In the Dominican Republic statelessness still exists

In the Dominican Republic statelessness still exists

Four years have passed since the Constitutional Court of the Dominican Republic enacted the ill-fated Judgment 168/13, which rendered Dominicans born of foreign parents from 1929-2007 stateless. 

Many speak of the decision as a “Civil Death”, but the deceased – when buried – carry a tombstone with their name.  

Their remains at least are recognized and left in peace, out of respect. 

Not so for the many Dominican-born people of Haitian descent, who – by virtue of Jus Solis (citizenship by birthright) should have their Dominican nationality recognized. But they continue to live without a legal identity.  

Law 169/14 Came Up Short 

On May 23, 2014, President Danilo Medina issued Law 169/14 in an attempt to resolve the situation of statelessness created a year earlier, by Judgment 168/13. However, the law has not had the intended effect, as the rights of the population targeted by the legislation have not been fully restored. Statelessness continues to affect thousands of Dominicans of Haitian descent. Despite all efforts by civil society to promote its implementation, Law 169/14 just came up short for us. 

Dual Identities 

Many believe that the Central Electoral Board has resolved the issue by reducing the number of stateless people. But they are unaware that most of the children of Haitian immigrants included on civil registries up until 2007 (known as “Group A”), have had their identities changed in the “transcription” process to new registration books. All this done in silence, without their knowledge, and affecting thousands.  

In a country where your birth certificate is used for everything: from registering for college to requesting a passport and seeking employment, people without it are left marginalized, segregated, reduced, and effectively invisible. 

False Expectations 

Law 169/14 was offered as a viable solution. We knew it was not, but we had hoped everything would work out, at least for the people who weren’t enrolled in the civil registry, known as “Group B”.  

However, those few that registered under the law do not yet have a defined identity. They cannot make use of their rights to health, employment, higher education, marriage, or to even declare their children as their own. The problem has only gotten worse. Law 169/14 has come up short for us Dominico-Hatians. It has not been effective. 

Learn about Mosctha´s work 

Learn about Race and Equality´s work in the Dominican Republic. 


About The Author

María Bizenny Martínez is a human rights defender at MOSCTHA. Her focus is on Dominicans of Haitian descent and afrodescendants.

Stay Informed. Follow Our Blog!

Start the discussion

The first-ever census for Afro-Peruvians: interview with CEDEMUNEP

In 2009, Peruvian President Alan Garcia issued the State a historic pardon for centuries of abuse, exclusion, and discrimination towards the Afro-descendant population in Peru. That same year, the CERD – the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination – expressed its concern for the lack of official data available on Afro-Peruvians. Since then, Peru has sought to address the criticism, and in 2016 it ratified the Inter-American Convention Against Racism, Racial Discrimination and other Forms of Intolerance. Despite progress, Afro-Peruvian socio-economic and political needs continue to be ignored. The discussion of their rights is seldom present on political party agendas. And the Peruvian government has failed to take affirmative action or generate public policies aimed at promoting their development. 

This Sunday, October 22, 2017, Peru will hold a national census taking account of Afro-Peruvians for the first time.  

Race and Equality interviewed Cecilia Ramirez, the director of the Center for the Development of Black Peruvian Women (CEDEMUNEP), who is a member of the Technical Inter-Institutional Committee on Ethnicity Statistics, which oversees the census process, from formulating its questions to communicating its results.  

Why is this Sunday’s national census so important for Afro-Descendant peoples? 

The census will reveal crucial demographics about our peoples, not only about how many we are and where we live, but also about the conditions we are in. The last time a census in Peru included a question about racial identity was back in 1940. That was 77 years ago. 

So there was no ethnic/racial question in past census surveys? 

Since 1961, race had been determined in the census through a question pertaining to one’s mother tongue spoken at home. Now for the first time in the history of Peru, an ethnic question will ask citizens to self-identify themselves ethnically. In this sense, Afro-Peruvians will be able to choose from 6 categories: Negro (Black), Zambo, Moreno (Brown), Mulato (mixed race), Afro-Peruvian or Afro-descendant.     

Have indigenous populations also been excluded from the census? 

Indigenous identification has been included in three prior censuses. But none have included Afro-Peruvians. This census’ official title is “The 12th for Population, 7th for Housing, and 3rd for Indigenous Communities”. We like to call it “The 1st for Afro-Peruvians”. 

Do you have an estimate of the Afro-descendant population in Peru? 

There is no official data of course. And many numbers are being thrown out there: from 0.1%, 5%, and even 9%. 

How about their socio-economic situation? 

Despite the government showing some initiative to improve the situation for Afro-Peruvians, inequality is still rampant in terms of education, health and employment. 

How long has CEDEMUNEP been advocating for an Afro-Peruvian inclusive census? 

We began raising the issue in 2010, and released a report on the human rights situation of the Afro-Peruvian population. The initiative was taken up again a little over 5 years ago in the context of the census planning, with the support of Global Rights, Race and Equality, as well as in collaboration with the National Institute of Computing and Statistics (INEI), the Ministry of Culture, the Ombudsman’s office, the National Elections Jury, some local governments and indigenous/afro-descendant organizations, such as Chirapaq, among others. We’ve also had tremendous support from partners such as the Ford Foundation, who have and continue to support us. They have played an important role in our advocacy efforts.  

What are some of the challenges you have faced? 

There is a lack of awareness and understanding of the issues facing the Afro-Peruvian population among all levels of society. Without this awareness, it is difficult for there to be genuine political will. Including a racial question in the census has therefore proven to be a challenge. 

Has there been any progress? 

Things were initially very complicated and there are still issues that need to be resolved, but we have made progress. The biggest obstacle was to include an ethnic question in the census. And we’ve accomplished that goal. But new challenges will surface from the census’ findings. 

So your work has been to educate the authorities on these issues? 

Yes, to educate and to raise awareness, not just at the national level, but also internationally. We’ve launched an advocacy campaign at the local and national level to sensitize the Peruvian people, and particularly the Afro-Peruvian people to the importance of having an ethnic self-identification question in the census. 

How has international support furthered your cause? 

No State likes to be shamed in front of other nations so the Peruvian government had to keep up with the progress made across Latin America. During the census planning, the Afro-descendant movement raised the importance of including an ethnic question in the national census. Since then, our international allies, such as CEPAL, UNFPA, and UN Women have supported us by issuing recommendations highlighting the importance of the question. This has helped the cause significantly.  

What consequences might the census results have on Peru?  

We have developed a national plan for the Afro-Peruvian peoples, called PLADEPA. This is an important development initiative, made in consultation with civil society. It is now vital that financial resources be made available for its implementation.  

What will happen in 6 months, when the census results are published? 

There will be no more excuses, as we will have access to indicators that illustrate the current situation and conditions in which Afro-Peruvians currently live. We will have clear evidence of the inequality that we face. This information must be translated into affirmative action and public policies, which account for Afro-Peruvians in all government programs, as well as poverty reduction plans. 

What can be done with these findings? 

There is a pressing responsibility for the State and Afro-Peruvian civil society to strengthen their ties. We must work together to generate change. 

And what are your hopes for the future? 

I hope the Peruvian government can adequately respond to the needs of Afro-Peruvian Peoples, and that they realize that poverty in our society is directly related to racism and racial discrimination. I hope that real political will can exist to bridge the inequality we face. I hope for better education, better healthcare, better jobs, and an increase in political representation. To invest in Afro-Peruvians is to invest in the country’s development, as we have historically contributed to building this nation, and we will continue to do so.   

Stay Informed. Follow Our Blog!

Start the discussion

The United Nations needs you to help combat racial discrimination. This is how.

The United Nations has a committee dedicated to fighting racial discrimination. But civil society organizations don’t always take full advantage of it.

Race & Equality recently published a report on the work of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), the UN body in charge of overseeing the implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, an international treaty ratified by every country in the Americas.

Across the region, governments have stated their commitment to combating racism and discrimination. These include the five countries in which we work: Brazil, Cuba, Colombia, the Dominican Republic and Peru.

But to reach its full potential, the Committee must overcome a number of challenges. First, CERD’s mission relies on greater engagement by citizens and organizations on the front lines. Second, greater efforts must be made to ensure governments take into account CERD recommendations on improving laws and policies to combat discrimination.

At Race & Equality we believe that greater participation by civil society in the Committee’s work is key. And a more effective Committee means more concrete actions by governments to reduce discrimination in the region.

Here are 5 ways you or your organization can become more involved in the Committee’s work.

1. Read Up!

For a better understanding of what CERD does, the Committee’s website is the place to start. It has general information about CERD’s work, its membership and how activists can use the Committee. More importantly, it also holds the archives of all documentation produced through the Committee’s work, searchable by country or session, including reports governments have submitted to the Committee, “alternative” reports submitted by non-governmental organizations, and the Committee’s recommendations to each country after its review. Bookmark it!

2. Know the Committee’s Calendar!

While we think it’s important to keep up with the Committee’s work year-round, year after year, there are key points when a more active participation is crucial, especially once a government has submitted a report to the Committee. CERD publishes on its website the dates of its sessions at least six months in advance, and it lists countries who have submitted reports but have not yet been scheduled for review. Keeping up with the Committee’s calendar will help your organization know when your country will be reviewed and better include CERD in its strategic planning.

3. Send the Committee Information!

After a government has submitted a report, people and organizations can submit “alternative” or “shadow” reports. There’s no set formula for the content or length of these reports, but they should include up-to-date, relevant information about situations relating to discrimination or groups that suffer from it, and—ideally—they should reference rights guaranteed by the Convention. While informing the Committee prior to its review of your country is important, information can be sent to the Committee at any time. This can include follow-up information (one year after the review) or information on specific, urgent situations that require the Committee’s immediate attention.

4. Apply for Funds to Attend CERD Sessions!

Traveling to Geneva is expensive, and most organizations face tough budgeting decisions. But incorporating CERD into your organization’s strategic planning and actively seeking funds for travel to Geneva can make advocacy at the UN an attainable goal. Every person we spoke to in our research said attending the sessions made a lasting, positive impact on their work, raising their organization’s profile and increasing its legitimacy with their government. A concerted effort to attend the sessions can have a big payoff!

5. Promote the Committee’s Recommendations!

After each country review, the Committee makes recommendations to the government about how it can better fight discrimination. When we argue that a certain policy should be adopted, noting that CERD has made a similar recommendation gives our claim greater legitimacy and support. We should make every effort to use CERD’s own recommendations to support our agenda and remind our governments when they fall short of their promises.

CERD can make a difference, but it’s up to all of us to take advantage of the Committee’s work and incorporate it into our strategic planning. Please include a comment below if you have other tips for engaging with the Committee or if you’d like more information about how to get involved in CERD’s work.


About The Author

Dominic Procopio – Program Officer at the International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights

Stay Informed. Follow Our Blog!

Start the discussion

Human Rights Council Discusses Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Forms of Intolerance

Geneva, Switzerland, June 29th The Human Rights Council held earlier this week, an interactive dialogue with Mr. Mutuma Ruteere, the Special Rapporteur on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance, who presented three reports to the Council, followed by a general debate on racism and racial discrimination.

In the presentation of the reports, Mr. Ruteere said that the first of his thematic documents focused on xenophobia, its trends and manifestations, especially in the context of the current migration crisis. He reminded States that strategies for countering xenophobic discrimination must be context-specific and carefully adapted to domestic realities, in which the role of local actors is paramount in designing and implementing tailored, local administrative and other measures to overcome local barriers to integration and peaceful cohabitation. When referring to his second report, on combatting the glorification of Nazism and neo-Nazism, Mr. Ruteere mentioned the violence perpetrated against Roma, Muslims, Jews and other minorities and vulnerable groups, also, he expressed concerns about cyber-racism and hate propaganda through social media platforms, as well as about the proliferation of extremist groups in sports. The third report was on his country visit to Greece.

Following the reports’ presentation, came the interactive dialogue, where delegations expressed concern that many of the issues raised in the report showed no signs of improvement and noted the continued threat to human rights and democracy of extremist political parties and movements, whose influence had increased in several areas of the world, particularly in Europe, where extremist parties occupied seats in national and regional parliaments. Speakers stressed the need for strong government response to racism and hate speech, including against refugees and migrants, and called for comprehensive strategies that would incorporate legal, educational and capacity building measures.  Speakers also addressed the crucial role that civil society could play in tackling xenophobia at the community level and said that their initiatives should be supported and not suppressed by state authorities.

He also said that in the current era of increased mobility, widespread forms of overt physical violence, hate speech, and discrimination were rooted in xenophobia.  He recommended that governments and stakeholders give due attention to a set of key elements in designing and implementing strategies with improved effectiveness. These included a local diagnosis of the situation, implementing preventive actions, promoting social solidarity, identifying the appropriate scale of intervention, the complementarity of strategies, and review and assessment.

The Special Rapporteur stressed the importance of cooperation between States, civil society organizations and technology actors for addressing online manifestations of racism. He also underlined the role of civil society organizations working with migrants at the local level in supporting access to justice for victims of xenophobic discrimination or xenophobic violence.  He then said that States had the obligation to prohibit the proliferation of racism in consistence with their human rights obligations.  Turning to the intersection with gender issues, he said that many women migrants were subjected to sexual violence.  Recognizing the intersectionality between gender and race was crucial to fully address the issue in all its dimensions. Next year, his report will be about counterterrorism and the problem of xenophobia.

The International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights welcomes the reports of the Special Rapporteur on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance, especially the mention of the intersectionality between gender and race. We call on State Members to follow up on the commitments in the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action and prioritize the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance.

 

Full report can be found in here.

For more information on the Human Rights Council, please contact our Legal Adviser in Geneva, Laia Evia, at Evia@oldrace.wp

The United Nations Human Rights Council establishes Special Expert to protect the LGBTI community

Geneva, Switzerland. 30 June 2016. In its 32nd session, the UN Human Rights Council has created an Independent Expert dedicated to sexual orientation and gender identity issues.

The historic resolution passed in a tight vote of 23 to 18, with 6 abstentions. The person appointed to this role will be known as an “independent expert” and the position is charged with monitoring “violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.”

This represents the most ambitious effort yet to advance LGBT rights within the United Nations system, with the resolution including the strongest language to date suggesting LGBT rights should be a concern of international human rights law.

During the three-hour voting session, the original resolution co-sponsored by the Governments of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico and Uruguay was weakened by a series of amendments led by regressive countries like Russia, Pakistan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, urging the other States not to commit, and pledged not to cooperate with the Independent Expert, despite the support the co-sponsors were getting from countries like UK, Switzerland, Netherlands, Germany and France.

The opponents of the resolution, led by Pakistan on behalf of almost all members of the Organization for Islamic Cooperation (OIC), succeeded in adding amendments that framed the LGBT rights proposal as a cultural imposition intending to override local values and sovereignty. Other amendments included one urging respect for local values, “religious sensitivities,” or domestic politics and another one suggesting that the resolution undermines universal human rights values to “impose concepts or notions pertaining to social matters, including private individual conduct.” Albania, which is a co-sponsor of the resolution, was the sole member of the OIC to break from the bloc.

In the end, the outcome was positive although most of the amendments suggested by Pakistan and the OIC were adopted.

In the aftermath of the Orlando, Florida attacks in the United States, the International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights, consider this resolution as a huge step in the right direction, congratulates the Latin American Countries that co-sponsored this very timely resolution and looks forward to engage with the new independent expert.

 

For more information, please contact our Legal Adviser in Geneva, Laia Evia, at Evia@oldrace.wp

Participation in General Assembly of the OAS – Inter-American Forum of Afro-descendants in Santo Domingo, the Dominican Republic

The International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights held the Inter-American Forum on Afro-descendants on Friday, June 10, 2016, in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, in conjunction with the Jacques Viau Network and DominicanosxDerecho. This annual civil society event, planned to coincide with the Organization of American States’ (OAS) General Assembly, this year brought together over ninety Afro-descendant and LGBTI activists from Latin America and the Caribbean.

The main objectives of the Forum were to promote the effective participation of Afro-descendant and LGBTI organizations in the General Assembly and broaden their advocacy opportunities before the OAS, and make more visible the rampant discrimination suffered by Afro-Dominicans and Dominicans of Haitian Descent in the Dominican Republic. To this end, the morning sessions of the Forum focused generally on the situation of Afro-descendants in the Americas, and the afternoon sessions on the specific reality of the Dominican Republic.

During the morning, the Institute welcomed the participation of a diverse array of speakers representing regional and national civil society organizations working on issues related to the human rights of Afro-descendants, as well as a special presentation via Skype by Zakiya Carr-Johnson, Director of the Race, Ethnicity, and Social Inclusion Unit at the U.S. Department of State. Several LGBTI activists also commented on overlapping and intersectional expressions of discrimination faced by both Afro-descendants, and lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, trans, and intersex individuals.

After a theatrical presentation by the group The Twelve Apostles, made up primarily of young Dominicans of Haitian Descent from bateys around Santo Domingo, panelists in the afternoon continued to focus the discussion on the situation of Dominico-Haitians. Speaking first about the historical 2014 decision of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in favor of the restoration of rights for Dominicans of Haitian Descent, representatives from Dominican organizations that have continued to advocate for these rights commented that unfortunately the Court’s decision has not been implemented. Dominicans of Haitian descent continue to suffer discrimination and have largely been unable to obtain their identity documents; consequently, the number of registered voters in the last general election was ten percent lower than in previous elections.

The Forum concluded with a screening of the the documentary Lives in Transit, which focuses on the experiences of Dominicans of Haitian descent struggling to get their documentation. Participants were also given the opportunity to consolidate advocacy strategies for the Civil Society Informal Dialogue with OAS Secretary General Almagro, which was held on June 12, 2016.

 

Mandate Holders Present Thematic Reports at the Human Rights Council

Geneva, Switzerland. June, 24th.  Over the last two weeks, the Human Rights Council has been holding its 32nd session, and in the past few days, several of the UN Special Procedures Mandate Holders have presented their thematic reports during interactive dialogues where all States, National Human Rights Institutions and NGOs can comment, ask questions, make suggestions and even sometimes complaints.

Four of those thematic reports are of our immediate concern. The International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights congratulates the experts and their staff for their very comprehensive reports, which touch upon current challenges to protect and preserve human rights across the world.

The first report that concern us, was the shared by Mr. David Kaye, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression presented who expressed his concerns on freedom of expression and the private sector in the digital age.

In his report, Mr. Kaye noted that recently, it is the private sector who is the driving force behind the greatest expansion of access to information in history.  Yet, the digital age has brought with it new questions and problems that international human rights mechanisms have not yet fully addressed. This report launched a multi-year endeavor to identify appropriate human rights norms for the private sector in the digital space and is the first step in an effort to identify the ways in which freedom of expression might be protected and promoted in the digital space.

During the interactive dialogue, speakers –States and Non-State actors- emphasized the importance of new information technologies and the Internet as a tool to promote peace, knowledge and economic growth.  They said that the right to privacy should not be undermined in the digital space and that freedom of expression online and offline must be practiced responsibly. They also noted that expansion of new technologies presented unprecedented new opportunities for freedom of expression, but also specific challenges needed to be overcome, such as repressive legislation, censorship and threats against journalists.

 

Full report can be found here.

 

The next day, Mr. Maina Kiai, Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, presented his report on fundamentalist intolerance and its degrading effects towards assembly and association rights worldwide.

In this report he explores the phenomenon of fundamentalism and its impact on the exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association. During the interactive dialogue, Mr. Kiai said that assembly and association rights are indispensable to democracy and development, as the glue that brought people together to explore society’s problems and solve them.  He said fundamentalism could include any movement, not just religious ones, that advocated strict and literal adherence to a set of basic beliefs or principles.

His report discussed four distinct types of fundamentalism: free market fundamentalism, political fundamentalism, religious fundamentalism and nationalist or cultural fundamentalism. The report, at its core, is about the struggle between tolerance and intolerance. Peaceful assembly and association rights are so fundamental, in part because of their crucial role in promoting pluralism.  He detailed the challenges each of the four types of fundamentalism he had identified presented to the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, noting that regarding political fundamentalism, his report cited the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Bahrain, China, Cuba, Eritrea, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Oman, and Saudi Arabia as notable examples.

He stressed that it is fundamental for people to have a system which would allow them to disagree with mainstream opinions.

 

Full report can be found here.

 

A few days later, the Human Rights Council began its clustered interactive dialogue with Dubravka Šimonović, Special Rapporteur on violence against women its causes and consequences, and Frances Radday, Chair of the Working Group on discrimination against women in law and in practice.

When presenting her report, Ms. Šimonović said an intermediate priority for the mandate would be to focus on the use of data on violence against women as a tool for its prevention and that in that regard she had already called upon States to establish a “femicide watch” or a “gender-related killing of women watch”, in order to inform the effective measures and strategies needed to prevent femicides. Other thematic priorities would, inter alia, include the protection of and services for women survivors of violence; the possibility of formulating a global code of conduct for security and police forces in carrying out their key role of prevention of violence against women; violence against women in the context of forced displacement and refugee flows; and the examination of connections between fundamentalism and gender-based violence against women and its root causes.

This thematic report examined the general context and main trends and challenges posed by violence against women, noting that the legal and policy landscape around the mandate had changed owing to developments in international and regional frameworks and mechanisms on violence against women.  At the same time, violence against women was still at pandemic levels, widespread and persistent.

Later, in her presentation, Ms. Frances Raday, Chair of the Working Group on discrimination against women in law and practice, presented the Group’s thematic report on discrimination against women in the area of health and safety.  Women’s right to equality in health and safety, including reproductive and sexual health, are enshrined in international and regional human rights instruments. The different biology of women and men necessitated differential treatment in the area of health, an identical approach to treatment, medication, research, budgeting, and accessibility to health services for women and men in fact constituted discrimination. The Working Group called on all Member States to reaffirm and respect the commitments they had made in the Sustainable Development Goals and other agreements.

In the interactive discussion, concerning violence against women, speakers underlined the issue of violence against women in the context of conflict, namely sexual harassment, early marriage, violence during conflict, fight against stereotypes and female genital mutilation.

As for discrimination against women in law and practice, speakers raised concerns over the disproportionate level of discrimination against women in the area of health and safety, particularly in their right to sexual and reproductive health.  Health policies tailored to specific needs of women should not be politicized, and it was vital for women to participate in all decision-making.  Speakers insisted on the importance of ensuring the security and health of all women through targeted measures, appropriate budgets and monitoring activities.

Women’s rights had to be viewed in a holistic way.  There had to be an emphasis on the provision of affordable and modern contraception, and family planning.  Due diligence was an obligation under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and under that obligation States not only had to provide health services but also had to regulate private sector health providers to prevent discrimination. Good practices in general would be examined by the Working Group in its next annual report.

 

Both reports can be found here.

 

For more information on the Human Rights Council, please contact our Legal Adviser in Geneva, Laia Evia, at Evia@oldrace.wp and follow @raceandequality on Twitter.

Join Our Efforts

Help empower individuals and communities to achieve structural changes in Latin America.