were taking care of and protecting their indigenous peoples when they were the ones who perpetuated this discrimination and the elimination of their treaty rights through many sophisticated moves.
YUMI NAKAI, of Japan Fellowship of Reconciliation, said that she was shocked recently to find two Chinese youths, Takeo Tanagi and Pon Li, detained in the West Japan Alien Detention Centre in Osaka. Both were university students in Japan. The sympathy towards them motivated her to come to Geneva to appeal to the Sub-Commission on that issue. Mr. Yanagi had been detained since last August. He was entitled to come and live in Japan due to the fact that he was a grandchild of a Japanese person who was abandoned in Manchuria, China by the Japanese military and the government at the end of World War II. Although he was a grandchild of one of those abandoned Japanese, the Japanese immigration authorities had decided to expel him and his family because they claimed that they were not Japanese descendents by blood.
KOK KSOR, of Transnational Radical Party, said the very existence of the Montagnards or Degar peoples of Viet Nam’s central highlands was neglected and it was virtually impossible to assess the decrease in the number of hill tribes people from the days of colonialization until today. The Montagnards were a peaceful people, who over the years had struggled to keep their culture alive despite their being at the center of a series of campaigns and policies running the risk of canceling their presence, cultures, traditions and customs from the beautiful central highlands of South East Asia. Not only were they denied access, ownership and use of their ancestral lands, and not only had they been stripped of their culture and life habits, but over the last couple of years, they had been the target of a violent campaign based on racial discrimination. There was a need to verify, officially and also through independent observers, the fact that the Central Highlands remained under a regime of martial law. People disappeared after arrests, and some were sentenced to prison terms after being tortured or were forcibly deported back by Cambodian police and sold back to Viet Nam for bounties. The life, welfare and ancestral culture of hundreds of thousands of individuals was at stake, and the international community must act.
SABA KOUKAB, of Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation, said that the Working Group on minorities had brought out valuable working papers and reports and had conducted seminars which had brought clarity and coherence on the subject and had provided a normative basis for dealing with minorities’ rights in international law. The theme of protection of minority rights had been examined from various angles and it had traversed a long way since the first report of the Special Rapporteur on possible ways and means of facilitating the peaceful and constructive solution of problems involving minorities was presented in the Sub-Commission. The present progress report on the update to the study on the same subject provided valuable new insights on the subject. The report had stressed that the prevalence of general human rights culture was a sine qua non for ensuring the implementation of human rights.
KOUKAB AL-SABA, of International Islamic Federation of Student Organizations, said Governments had a legal and moral obligation to create transparent systems of governance that provided safeguards and protection to minority groups against discrimination and exploitation at the hands of the majority. They needed to build foundations of their political and socio-economic systems to ensure provision of equal access and opportunities to the minorities in all walks of life. One of the appropriate means to address the genuine grievances of minorities in a multi-ethnic society was employing affirmative action policies in favour of the minorities and disadvantages groups to improve their social and economic conditions. First one must define what affirmative action was. Affirmative action polices were problematic for white Americans because they created tensions between their convictions of tolerance and color-blindness as represented through their perceived universal and neutral standards of merit, and the use of race-conscious programmes as a means to remedy past discrimination. Affirmative action must not be seen as merely righting a past wrong, but rather, rooted in present social circumstances. The affirmative action debate must be one of rights, rather than one of privilege. The Sub-Commission was urged to promote and protect affirmative action and special measures programmes throughout the world, where programmes were in place to remedy wrongs and to ensure lasting socio-economic equality.
ANNA BIONDI, of International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, expressed her Confederation’s satisfaction for the entry into force on 1 July 2003, of the new international treaty protecting migrant workers – a major breakthrough for the world’s 175 million migrant workers, among the most vulnerable people, frequently subjected to discrimination, appalling working conditions and poverty wages. The widespread abuse of migrants in the workplace ranged from virtual slavery for women domestic workers to abuse of rights in factories on farms and in service industries. There was a concern that while the necessary ratifications were reached for the formal entry into force of the instrument, none of he major migrant receiving countries in North America and Europe or other countries such as Australia, Japan, Jordan, Israel, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates had ratified it. That was why the international labour movement would keep and strengthen the pressure on those targeted countries in order to make sure that they would ratify and implement in full both the specific instruments, as well as the ILO Core Conventions, which formed the basis for an effective equitable society.
ABDALLA SHARAFEDDIN, of International Organization for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, said the insane aggression against Iraq served no other purpose but to control this country’s resources and to arrogantly bully its people and coerce them by force. The perpetrators of this crime falsely claimed that their intent had been to free the world from Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. Needless to say, years of inspection by United Nations teams proved that Iraq had none. The false claim had been initiated and fabricated by international Zionism and arms traders. If there was any justice in the work, those who waged this tragic war must be brought to justice and tried in front of the United Nations and the international community to serve as an example throughout history. The United Nations was the only refuge as humanity faced its increasing vulnerability and the threats that surrounded it day by day. There was no way to counter these threats but for non-governmental organizations to stand firm and work jointly against such deviations. Non-governmental organizations must strongly condemn violations of international law and must pursue justice through the International Criminal Court.
. LAZARO PARY, of Indian Movement “Tupaj Amaru”, said that natural resources of indigenous peoples had turned into a very controversial topic. Behind the refusal to adopt the Declaration were hidden reasons and interests of States in the land of indigenous peoples. The solemn statements that had been made by States did little but obfuscate the real ulterior motives of States. The access of indigenous peoples to their natural resources was key to self-determination. In addition, policies of racism and racial discrimination as part of measures to combat terrorism on the part of the United States Government were condemned. Due to the lack of political will of States, the World Conference against Racism had failed to properly address the discrimination faced by indigenous peoples. The Sub-Commission must invite the Working Group to study the cause and effect relationship of racism, including underlying economic, political and strategic interests. It was important to also examine elements of racism in the new international economic order which forced indigenous peoples to live in extreme poverty. The eradication of racism required the political will of States.
YORIO SHIOKAWA, of International Association of Democratic Lawyers, said that in 1998, his group began to give contributions to the United Nations Voluntary Fund on Contemporary Forms of Slavery out of the compensation they received in the Chubu Electric Power Human Rights and the Kansai Electric Power lawsuits. They were also trying to extend contributions to the Indigenous Population Fund and the Fund for Victims of Torture. Their fund-raising principle was simple but steady: “Millions of small stones make a mountain”. By increasing gradually the number of contributors and amounts of contribution to the United Nations Voluntary Fund, international cooperation for human rights would come true as people were getting more and more involved in human rights issues.
ANA LEURINDA, of All for Reparations and Emancipation, said the Afro-descendant minorities through the slavery diaspora had experienced total destruction of their collective human rights – original identity, language, culture and religion. Once they were families of African nations, but today their blood was mixed with the blood of the slave masters. They spoke his mother tongue instead of their own. They were the living example of the lingering effects of slavery, scattered across the Americas and the slavery diaspora. The rights of Afro-descendant people were not legally recognized by the United Nations General Assembly, thereby, they did not have the respect nor the protection of the United Nations as did other human families. They sought official recognition that there were new minorities from the Sub-Commission and all bodies of the United Nations. Supporting the recommendations of the ninth session of the Working Group on minorities for a second regional seminar for Afro-descendants in the Americas region, the Sub-Commission was urged to place its full support behind the Working Group and to establish an International Year for Minorities, with a Decade to follow.
KAREN PARKER, of International Educational Development, Inc., said that her organization recognized that the UN Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Populations contributed significantly to the work of the Sub-Commission and its Working Group on Indigenous Populations. The UN Voluntary Trust Fund on Contemporary Forms of Slavery had made a substantial contribution to the Sub-Commission’s work on slavery. The Funds were established by the General Assembly. A key element of the success of those Funds was that they each had their own boards of directors who specialized in the subject areas and who decided on the distribution of the available Funds in as equitable a way as possible. For that reason, the group was concerned that proposed or actual changes in those Funds could have an impact on their operations and the Working Groups that they supported.
MARCELLO DIAZ DE JESUS, of International Indian Treaty Council, said it was particularly regrettable to have to raise ones voice to appeal against racism and discrimination which affected indigenous peoples, minorities and vulnerable groups at all levels. Discrimination perverted everything and made a harmonious, constructive future among people impossible. In Chile, court cases had taken place ripe with discrimination vis-à-vis indigenous peoples. In Mexico, indigenous peoples and human rights defenders were also facing discrimination by being jailed without trial. The Working Group on indigenous populations was a pillar defending the rights of indigenous peoples and the members of the Group were commended for their important work. The unswerving support of the Council for the proposal of a Second Decade for Indigenous Peoples was stressed. The Sub-Commission was appealed to ensure the continuity of the Working Group on indigenous populations, in order to work toward the guaranteeing of the economic, social, political and civil rights of indigenous peoples.
DRULAT RAISAINI SAINI, of European Union of Public Relations, said that despite all the advancements that mankind had made in science and technology, particularly in shortening distances and increasing the ability to interact with each other, the evil of discrimination based on the diversity of mankind remained the greatest hurdle in the path of global development. There was no society in the world that could claim to be completely homogenous. The existence of majorities and minorities was a human constant. Unfortunately, that reality of humanity had become a source of oppression, particularly of minority groups, based on factors such as religion, gender, colour or ethnicity. Every single religion in the world recognized the reality of the oneness of mankind. Yet in practice, those who arrogate to themselves the authority to interpret religion, converted places of worship into venues to foster divisiveness rather than to create unity. None of the great religions of the world had been free from the man-made subversion of their real intent.
PENNY PARKER, of Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights, drew the attention of the Sub-Commission to the killing of over 2,000 Muslims and the destruction of over 100,000 Muslim homes in the state of Gujarat, India, in a single, organized campaign of violence wages against the Muslim population in February to March of 2002. There was an ongoing failure of the government to protect effectively the rights of its Muslim minority and to stop the extreme Hindu nationalist ideology from promoting the violence. What occurred in Gujarat was not merely communal rioting – it qualified as a crime against humanity. Credible internal and external investigations had concluded that Hindu nationalist groups operated with the cooperation of the state government and targeted the violence at Muslims. Senior ministers of the local political party had met in secret and a plan had been created and disseminated to the top 50 political leaders in the state and the local police. In many cases, members of the local police had participated in the violence, killing Muslims who tried to block the mob’s advance. The Indian Government was called upon to take special action in this case and to follow the National Human Rights Commission’s recommendations with regard to this incident. The Sub-Commission was urged to study this and other cases in their analysis of problems of discrimination.
DAVID LITTMAN, of World Union for Progressive Judaism, said that when Amroz, the grinning Bali bomber, had entered the courtroom for sentencing last week, he had shouted “Jews, remember Khaibar. The army of Muhammad is coming back to defeat you”. Although none of the 202 slaughtered foreigners and Indonesians last October were Jews, there had been no media attention to this reminder by the Islamist killer of a historical precedent of great interest for all minorities and all those concerned with the prevention of discrimination and the protection of minorities. The World Union recalled last year’s petition to the High Commissioner, signed by over 123,000 persons expressing their grave concern at the collective blindness by the international community and calling on the High Commissioner, all United Nations bodies, church leaders, particularly Muslim spiritual leaders, to open their eyes to the lamentations of the remnant Christian dhimmi communities who often endured persecutions. There was also the modern Jewish exodus from Middle East countries since the 1940s – the forgotten million who had had to leave Arab countries. It was a historical fact that the tragic double exodus of Arab and Jewish refugees happened because of the Arab League’s refusal of international legality and their unashamed aim of eliminating the nascent State of Israel.



* *** *