UN High Commissioner highlights states’ “lack of cooperation” in opening statement to Human Rights Council

UN High Commissioner highlights states’ “lack of cooperation” in opening statement to Human Rights Council

Geneva, Switzerland. June 6, 2017. Today marked the start of the Human Rights Council’s 35th session, its second session of 2017. The opening panel included an address by Mr. Tabaré Vázquez, President of Uruguay, followed by an update on the global human rights situation by H.E. Mr. Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

In his address, the High Commissioner shared his concerns about intimidation and reprisals made by state officials against people who engage with the UN on human rights. In addition, the High Commissioner noted that, under the terms of GA resolution 60/251, all states – but especially Human Rights Council member states and those running for membership – bear a particular responsibility to cooperate with the UN’s human rights mechanisms. Regarding members of the Council, resolution 60/251 requires that they “uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights [and] fully cooperate with the Council.” Yet, in many cases, members have not been living up to these requirements.

Regarding Latin American states in this situation, the High Commissioner made specific mention of Venezuela, which has ten pending requests for visits by UN Special Procedures. The most recent visit by a thematic mandate-holder to Venezuela was in 1996.

Based on a UN survey of global cooperation and non-cooperation with Special Procedures, the High Commissioner made specific mention of Cuba, which in April – after ten years without visits by mandate-holders – accepted a mission by the Special Rapporteur on trafficking in persons. “It seems unusual for such an active member of the Human Rights Council to maintain such limited engagement with the Special Procedures,” the High Commissioner said.

The High Commissioner also congratulated several states which have devoted considerable efforts to cooperating with mandate-holders and have facilitated more than five country visits in the past five years. The states singled out for their cooperation were Australia, Brazil, Chile, Georgia, Italy, Mexico, Tunisia and the United States.

However, not all the visits of Special Procedures to these countries have been free of difficulty. For example, the United States has received six country visits from Special Procedures in the past five years and has agreed to a further two during 2017. Despite this, the US has been reluctant to grant the Special Rapporteur on torture access to the Guantanamo Bay detention center.

It is important to note that becoming party to an international human rights treaty is a commitment that states make to their own people. Reporting procedures aim to identify gaps in protection and measures to take to correct them. Yet, according to different reports cited by the High Commissioner, 74 states have been overdue for a decade or longer, meaning states have ratified the related treaty or optional protocol and then failed to meet their obligations.

The treaties with the highest proportion of states parties not complying with reporting obligations are the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

On another note, the High Commissioner congratulated Guatemala for the extension of its UN OHCHR country office for three more years. In contrast, he lamented that, based on the decision of the Bolivian government, the OHCHR country office in Bolivia will close at the end of the year.

He concluded his opening remarks by saying:

As this Council is aware, where the human rights situation appears critical, and where access is repeatedly denied to my Office, the only option open to us may be to conduct various forms of remote monitoring. So long as refusals to enable access persist, I will be compelled to consider reporting publicly and regularly on their findings.

Other highlights from the HRC 35th session include:

  • A total of five panel discussions, including panels on enhancing capacity-building in public health, unaccompanied migrant children and adolescents and human rights, the annual full-day discussion on the human rights of women and the annual thematic discussion on technical cooperation.
  • The consideration of the High Commissioner/Secretary-General reports on a few thematic issues, including the relationship between climate change and the full enjoyment of the rights of the child and the operations of the Voluntary Trust Fund for Participation in the Universal Periodic Review.
  • The consideration of regular reports from 18 Special Procedures mandate-holders (4 country-specific and 14 thematic), including those dealing with health, peaceful assembly and association, extreme poverty, migrants, freedom of expression, and racism.
  • At the end of the session, on June 23, Council members will act on around 30 draft resolutions and appoint new mandate-holders for the positions of Special Rapporteur on minority issues, Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, Special Rapporteur on counter-terrorism and human rights, and Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity.

The Institute collaborates on project to improve the CERD election process

The International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights is pleased to share the outcome of one of its projects carried out by the Geneva office. The project focused on improving transparency in the election process of the members of the Committee that oversees the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), and was coordinated by the Institute, along with the International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR) and Minority Rights Group International (MRG).

For the last few years, it has been noted that regular elections for Treaty Body members are often overlooked, often not transparent and not very public. It was usually difficult for NGOs and UN voting members to find the list of candidates and their profiles, in order to choose expert, independent and competent candidates.

In order to ensure the strengthening of the Treaty Body membership by promoting a merit-based and transparent election process, in 2016, several NGOs launched a joint initiative to enable all States and other stakeholders to better understand the skills and experiences of the candidates running for seats on the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the Human Rights Committee (HRC), the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).

This year, the International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR), Minority Rights Group International (MRG) and the International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights, took the project on board, updated the webpage and developed a questionnaire addressed to the candidates for election to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD). The responses to the questionnaire as well as the profile of all candidates are available on the website: http://untbelections.org/

The responses will also be shared directly with all UN Member States who will vote for their preferred candidate on June 22, during the UN General Assembly in New York. There are two candidates from Latin American countries: Mr. Silvio José Albuquerque E Silva from Brazil and Mr. Ricardo Ulcuango Farinango from Ecuador. Elected CERD members will start serving in 2018.

The CERD is formed by 18 expert members; currently there are five members from the Americas: Mr. José Francisco Cali Tzay (Guatemala), Ms. Gay McDougall (United States), Ms. Verene Shepherd (Jamaica), Mr. José Lindgren Alves (Brazil) and Mr. Pastor Murillo (Colombia). Their term will end in 2020, except for Mr. Lindgren Alves who will finish his term in 2018.

The Institute Participates in the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent

Geneva, Switzerland. April 7th 2017.  The World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, held in Durban in 2001, adopted the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action which specifically “requests the Commission on Human Rights to consider establishing a working group or other mechanism of the United Nations to study the problems of racial discrimination faced by people of African descent living in the African Diaspora and make proposals for the elimination of racial discrimination against people of African descent”.

The Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent (WGEPAD) was then established in 2002 by the Commission on Human Rights resolution 2002/68 as a Special Procedure. The mandate has been subsequently renewed by the Human Rights Council and holds two annual sessions in Geneva since then, composed by five independent experts from all regions.

The WGEPAD held its 20th session this week in Geneva. The session was entitled “Leaving no one behind, people of African descent and the Sustainable Development Goals” and its main priorities were to advocate for the prioritization of people of African descent in work to achieve SDGs and to develop simple operational guidelines for use by stakeholders (Governments, UN and civil society) on how to prioritize people of African descent as a particularly discriminated group at all stages of implementation of the SDGs.

The International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights’ Executive Director, Carlos Quesada, was invited to be part of a panel discussion on “How to Reduce Inequalities, SDG 10” together with WGEPAD’s member Ricardo Sunga and Ms.Hilary Gbedemah, member of the Committee on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) were he discussed the inequalities and challenges of Afro-descendants in the Latin American region. The full speech can be found in this link.

Further during the session, the WGEPAD held a three-hour consultation with civil society actors with the objective of exploring new and innovative ways for the Working Group to work with civil society organizations to strengthen its work. The consultation included discussion on 1) exploring the key challenges of racial discrimination today and responses by civil society to combat them; 2) engagement to date by civil society with the Working Group and suggestions to strengthen the impact of its recommendations on the ground and 3) recommendations for priority human rights concerns which the Working Group should focus on in the next three years.

The Institute also participated in this consultation, the full webcast can be found here.

On the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, States must strengthen their normative and Institutional frameworks

Washington DC, March 21, 2017. On the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, The International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights adheres to all forms of expressions from state and non-state actors, international organizations, and everyone who today, express their commitment to reinforce efforts leading to the elimination of racial discrimination.

Particularly, we wish to express admiration and recognition to the many Afrodescendant communities and organizations with whom we work with in Latin America (Brazil, Colombia, Cuba, Peru, and the Dominican Republic), as well as the regional networks of Afrodescendants. These defenders work tirelessly day and night to protect the rights of the most excluded and discriminated Afrodescendant communities in their countries. Their work and compromise are incessant, despite the structural nature of racial discrimination which they suffer. They continue to systematically develop initiatives and proposals to help their states fulfill their duty and commitment to eliminate racial discrimination. However, states must make greater efforts to listen to them and to incorporate them as differentiated public policies to overcome this historical exclusion.

These efforts from Afrodescendant communities in the region must be met with a more resolute response from States to devote more resources to overcome the cause and consequence of racial discrimination. In this aspect, the Institute urges all states in the region to follow the leadership of Costa Rica in ratifying the Inter-American Convention against Racism, Racial Discrimination and other forms of Intolerance.

The Institute also expresses its appreciation of the analysis offered on March 17, 2017 by the Human Rights Council in its commemoration of the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, with a debate on racial profiling and incitement to hatred, including in the context of migration. The moderator of the panel was Anastasia Crickley, Chairperson of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), and was composed of a panel of various actors, delegations and members of the Council, such as the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance Mutuma Ruteere, among others.

Ms. Crickley started the debate saying that the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination was an opportunity to address the connected and changing contexts and contemporary concerns of addressing racism in 2017.  The context of migration provided a global and complex current challenge for addressing racism, racial profiling and incitement to hatred for each State.

Mr. Ruteere followed saying the day’s debate was important to a world where migration and mass movements of populations had emerged as urgent political and moral questions.  In too many places, those fleeing persecution or crossing borders in search of a better life had found themselves cast as threats to security, and their faith and hopes had been met with hostility, prejudice and even violence.  He also discussed the legal, political and regulatory frameworks prohibiting racial and ethnic profiling.

Other speakers, such as Ms. Rokhaya Diallo, journalist and filmmaker; Mrs. Rachel Neild of Open Society; and Mr. Milos Pavlou of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, stressed that in many circumstances, racism comes from the same States through the development of racial profiling, and that Member States and EU institutions must take steps to eradicate these practices and build trust in societies.

The Institute reaffirms its commitment to continue interacting with state and non-state actors, regional and international organizations, and other avenues of dialogue to promote racial equality.

The United Nations Reviews the Situation of Forced Disappearances in Cuba

Geneva, Switzerland. March 9, 2017. –  On March 6 and 7 at the Palais Wilson at UN Seat in Geneva, the United Nations Committee of Independent Experts on Forced Disappearances (CED) reviewed Cuba’s compliance with its international obligations effective upon its signing in 2009 of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. This is the first time the Cuban State has been reviewed by the Committee.

During the first phase of the revision process, Cuba presented a written report that described its advances in implementing the Convention on Forced Disappearances. In the report, the State affirmed that “peoples’ rights to life, liberty and security have always constituted the pillars of the actions of the Cuban Revolution, its authorities and of the functioning of society in general,” and that “in its foreign and domestic policy, Cuba puts into practice respect for the physical and moral integrity of the individual.” It added that, “since the triumph of the 1959 Revolution, torture has been eliminated, and not one case of forced disappearance or extrajudicial execution has occurred,” a position it maintained throughout the its dialogue with the Committee of experts.

Led by Mr. Abelardo Moreno, Vice-Minister of Foreign Relations, the Cuban delegation

gave its opening statement, in which it underscored that the report it presented was compiled after a process of broad consultation with numerous governmental and non-governmental institutions. These institutions helped to evaluate the State’s compliance with the Convention, concurring that the Cuban Revolution put an end to the policy of forced disappearances that were common under the dictatorship and that currently no forced disappearances or secret detentions occur in the country.

Following these statements, the country Rapporteurs, Mr. Juan José López Ortega and Daniel Figallo, asked several questions of the Cuban delegation in order to clarify certain parts of the report. Other members of the Committee followed with questions of their own.

These questions focused on several issues, including the classification of the crime of forced disappearance; the difficulties in Cuba allowing the Committee to hear individual cases; and the lack of ratification of basic human rights instruments such as the Optional Protocols, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Rome Statute.

The country rapporteurs also requested details on the participatory methodology utilized by the State in the writing of its report, especially in regards to its inclusion of civil society in the process and whether the report included information from internationally recognized NGOs.

The experts asked for clarification on short-term forced disappearances. The Committee also requested additional information on structural deficiencies related to judicial independence—a situation highlighted by other UN organs—in reference to the resolution of cases and the broad role of military tribunals in the crimes in question. It also requested more information on arbitrary detentions and detention lengths, the manner in which family members of the detained are contacted and kept informed of detainees’ situations, the right to an attorney, and the existence of a gender perspective with regards to the subject.

The delegation answered some of the Committee’s questions, referring to the State’s report. These responses can be found in the video of the session.

As of this time, the Convention has been ratified by 56 of the 193 UN member States. During the Committee’s 12th period of sessions the experts will also review Ecuador and Senegal. The recommendations made during the review of the three countries will be published on March 17. The Concluding Observations for Cuba can be found in here. 

Key Challenges Identified and Recommendations Made to CERD by Civil Society Actors

Geneva, Switzerland. February 2017

A public consultation with civil society actors, entitled “Joining Hands to End Racial Discrimination,” was held during the Committee’s 91st session in Geneva, Switzerland, on November 23, 2016. The Institute and representatives from its partner organizations participated, along with CERD Committee Members and other civil society stakeholders, as detailed in a previous article.

The final report of the consultation has been recently released and it compiles a number of key challenges and recommendations made to the Committee by civil society actors in both written and oral statements.

The consultation had three main objectives: 1) To gain an up-to-date picture of the main challenges faced by civil society in combatting racial discrimination around the world; 2) To gain an overview of the recent experiences of civil society organizations in their engagement with CERD; and 3) To receive ideas regarding how to enhance the Committee’s engagement with civil society in the fulfilment of its mandate.

With regard to key challenges, the dialogue and written submissions noted with concern the increasing racialization of economic disparities and advancement of ideas supporting societal superiority, phenomena that have led to a greater polarization of groups. They also brought attention to current manifestations of racial discrimination in various areas of the world and identified particularly vulnerable groups; for example, racism and racial discrimination against Dalits, people of African descent, Roma, indigenous peoples, migrant workers, Muslim communities and refugee and migrant communities featured prominently.

Institutionalized racism, a lack of legal and political infrastructure to protect victims, as well as political, social and economic disparities faced by racial, ethnic and religious minorities were recurring topics during the consultation.

The discussions also highlighted the problems associated with countries’ lack of data collection on racial discrimination, and it raised questions about how to improve this. Concerns were raised by those working in civil society who noted with disappointment that states sometimes did not fully implement the recommendations of the Committee. NGOs wrote about the lobbying activities that they have undertaken with their respective governments to promote and protect human rights and reduce racial discrimination.

The issue of language diversity was raised as well, as the Committee’s documents and procedures are not accessible to many NGOs who work in languages other than the official United Nations languages.

Some of the recommendations for CERD to enhance its engagement with civil society included:

  • To travel to States parties to present reports and stimulate discussion about discrimination in the visited country.
  • To ensure that CERD’s focus during State party examinations and in its concluding observations not only includes an examination of the federal level, but that it also considers the actions of provincial governments and authorities.
  • To develop a collective complaints mechanism involving the violation of rights that are collective in nature, such as those held by indigenous peoples.
  • To establish a joint complaint mechanism and/or joint follow-up mechanism that cuts across the treaty bodies.
  • To provide training programs for civil society organizations.
  • To increase efforts to understand the specific dynamic of decentralized state structures and how they impact racial discrimination, in law and practice.
  • To consider a formalized procedure for reviews of States parties in the absence of a State party report.
  • To increase outreach through social media in order to share more information and help NGOs better engage with CERD.

Finally, the final document illustrates that many civil society organizations are not aware of the ICERD and the procedures that exist under the CERD mandate. A genuine opportunity exists to maximize ties between civil society actors and the Committee, and to communicate the issues within CERD’s mandate in a more systemic way.

The consultation succeeded in raising the profile of the ICERD in global discussions on racial discrimination, in light of the worldwide rise in manifestations of racial discrimination, including the recently witnessed hate speech, hate crimes and racist attitudes towards refugees, migrants and other minorities.

The full text of the outcome document can be found in here. English version only.

The Institute Advocates for a Stronger UN CERD Committee

Washington, DC | December 14, 2016 “A strong Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination is needed now more than ever, given that the reality in the Americas today is that it is seemingly acceptable to be racist in public,” stated Carlos Quesada, Executive Director of the International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights, during his presentation as a panelist at the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination’s (CERD) Consultation with Civil Society. This consultation, entitled “Joining Hands to End Racial Discrimination,” was held during the Committee’s 91st session in Geneva, Switzerland, on November 23, 2016. The Institute and representatives of its partner organizations present in Geneva participated, along with CERD Committee Members and other civil society stakeholders.

While Mr. Quesada emphasized the situation of racial discrimination in the Americas, where the Institute works, he was in fact echoing the CERD Committee’s own global concerns and the driving force behind its organizing the event. In convening the consultation, the CERD Committee noted that “racial discrimination in all its forms – including hate speech, hate crimes and racist attitudes towards migrants and minorities – is on the rise worldwide. It is critical that the implementation of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) and the work of the Committee addresses these global issues. The Committee also seeks to ensure that its work addresses the concerns that are most pressing in various country contexts and at national, regional and global levels.” As such, the Committee requested that civil society actors interested in participating in the consultation think about and respond to three key questions: 1) What are the key challenges and issues of racial discrimination in your country/region today and how do you work to address them?; 2) What has been your experience, as civil society, of engaging with CERD to date?; and 3) How can the CERD improve and enhance its engagement with civil society, and its work on racial discrimination for greater impact on the ground?

Many of the Institute’s partners submitted written responses, and four had the chance to voice their concerns to CERD Committee Members during the consultation itself. María Martínez, of the Dominican Republic, and speaking on behalf of the Social-Cultural Movement for Haitian Workers (MOSCTHA), stated that Dominican leaders routinely deny the existence of racial discrimination in the country. Furthermore, people of Haitian origin continue to be treated as second-class citizen and denied their right to Dominican nationality, despite the Committee’s previous recommendations in that regard. Cecilia Ramírez, of Peru, and speaking on behalf of the Center for Development of Black Peruvian Women (CEDEMUNEP), lamented that the Decade for People of African Descent did not make specific reference to the particular needs of Afro-descendant women, given that these women suffer intersectional discrimination based on their race, sex, and likely other elements of their identities as well. Vicenta Camusso, of Uruguay, speaking on behalf of the Network of Afro-Latina, Afro-Caribbean and Diaspora Women, echoed Ms. Ramírez’s comments, and stated that the Sustainable Development Goals should also include special consideration for the situation of Afro-descendant women. Finally, Juan Antonio Madrazo, of Cuba, speaking on behalf of the Citizens’ Committee for Racial Integration (CIR), informed those present that there has been very little progress with regard to the CERD Committee’s recommendations in Cuba because of lack of political will on the part of the Cuban government, and that speaking publicly about racial discrimination in the country is considered counter-revolutionary.

All remarks were well received by Committee Members, including Chairperson Anastacia Crickley, who thanked all present for their contributions and encouraged civil society organizations to continue to engage with the CERD Committee through the preparation of alternative reports and participation in events like the consultation. In his closing, Mr. Quesada noted that the large presence of civil society actors from Latin America and the Caribbean demonstrated the region’s commitment to the work of the Committee. The Institute will continue to support the participation of partners from the region working to combat all forms and manifestations of racial discrimination.

You can watch the full webcast of the session here:

Consultations with Civil Society – 2492nd Meeting 91st Session Committee on Elimination of Racial Discrimination

Institute supports NGO participation at UN CERD Review of Argentina and Uruguay in Geneva

Geneva, Switzerland. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) opened its ninety-first session on November 21, 2016, with an address by Paulo David, Chief of the Capacity Building and Harmonization Section of the Human Rights Treaties Division of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. During the Committee’s session, which lasted until December 9, it reviewed anti-discrimination efforts undertaken by Argentina and Uruguay, among other countries.

The International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights supported Lourdes Martinez, who represented COLECTIVA MUJERES, CLADEM, ATABAQUE, and AFROGAMA; Vicenta Camusso, who represented the Red de Mujeres Afrolatinas, Afrocaribeñas y de la Diáspora; and Miriam Gomes, who represented the Sociedad Caboverdana of Argentina.

The three made remarks during the informal meeting for civil society organizations held on November 22, where Ms. Gomes stated that in Argentina, Afro-descendants are not actively included in budgetary and policy decisions; that existing laws aimed at protecting against racial discrimination have not been successfully implemented; and that there is a lot of discrimination against African and Haitian immigrants in the country, including a consistent lack of investigations for high profile crimes committed against African migrants. Committee Members asked questions about data collection and specific public policies favoring Afro-descendants; they also asked if race-based discrimination is criminalized. In response, Ms. Gomes mentioned that during Argentina’s last census, a lot of people were not asked whether they self-identify as Afro-descendant. She also mentioned that the National Institute Against Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Racism (INADI) does not have specific policies for Afro-descendants and that Afro-Argentineans generally do not trust the organization. In closing, she confirmed that race-based discrimination is not criminalized.

Turning to Uruguay, Lourdes Martínez and Vicenta Camusso explained to the Committee Members that the country does not have national legislation which complies with Article 1 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Furthermore, the scarce amount of progress that Uruguay has made in terms of internal legal norms is focused on Montevideo, the country’s capital; there are no country-wide specialized services to address racism and racial discrimination. Finally, although the 2011 national census made progress with disaggregating data, more needs to be done with regard to Afro-descendants and indigenous peoples.

Ms. Martínez and Ms. Camusso stated that the most visible manifestation of inequality is in education: Afro-descendants in Uruguay are much more likely to drop out of school than their non-Afro-descendant peers. They also mentioned that there are concerning indicators about sexual minorities of African descent, as discrimination against them is intersectional, as well as about the situation of migrants, especially those from Africa, the Dominican Republic, and Colombia. Overall, the daily experience of racism towards Afro-descendants is still deeply rooted in Uruguay.

On November 23, during the CERD Committee’s country review of Argentina, Claudio Avruj, Secretary for Human Rights and Cultural Pluralism of the Nation, stated that the Secretariat drafted and promoted policies on cultural pluralism, ethnic, religious and sexual orientation, and gender identity. He also informed the Committee that November 8 has been proclaimed the National Day for Afro-Argentines, with the purpose of promoting their culture.

The National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism (INADI) has worked on combating the three problems in its purview, in cooperation with civil society and other stakeholders. Also, INADI now has the ability to receive complaints and provide guidance to concerned citizens, as well as to play an important role in promoting its agenda through audio-visual materials, brochures, and educational pamphlets. Finally, in 2016, the authorities began designing the National Human Rights Plan for 2017-2020.

In the ensuing discussion, Committee Experts praised numerous legislative achievements that Argentina has made in recent years, but wanted to know more about the implementation of those norms in practice. They inquired about the status of Afro-Argentine and indigenous communities, in particular on their access to justice, education, healthcare and their overall visibility in society at large. The issues of land ownership, prior consultation, and forced evictions with indigenous communities were also discussed. Committee Experts asked questions about the treatment of migrants and inquired about the existence of a migrant detention center.  Particular attention was paid to the issue of the implementation of international treaties, including the Convention, at federal, provincial, and local levels. The Committee asked for further details and disaggregated data on a number of questions, particularly related to the status of minority communities.

Pastor Murillo, Committee Member and Rapporteur for Argentina, concluded that the dialogue was very educational in numerous aspects. He expressed his hope that the practice of evictions would be completely eradicated, and suggested that the State Party reconsider laws related to minority quotas.

On November 26, CERD completed its consideration of the combined twenty-first to twenty-third periodic report of Uruguay. In introducing the State’s report, Alejandra Costa, Director for Human Rights and Humanitarian Law at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, stated that Uruguay’s steadfast commitment to the protection and promotion of human rights required it to regularly present and explain its progress and that interaction with the treaty bodies allowed for a direct dialogue with the United Nations human rights system.

In the interactive dialogue which followed, Committee Experts praised progressive policies and the leadership of Uruguay in many social areas. They acknowledged adopted legislation, including the Affirmative Action Act, but wanted to hear more about its implementation. They sought information about the definition of the crimes of racism and racial discrimination, and a number of court cases in that regard. Experts wanted to know about the situation of refugees and migrants in Uruguay, as well as domestic workers, who are disproportionately migrants or women of African descent. They asked questions about concrete steps taken to combat structural discrimination, and about promoting and integrating Afro-Uruguayan and indigenous peoples’ cultures in educational curricula. Other issues raised by Committee Experts included the status of indigenous people’s ancestral lands, the use of prior consultation, the provision of free legal aid, and the representation of racial minorities in public and private sectors.

Alexei Avtonomov, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur for Uruguay, remarked in closing that for the first time in Uruguay’s history, people of indigenous or African descent appeared in statistics and were recognized as such. According to Mr. Avtonomov, it was encouraging that the State party was ready to respond to its historical challenges.

On December 9, CERD published the concluding observations for Argentina and Uruguay in Spanish.

Click here for Uruguay

Click here for Argentina

Vice-President of AFRODES Colombia Participates as Expert Panelist at 2016 UN Forum on Minority Issues

Bogotá, December 7, 2016. The Vice-President of the National Association of Displaced Afro-Colombians (AFRODES), Erlendy Cuero, participated in the United Nations Forum on Minority Issues, held in Geneva, Switzerland, November 22-24, 2016. Specifically, Erlendy participated in two of the Forum’s sessions: she was part of a meeting of experts who reviewed the Special Rapporteur’s recommendations, which will be published in 2017, and she was a panelist for the session on “Protecting Minority Rights as a Means of Preventing and Mitigating the Impact of Humanitarian Crises on Minorities.” The Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights provided Erlendy technical assistance during her participation. At the conclusion of the Forum, the Special Rapporteur on minority issues recognized Erlendy for her contributions.

The topic of this year’s Forum was “Minorities in Situations of Humanitarian Crises.” Experts from the world over participated, as well as numerous non-governmental organizations from countries in which ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities have experienced violence and exclusion as a result of humanitarian crises. Diplomatic representatives from the Permanent Missions of UN Member States were also present.

Erlendy’s participation in this global event was especially significant, as she was the only expert panelist who was also a direct victim of an armed conflict, which has produced one of the most serious humanitarian crises in the world. Through this experience, Erlendy was able to offer a unique perspective to the Forum and make relevant contributions for the overall outcome of the event. In her remarks as a panelist, Erlendy offered key lessons derived from her personal experience both as a victim and as a community leader of a minority group profoundly affected by a humanitarian crisis. Among those lessons, it’s worth highlighting:

The importance of strengthening the organizational autonomy of minority groups in order to prevent and mitigate the impacts of a humanitarian crisis. Based on the Colombian experience, Erlendy presented a critical assessment of the insufficient emphasis that States and international organizations have placed on strengthening grassroots organizations. Their current approach does not necessarily guarantee the protection of minority rights. The Colombian example is emblematic in this sense: it has an extremely robust normative and institutional framework aimed at protecting ethnic minorities, but the implementation of this framework has not led to the protection and restauration of the country’s minorities’ rights in practice.

The lack of effective implementation of a differential approach for minorities, both before and during the humanitarian crisis caused by the Colombian armed conflict, has led to the profound deterioration of victimized Afro-Colombian communities. The rhetorical adoption of differential approaches sensitive to the needs of minorities – and the impact the armed conflict has had on them – is not sufficient. Adequate and appropriate resources designated for the implementation of these approaches must be earmarked.

The protection of minority women, especially in the face of sexual violence, must be the number one priority when addressing humanitarian crises associated with armed conflicts. In the case of Colombia, what had already been widely observed has been verified: sexual violence against women is used strategically as a weapon of war by all armed actors. In the Colombian case, and despite progress in adopting general measures, protective protocols and services that take into account the specific needs of Afro-Colombian and indigenous women who have been victims of sexual violence are still lacking.

Exclusionary economic and political development models have been at the root of the conflicts that have produced humanitarian crises which most impact minorities. As in the Colombian case, exclusionary economic models, designed to exploit the resources of the territories in which minority groups live, have in turn marginalized those groups, without addressing difficult living conditions. Humanitarian crises deepen this marginalization. It is therefore necessary to transform these economic models to ensure the sustainable restoration of rights that have been violated.

In her conclusion, Erlendy shared the expectations and proposals that Afro-Colombian communities have regarding a possible end to the armed conflict in Colombia. She reiterated that strengthening institutions, guided by international standards such as those in the recommendations of the Forum, will be effective only to the degree that these institutions help communities achieve effective participation in all aspects of public policies aimed at restoring rights.

The Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights fully supports the analysis and recommendations made by Erlendy in the Forum. We will continue to support the activities that AFRODES is developing to strengthen its capacity to participate in advocacy processes at the national and international levels. We will follow up on the incorporation of Erlendy’s contributions in the final recommendations that the Special Rapporteur on minority issues will present to the United Nations General Assembly.

Conclusion of the 33rd Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council

Geneva, Switzerland. October 3rd 2016. Last week marked the end of the 33rd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council which was held from 13 September to 30 September 2016.

The Human Rights Council (HRC) opened with a briefing by the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr. Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, who devoted most of his regular address to ‘the growing refusal on the part of an increasing number of Member States to grant OHCHR, or the human rights mechanisms, access.’

Later, the HRC decided to amend the mandate of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which would assist Member States upon request to achieve the ends of the Declaration on the Rights Indigenous Peoples and extended by three years the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples.

About the relevant resolutions adopted:

  • The HRC adopted a resolution on the safety of journalists, calling upon States to develop and implement strategies for combating impunity for attacks and violence against journalists.
  • Arbitrary detention was addressed by the resolution which extended the mandate of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention for three years and requested States concerned to take appropriate steps to remedy the situation of persons arbitrarily deprived of their liberty.
  • In another resolution, States were encouraged to establish effective, independent and pluralistic national human rights institutions and to strengthen the existing ones.
  • In the resolution on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order, the HRC called upon Member States to fulfil their commitments expressed during the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.

About the relevant appointments:

The Council appointed five individuals to fill vacancies for Special Procedure mandate holders:

  • Cecilia Jimenez-Damary (Philippines) as the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons;
  • Nils Melzer (Switzerland) as the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;
  • Asma Jahangir (Pakistan) as the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran;
  • Elina Steinerte (Latvia) as a member of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention from the group of East European States.
  • And finally, the Human Rights Council President appointed the first ever United Nations expert on sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI), Mr. Vitit Muntarbhorn (Thailand).

Other matters of discussion:

  • In the resolution on the human rights situation in Burundi, the Council created, for a period of one year, a commission of inquiry to conduct a thorough investigation into human rights violations and abuses in Burundi since April 2015, and to identify alleged perpetrators.
  • The Council also decided to appoint, for a period of three years, a Special Rapporteur on the right to development.
  • The resolution on the human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic asked that Syria immediately cease the use of chemical weapons, and demanded that all parties take all appropriate steps to protect civilians and allow for the full, immediate and safe access of humanitarian actors to the areas in need.

In concluding remarks, Choi Kyong-lim, President of the Human Rights Council, stated that he had received allegations of acts of intimidation and reprisals during the session, and that various representatives of civil society organizations had been banned from traveling from their home countries to Geneva to attend the session. “The participation of civil society in the Human Rights Council is crucial, and any act of intimidation and reprisal against an individual or group who cooperated with the Council is completely unacceptable”, stressed Mr. Choi.

The thirty-fourth session of the Council will be held in Room XX of the Palais des Nations from 27 February to 24 March 2017.

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

Join Our Efforts

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

Donate Contact Us