COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS CONCLUDES GENERAL DEBATE ON RACISM, XENOPHOBIA AND OTHER FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION

Commission on Human Rights
AFTERNOON

21 March 2005


Participants Affirm that the Elimination of Racism
is the Responsibility of All Mankind



The Commission on Human Rights this afternoon concluded its general debate on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and other forms of discrimination. Representatives of national governments as well as numerous non-governmental organizations took the floor, addressing such issues as the lack of implementation of the commitments ensuing from the Durban World Conference against Racism; the apparent rise in racism and discrimination; and the appearance of new forms of racism and xenophobia. The elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance was the responsibility of all humankind, speakers agreed.

The United Nations had been instrumental in developing a framework for the elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and all forms of discrimination, said speakers, but a lot more needed to be done. The issue of the implementation of the Durban Declaration and Plan of Action remained a priority in many fields and in many States. It had been agreed at Durban that the Declaration and Programme of Action constituted a road map to combating past manifestations and contemporary forms of racial discrimination, and yet racism and its attendant evils remained the major challenge of the times. There was a need for additional measures to implement the Declaration and to highlight the role of education in the eradication of the phenomenon.

The growing trends towards racism and xenophobia posed a serious challenge to the attainment of internationally accepted human rights standards and laws, some delegates said. The first and foremost priority therefore had to be the display of political will by States to implement the commitments they had assumed, and to abide by their international obligations. The battle against racism globally should also involve combating anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. The use of the Internet to spread racist and xenophobic propaganda and information was also an issue raised by several speakers. Micro-racism - racism manifested at the community level, as well as the State level - had also appeared, and this remained difficult to combat and necessitated new strategies, including the strengthening of educational and awareness programmes. Moreover, at the State level, ethnocentrism was being celebrated as a new approach to the organization of political society.

The defamation of religions in general, and Islam in particular, and discrimination against Muslims was the most notable demonstration of contemporary forms of racism and intolerance. Islamophobia, many speakers affirmed, was a phenomenon that appeared to have grown significantly. Mosques and Islamic cultural centres, as well as commercial establishments and property owned by Muslims, had been the target of attacks in some societies and attempts had been made to associate Islam with negative phenomenon such as terrorism. Islam was a religion of peace that advocated tolerance, mutual aid and solidarity. True respect for all religions would come only with genuine respect for democracy, tolerance and pluralism.

Speaking this afternoon were Representatives of India, Pakistan, Burkina Faso, Saudi Arabia, the Russian Federation, the United States, Nepal, Egypt, South Africa, Ireland, Sudan, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Kuwait, Liechtenstein, Yemen, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Norway, Iraq, Syria, Bahrain, Israel, Azerbaijan, Angola, and Venezuela. The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies also took the floor.

Also speaking were the following non-governmental organizations:
Canadian HIV/Aids Legal Network; International Commission of Jurists speaking on behalf of International Federation of Human Rights Leagues; Franciscans International; B'nai B'rith speaking on behalf of Coordination Board of Jewish Organizations; International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists; Al-Haq, law in the service of man; Movement against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples; International Movement against all Forms of Discrimination and Racism; Colombian Commission of Jurists; Association forWorld Education; American Association of Jurists; Movimiento Cubano por la paz y la Soberanía de los Pueblos; Foundation for Aboriginal and Islander Research Action; Interfaith International; UNESCO Centre of Catalonia speaking on behalf of Pax Romama; World Peace Council; European Union of Public Relations; Afro-Asian Peoples Solidarity Organization; Federation of Cuban Women; International Humanist and Ethical Union; Voluntary Action Network India; National Union of Jurists of Cuba; Indigenous World Association; and World Union for Progressive Judaism.

Botswana, Japan, Malaysia, and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea exercised their right of reply.

The Commission will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 22 March, when it will start its general debate on the right to development.

Statements

HARDEEP SINGH PURI (India) said India's Constitution prohibited discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth and affirmed the right to equality, including equality before law, and equality of opportunity in matters of employment as fundamental rights. In the international arena, India had played an active part in the drafting of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and had been among its earliest signatories. It was therefore a matter of deep concern to India that there was a recurrence of racism, xenophobia, exclusivism and racial profiling in many parts of the world, including in those countries which were signatories to the Convention. Those trends posed a serious challenge to the attainment of internationally accepted human rights standards and laws. The first and foremost priority therefore had to be the display of political will by States to implement the commitments they had assumed, and to abide by their international obligations.

India was firmly against the stereotyping of any religion. India was home to almost all the religions of the world, including the second largest Muslim population. It was absolutely clear that true respect for all religions would come only with genuine respect for democracy, tolerance and pluralism. As one of the most diverse societies in the world, India was fully conscious of its responsibility to make a substantial contribution to the fight against racism. India would work tirelessly to ensure that its shared vision and conviction of an egalitarian global family was translated into reality.

MUSHTAQ VICTOR (Pakistan) said the United Nations had been instrumental in developing a framework for the elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and all forms of discrimination, but a lot more needed to be done. He noted that important work was being undertaken by the inter-governmental Working Group on the effective implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, and in this context Pakistan urged States, as well as members of civil society, to take necessary measures regarding the early implementation of the recommendations set out at the third session of the Working Group.

Pakistan was a multi-religious, multi-cultural and pluralistic society where people of different ethnic and religious backgrounds lived together in peace and harmony. The Government of Pakistan had taken a number of legal and administrative measures to promote non-discrimination and tolerance. To eliminate discrimination among the nations and civilisation, the President had put forward the concept of "Enlightened Moderation", which consisted of a two-pronged strategy by which all Muslims were required to invest in modern education based on tolerance and moderation, and to acquire knowledge in the fields of science and technology. The second prong of the strategy required the Western and developed nations to ensure a just settlement of long-standing international political disputes involving Muslims and to address the root causes of extremism and frustration, particularly among the youth of the Muslim world. Realisation of the concept of "Enlightened Moderation" would make the world a more peaceful and safer place to live.

MOUSSA B. NEBIE (Burkina Faso) said the Government of Burkina Faso found it shameful that acts of racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia continued, and were on the rise, at the same moment that the international community was commemorating the horror of the Holocaust. Racism, xenophobia and discrimination continued to be a major source of concern, and States should implement policies to make it possible to change people’s behaviour and to abolish acts of discrimination.

Aware of its own responsibility to its people, Burkina Faso had made non-discrimination one of the principle aspects of its policies, he said. Thus, the country’s 12 million people, who came from 60 different ethnicities, continued to live in harmony amongst themselves, and with their six neighbouring States. The Constitution had enshrined the main principles of those international instruments dealing with the issues of racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia, and the country had adopted an integrationist policy, which envisaged complete assimilation. Burkina Faso hosted multiple foreign communities, composed of both voluntary immigrants and refugees, who lived in perfect harmony with the national populations and benefited from equal protection before the law. Refugees had the same national rights to education as nationals; in 1998 the country had adopted a pilot project for the reintegration of refugees, one of the few African countries to do so.

Given the multiple causes of racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia in today’s world, which included poverty, socio-economic crisis and questions of identity, Burkina Faso supported the extension of the International Decade for Human Rights Education in order to permit Africa and other continents to benefit from the gains of the first decade, and to instill the values of human rights in new generations.

ABDULWAHAB A. ATTAR.(Saudi Arabia) said his country was committed to the noble aims and purposes underlying international efforts to protect, and ensure respect for human rights through the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination; this was in keeping with the Islamic principles and values embraced by Saudi Arabia and which called for the protection of human rights and dignity. The Islamic Sharia had helped to enrich the concepts of human rights, including the need to eliminate racial discrimination, through the lofty values and noble moral principles that it advocated as part of its integrated and comprehensive system of human rights. All those Islamic values and principles stressed the importance of respect for human rights, regardless of ethnic origin or belief, and rejected racial intolerance that would lead to racist practices against others.

The Government of Saudi Arabia wished to express its concern at the increasing tendency in some societies to discriminate against religious beliefs and, in particular, against Islam. Mosques and Islamic cultural centres, as well as commercial establishments and property owned by Muslims, had been the target of attacks in some societies and attempts had been made to associate Islam with negative phenomena such as terrorism. Islam was a religion of peace that advocated tolerance, mutual aid and solidarity.

G. Y. LUKIYANTSEV (Russian Federation) welcomed the fact that the fight against racism, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance had become one of the priority tasks for the United Nations and its bodies. This, as well as the related issue of the implementation of the Durban Declaration, was a priority for many organizations, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. The events of Durban had demonstrated the international community’s commitment to eradicating all forms of racism, xenophobia and discrimination; however, implementation of its measures was still not up to scratch. The initiatives taken to effectively implement the Declaration and Programme of Action were fully supported by Russia, which was actively cooperating with the Special Rapporteur, Mr. Diène, who was expected to visit Russia in June.

The resolution submitted under this item by the Organization of the Islamic Conference had been supported in the past, and a comprehensive approach to this initiative should be supported, as it would help with the issue of multi-cultural societies. Certain types of practices, which served to escalate racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of discrimination, such as neo-Nazism, should be condemned. The right to citizenship was a fundamental human right, and it was a right which needed to be protected; the Commission should pay more attention to this problem as well as to the situation of stateless persons.

GOLI MERI (United States) said the Government of the United States remained committed to the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance wherever and whenever they occurred -- in the United States and around the world. The United States’ record was not unblemished; its history of the violent mistreatment of Native Americans, enslavement and discrimination against African-Americans, internment of Japanese Americans during the Second World War, and other racial and ethnic injustices was well known. However, these episodes were part of the past and the United States was proud of the progress it had made and continued to make.

The United States was one of the most racially diverse countries in the world, she stated, in large part due to its history of immigration. The Government had long condemned discrimination and vigorously enforced laws and programmes designed to ensure equality of opportunity. The Constitution, coupled with the federal civil rights legislation of the 1960s, prohibited discrimination based on race, religion or national origin. For more than half a century, the Government of the United States had promoted equality by enacting and enforcing statutes prohibiting racial and ethnic discrimination in housing, employment, education, voting and access to public accommodations. While there was still a long way to go, the United States strove to become more racially and ethnically tolerant and united. Racism continued to persist, as did race-based disparities of economic well-being, but the President had made issues of racial diversity and equal opportunity an important part of his agenda. Finally, she stressed that the global battle against racism must also involve fighting anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.

GYAN CHANDRA ACHARYA (Nepal) said his country’s Constitution clearly stated that the State should not discriminate among its citizens on grounds of religion, race and caste, ideological conviction, or on any other grounds. No person should be discriminated against or denied access to any public place on the basis of caste. Any contravention of that provision was punishable by law in Nepal. The country’s laws prohibited all forms of racial discrimination. In the country, public authorities and institutions were prohibited from promoting ideals based on racial superiority or hatred and inciting racial discrimination. Acts of violence and the incitement of others to commit such acts against any race or groups of persons of different ethnic origin were also prohibited. The Constitution also guaranteed the right of remedy through the exercise of ordinary and extra-ordinary jurisprudence. The Government was taking sincere efforts to uphold the promotion and protection of those constitutional rights. Numerous efforts were also underway to bring the underprivileged and marginalized communities into the mainstream of national life.

A National Dalit Commission had already been established to increase the representation of such groups at all levels of decision-making. The National Foundation for the Development of Indigenous Nationalities, and the National Commission for Women had also been established to address the problems of discrimination in society. Poverty, underdevelopment, illiteracy, lack of social awareness and social exclusion were, among others, factors that contributed to the perpetuation of discrimination.

AMIN MELEIKA (Egypt) said racism was the primary scourge suffered by humankind throughout its history; it had led to wars, looting, injustice and other phenomena. It was still a serious threat, and various constitutions in Egypt had guaranteed rights for all citizens irrespective of race or religion. Despite all the national and international legislation, racism and racist crimes were expanding. It was wrong to think that one form of discrimination was more worthy to fight than another, because that in itself was a kind of discrimination. Egypt was deeply concerned about the escalation of campaigns of discrimination against Arabs and Muslims following the September 11 attacks which that often resulted in violence and physical attacks. Egypt also wished to point out that collective punishment was one of the most dangerous manifestations related to racism. The building of a wall to isolate a whole people and to take away the peoples basic rights was the worst thing that one person could do against another. The international justice has already said its word about the "security wall" I Palestine, and the world was waiting for Israel to implement it, remove the wall and compensate the victims.

Egypt expressed its support for the results of the third session of the Working Group for the Implementation of the Durban Plan of Action, although there was a need for additional measures to implement the Declaration and to highlight the role of education in the eradication of discrimination and racism. It was time to face up to these issues on an ethical basis.

CLAUDINE MTSHALI (South Africa), recalling that it had been agreed at Durban that the Declaration and Programme of Action constituted a road map to combating past manifestations and contemporary forms of racial discrimination, stressed that racism and its attendant evils remained the major challenge of the times. Holding the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action in high esteem as the elaboration of the steps necessary to bring this sad chapter in history to a close, South Africa held that the establishment of the Working Groups on the implementation of the Durban outcomes and on people of African descent brought hope that the international community would apply itself to support the work of those mechanisms, and to join in advancing the global anti-racism, anti-discrimination agenda.

South Africa would like to refer to the Intergovernmental Working Group's recommendation to the Commission that it sanction a high-level seminar to examine the issues of complementary standards relations to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and other related instruments. Also recalling the Independent Eminent Experts proposal to establish a "Racial Equality Index", she urged the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to expedite the consultative process this year. Moreover, those mechanisms concerned with the issue, including the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, should forge a close working relationship and build synergies to harmonize their work. And as the elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance was the responsibility of all humankind, all Member States should participate in and fully support the mechanisms charged with advancing the Durban agenda.

MARY WHELAN (Ireland) said her Government had launched the National Action Plan Against Racism on 27 January, thus fulfilling the commitments of the Durban Declaration. The Plan provided strategic guidance to combat racism and to promote the development of a more inclusive, intercultural society in the country. A 12-month consultation process involving a wide-range of stakeholders, including government, social partners and civil society, preceded the development of the Plan. The Government had developed a system of social and economic planning through social partnership and consensus. The process of developing the Plan was nearly as important as the content itself; the Plan was seen as the over-arching strategy for the Government's policy in this area.

The Government was in the process of establishing the Strategy Monitoring Group, which would represent the stakeholders who helped develop the National Action Plan, to oversee the implementation of the Plan. The Plan would be the key policy instrument in the promotion of cultural diversity. This approach by Ireland envisaged the development of a range of policies and their coordinated implementation across the public administration.

OMER MOHAMED (Sudan) said the Sudanese Government agreed with the statements made by Ethiopia, Libya and Pakistan. The suffering on the African continent was not just a part of history; its aftermath was still a cause of suffering. Colonialism in Africa had created this phenomenon. There was a moral and legal responsibility which should be shouldered by countries which had been guilty of colonialism in the past.

What had been achieved in terms of the implementation of the Durban Plan of Action was welcomed, but there was a need to recognize the continued suffering of persons of African descent in the Diaspora. Legal, social and pedagogical measures were required in host countries to put an end to the suffering, and there was a need for regional agreements on migration and discrimination. There was also a need to put an end to feelings of racial superiority and discriminatory treatment.

AMARE TEKLE (Eritrea) said that the memory of humiliation and indignity under the racist laws of Italian fascism, and of ethnic discrimination under Ethiopian colonial subjugation, had left an indelible mark on the collective mind of Eritreans, exhorting them to abhor racism, racial and ethnic discrimination and xenophobia. The divide and rule-based strategies of colonial and occupying powers had been failures in Eritrea due to united opposition by the leadership of the major religious and ethnic groups. Furthermore, the forging of a common Eritrean identity and destiny, and the determination to fight as one, had been the reason for the country's victory. Upon independence, the people had enshrined these values in their Constitution, which glorified the "unity in diversity" of the people and guaranteed them equality before the law, proscribing discrimination on the basis of race, ethnic origin, language, colour, gender or religion. Eritrea had also been an active participant in all regional and international conferences for the elimination of racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia.

Unfortunately, racism and related intolerance were yet again on the rise, particularly in developed countries, he said. Racism had manifested itself at the community level, as well as the State level; such micro-racism remained difficult to combat and required new strategies, including intensification of educational and awareness programmes. Moreover, at the State level, ethnocentrism was being celebrated as a new approach to the organization of political society in the Horn of Africa. Ethnic federalism often resulted in instability and insecurity within a State, as well as conflict at the regional level. Eritrea unequivocally condemned such ethnocentrism, along with racism and racial discrimination.

SUNU MAHADI SOEMARNO (Indonesia) said Indonesia had always practiced a moderate form of Islam, hence the intellectual and religious aspect of the fight against intolerance and sectarianism was one to which the Indonesian Government attached the greatest importance. That was why the Government had come down hard, over the last three years, on the perpetrators of acts of terrorism that were particularly abhorrent and it was also why Indonesia should continue to hunt down those who murdered in the name of religion, and bring them to justice. In reaction to those propagating religious extremism, Indonesia’s various communities had closed ranks against intolerance. Through inter-faith dialogue and inter-denominational meetings held throughout the country in recent years, they had demonstrated that faith could be a force for peace.

For the Government of Indonesia, promoting dialogue through pluralistic-oriented education was the answer to spreading, deep into the grassroots of society, the principle of respect for other people’s fundamental right to their identity – racial, ethnic or religious – and thus to promoting and protecting that right. Racism also thrived on the frustration caused by poverty and underdevelopment through the economic and social disparities that they created.

FOROUZANDEH VADIATI (Iran) said racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia continued to present serious threats to human dignity and international peace and security, with an immediate negative impact on individual and community life. Many important steps had been taken by the international community to eliminate racism, xenophobia and related intolerance, but despite all these, the scourge of racism and intolerance continued to pose new challenges to all societies. There was a manifest increase in Islamophobia, in particular in the intellectual legitimization of hostility towards Islam and its followers, and the political tolerance of such hostility in several parts of the world. The defamation of religions, in general, Islam, in particular, and discrimination against Muslims was the most notable demonstration of contemporary forms of racism and intolerance. It was therefore of the utmost importance that further efforts be made to counter these negative and harmful phenomena, including through education and intercultural and inter-religious dialogue.

There was concern for the increasing number of racist incidents as well as the rise of parties and movements with racist and xenophobic political platforms in some European countries. These countries should encourage meaningful cooperation and dialogue for a further and better understanding of different cultures and civilizations, thus promoting a culture of peace and tolerance which would lead to the eradication of all forms of discrimination and xenophobia.

NAJEEB A.A. AL-BADER (Kuwait) stressed that Islam was the religion of tolerance and coexistence and it stood against violence and intolerance. Kuwait agreed fully with the Special Rapporteur when he spoke of the need to pursue dialogue among civilizations to promote a better understanding, tolerance and respect for peoples of different religions. He also stressed that Islam stood against acts perpetrated against innocents, as well as all of the other negative practices ascribed to it. It was important to assemble efforts to combat racism and to strengthen the culture of tolerance and respect.

ANDREA HOCH (Liechtenstein) said Liechtenstein attached great importance to the elimination of discrimination, xenophobia and racist activities, including through steps to prosecute perpetrators or through other remedial measures. However, prevention was the most important tool at the country's disposal. The cornerstones of prevention, in turn, were mutual understanding and respect. In that regard, the Government strongly supported the observation made by the Special Rapporteur that in order to understand the phenomenon of racism and in order to combat and eliminate all its forms the increasing interweaving of race, ethnicity, culture and religion should be better taken into account, and that intercultural and inter-religious dialogue needed to be intensified on all levels.

In order to achieve lasting results, Liechtenstein would continue to make great efforts in implementing the National Action Plan against racism. The issues of prevention and integration of all groups of society would remain the primary objectives of the society against racism and xenophobia.

IZUMI AOKI, of International Red Crescent and Red Cross Societies, said the reports under review were of great value in analyzing the directions of the debate, but they should be assessed by reference to the work of other organizations working in this field. The approach of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies had aimed at creating a positive appreciation of the value of tolerance and non-discrimination, and this was done by valuing the richness and strength of diversity and looking for ways to harness that strength for the benefit of communities and nations. Much more attention needed to be paid to community-based organizations with a mandate built around tolerance and work against discrimination. Successful work for sustainable development, disaster preparedness, against the HIV/AIDS pandemic and many other humanitarian priorities depended on building a culture free from any form of discrimination. Work against discrimination was both an end in itself and also a means for the achievement of many other humanitarian objectives.

EMAD MORISHD (Yemen) said his country had made headway in its commitment to the elimination of all forms of racism through its implementation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The country’s Constitution was clear as to the equality of all members of society, and as to the inadmissibility of discrimination in any form. The financing of political parties based on racist sentiment was also prohibited. Moreover, Kuwait had worked for the implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action.

KIM YONG HO.(Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) said racism and racial discrimination, was an idea and practice of "jungle law" based on unscientific racial or national superiority, and constituted a flagrant violation of the principles of international law providing for human equality. The States responsible for the historical injustices, such as colonialism and slavery, should accept their responsibility and apologize and provide due reparation or compensation to the victimized States, communities and individuals. This should be considered a prerequisite for the prevention of past crimes from recurrence and for building a world free from discrimination.

Japan had committed unprecedented crimes against humanity by forcibly drafting more than 8.4 million Koreans to its military as cannon fodders and for slave-like labour by way of abduction, seduction and intimidation; they massacred one million people, and forced 200,000 women and girls to serve as sex slaves for the Japanese military. However, that very country was now dreaming of becoming a political "big power" and to hold a permanent seat in the Security Council. If Japan continued to turn a blind eye to the fact that other defeated countries in the Second World War had clearly resolved their past issues and contributed to the world peace and friendship among people and calculated to gloss over its peace crimes with a trifling of money, it could never be qualified to get rid of the status of a weak nation in politics and stigma as an "enemy State" for good, to say nothing of a permanent membership in the Security Council.

ASTRID HELLE AJAMAY (Norway) said the elimination of racism and racial discrimination was a fundamental objective in several human rights instruments. Although the standard of non-discrimination had been established as a bedrock principle in international human rights law, the persistence of racism and racial discrimination demonstrated the need to look for new ways to address this problem with more resolve and greater efficiency. The international community expressed in the Durban Declaration its concern that contemporary forms of racism and xenophobia were striving to regain political, moral and even legal recognition, including through the platforms of some political parties. The need to prevent racist and xenophobic discourse from entering the mainstream was a challenge that was relevant worldwide.

An effective implementation of existing standards should be given priority to develop new standards. It was the responsibility of every State to challenge the growing idea that multi-culturalism posed a risk that endangered the identity of countries. A comprehensive public policy that promoted inclusion and participation of all citizens was critical for the elimination of racism.

ALI AL KAABI (Iraq) said the charters and international instruments of human rights had already set forth the principles on non-discrimination and stated that any national policies in contravention of them constituted flagrant violations of human rights. The former regime in Iraq had perpetrated numerous crimes against the people of the country, including against Baathists, Kurds and Shiites. Anyone not supporting the regime had been punished. However, Iraq today had adopted policies enabling people of all faiths to participate in society. The country was attempting to promote human rights respect for freedoms and for the rights of minorities, so that all could enjoy political, economic and social rights.

The Government attached great importance to the need to promote democratic principles, and to avoid the kind of discrimination from which it had suffered for so many years, he continued. The Government was attempting to maintain and support all enterprises aimed at the promotion of social well-being so that all could benefit from the new prosperity without the discrimination of the past. Doing away with racial discrimination was a sine qua non for the building of a democratic and stable society.

AYMAN RAAD (Syria) said racism and xenophobia were phenomena which showed that humans had not yet set the foundations in their cultures and actions to the real meaning of civilization. These actions of racism and racial discrimination strongly enforced their presence and took new forms. One of these new forms was discrimination against Arabs and Muslims. We had thought that with the end of colonization and with the end of apartheid systems, offensive racist policies would stop. However, unfortunately, Arabs and the world were watching together the Israeli occupation forces repeat the tragedy of yesterday in Africa by continuing with their racist policies in the occupied Arab territories and in the Golan Heights.

SAEED MOHAMED AL-FAIHANI (Bahrain) said although the report of the High Commissioner on this agenda item was important in encouraging tolerance and respect toward differences between civilizations, it did not indicate the steps which have been taken to rectify the intellectual hostility towards certain targeted religions. All human beings should be treated with dignity, equal and inalienable rights, which were pillars of freedom, justice and peace in the world. Therefore it was important to reciprocate respect between individuals as well as groups despite the differences in faiths, cultures and languages. It was also important to eliminate all the causes that led to racism through dialogue on all levels.

Tolerance, respect, understanding and encouraging dialogue between cultures and religions should be supported whilst building a multi-cultural democracy. Education was an important and essential instrument to eliminate prejudice and strengthen respect and tolerance. The human rights mechanisms played a major role in focusing on the relation between human rights, respect and tolerance.

ITZHAK LEVANON (Israel) said that the evils of racism and discrimination had arisen in almost every society, and every generation. Those who had suffered from any form of such hatred felt a special sympathy and responsibility for all other victims. Thus, as victims of anti-Semitism, Israel felt a special responsibility to stand with other victims of hatred and discrimination, wherever they might be. Moreover, the United States, which had been built upon the ashes of the Holocaust, had a special responsibility to be mindful of the atrocity that led to its establishment and to be determined to confront any such hatred in the future. Yet, less than one generation after the horrors of the Holocaust, the world was again witnessing the resurgence of the scourge of anti-Semitism. Sometimes that phenomenon was cloaked in politics, with States trying to hide their own disrespect for human rights by turning the finger on Israel. At other times, its advocates claimed they were solely against Zionism, and that there was a difference between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. As Martin Luther King clearly stated: "When people criticize Zionism, they mean the Jews. You are talking anti-Semitism".

The destructive machinery of the Nazis began with talking anti-Semitism, he noted -- not with tanks and guns, but with words. It was too easy to move along the dangerous scale from vilification to delegitimization, to dehumanization and destruction. The international community must learn from the past; it must include special courses in racism, anti-Semitism and other forms of intolerance in school curricula. Incitement and vilification should be rooted out of schoolbooks, and the demonization of ethnic groups out of the media. The Commission should take the lead in ensuring such crucial measures were taken.

AXAD CAFAROV (Azerbaijan) said Azerbaijan reaffirmed that racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and all forms of discrimination constituted a negation of purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. They also constituted a serious violation of and obstacles to the full enjoyment of all human rights and would deny the self-evident truth that all human beings were born free and equal in dignity and rights. The indigenous people of Azerbaijan, originally residing in a neighbouring country, had been evicted because of their language, religion and ethnic identity. In addition, hundreds of thousands of internally displaced persons from the occupied territories inside Azerbaijan had suffered from the same scourge.

JOAQUIM BELO MANGUEIRA (Angola) said the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action were important documents that were useful tools in the fight against racial discrimination, xenophobia and other forms of discrimination. They were only contributions, however, for the elaboration of Government policies against discrimination, as, due to their moral character, the main task for eliminating discrimination belonged to Governments themselves. There was a long way to go in carrying out the Durban principles and Governments should do more.

The Internet could serve humankind in approaching peoples and cultures and not only for spreading any kind of discrimination. A regulation on the use of the Internet was necessary under existing human rights standards. Education was one of the most important ways to eliminate negative behaviour, and it should start within the family, respecting social values like equality, solidarity and tolerance. Angola was in favour of the establishment of a racial equality index that should provide useful statistical data that could help governments in elaborating their policies.

ENZO BITETTO (Venezuela) said his country had been unswerving in its permanent battle for the total eradication of all forms of discrimination. The Constitution prohibited any form of discrimination on the basis of race, creed, gender, or social condition. Together with its Ombudsman and civil society organizations, the Government had studied practices of exclusion among vulnerable groups, especially with regard to poverty, and particularly among people of Afro-American and indigenous descent. The Government had implemented programmes and public policies to defend and monitor the constitutional mandate and to guarantee the rights to health, education, housing, food and redress from exclusion. These programmes aimed mainly at the security units of the State working in those spheres. However, a number of racist attitudes continued to be seen in certain sectors, including the media. The national Government was taking measures necessary to ensure harmonious and rational relations of all people living in the country.

HUDSON TUCKER, of Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, said despite efforts by some States to dismiss the issues as "new rights that are contrary to religious and cultural values", sexual orientation was as much a part of identity as their race, faith, or gender. Lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender people experienced the world differently depending on their race, sex, age, class, disability, culture, religion, language and other factors. The struggle against one form of oppression could not in practice be separated from the many other struggles for equality in which members of their communities were engaged.

HASSIBA HADJ-SAHRAOUI, of International Commission of Jurists speaking on behalf of International Federation of Human Rights Leagues, and Human Rights Council of Australia, said that the debate on the issues of human rights and sexual orientation should be framed in terms of human rights principles and the obligations of States to prohibit discrimination; discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity gave rise to the most egregious of human rights violations. The work of the special mechanisms and treaty bodies showed that everywhere in the world, regardless of cultural or religious environment, human rights violations continued to be perpetrated on the grounds of real or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity. Discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity also had consequences in the deprivation of enjoyment of all other guaranteed human rights. It was time for the main human rights body of the United Nations to stop turning a blind eye to the serious human rights violations taking place on this basis.

MARIAMMA KHALLIL, of Franciscans International, said the issue of discrimination based on work and descent and its nexus with the denial of the right to land was often the root cause of human rights violations. In order to prevent discrimination based on work and descent, the Commission should approve the decision of the Sub-Commission to appoint two Special Rapporteurs on Discrimination based on Work and Descent.

JOEL KAPLAN, of B'nai B'rith speaking on behalf of Coordination Board of Jewish Organizations, said regarding the marked increase in anti-Semitism over the past four and a half years, the Special Rapporteur had repeated his recommendation that this issue should be treated by the Commission in a similar manner to Islamophobia, through a stand-alone resolution condemning it. This was applauded and should be immediately implemented. However, certain aspects of the report were troubling, as he stated that there was no single definition of the phenomenon. While critiques of government policies were valid, where these critiques employed age-old canards or anti-Semitic stereotypes, they crossed a line into anti-Semitism. The Commission should look to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe for an example of an international organization that could advance legal, educational and cultural remedies for anti-Semitism.

MAYA BEN-HAIM ROSEN, of International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists, welcomed the decision of the Special Rapporteur to visit the Russian Federation on the invitation of its authorities. The recent wave of virulent anti-Semitism attacks had reached an extremely dangerous peak with the defamatory letter sent by 19 deputies of the Duma to the Prosecutor General demanding that all Jewish organizations be banned for "inciting hatred to mankind". The Office of the Prosecutor General did not take any action against the authors of the letter. President Putin had condemned the "climate of anti-Semitism" that led to that occurrence in his address of 27 January 2005 on the occasion of the Auschwitz commemoration.

C. ANNE MASSAGEE, of Al-Haq law in the service of man, said that Israel had been separating thousands of Palestinians in the occupied Palestinian territories from their families in Israel solely on the basis of ethnic origin for three years now. In July 2003, Israel enacted the Nationality and Entry into Israel Law, which specifically excluded the residents of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. That discriminatory law did not apply to people whose spouses were from other parts of the world. Moreover, it had been applied retroactively, freezing the upgrading of any previously granted status. The sweeping prohibition could not be justified by security claims, but considered the whole Palestinian population a security threat and banned them from family reunification in Israel on the basis of their ethnic origin. The law also discriminated against Arab citizens and residents of Israel who married Palestinian residents of the occupied territories. The international community must take a stand on this racist law, and the Commission should condemn Israel’s discriminatory practices.

J. J. KIRKYACHARIAN, of Movement against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples, said racism was always being reborn in unexpected forms and was always seducing new participants. It had come to pass that anti-racism was the one thing that was guilty of destroying social peace, encouraging violence, and pitting peoples against each other. There were laws against racism, efforts of education against racism, and this was good, but it was important to recognize that this pedagogical effort had only limited effects, and sometimes caused negative effects. The educative effort needed to continue, not by aiming for edification but to the liberation of spirits.

NIMALKA FERNANDO, of International Movement against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism, said the Government of Sri Lanka had failed thus far to set up a joint mechanism with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam for the distribution of tsunami relief. That was tantamount to the non-recognition of the needs of the Tamil community and the Muslim community in the East. The Muslim population had been worst affected by the tsunami as they had been affected in the north, east as well as in the south of the country. The Government was proposing to shift the Hambathota city where a predominantly Muslim community found its living and home towards the interior. That geographical shift would mean that the Sinhala majority would benefit from the development of that new city replacing the tsunami affected Hambathota, while the economic and social status of the minority Muslim community would be seriously affected.

ANDRES SANCHEZ, of Colombian Commission of Jurists, said he wished to highlight the work of the Working Group on the effective implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action as well as measures and actions adopted in the sphere of human rights education. Activities with young children constituted an important contribution to the protection and promotion of human rights, and by empowering communities of African descent and indigenous communities. Noting that in Colombia the policy of "democratic security" was much more concerned with security than with democracy, he underscored the Special Rapporteur’s recommendation to establish a national human rights institution in Colombia. The Colombian Commission of Jurists invited the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to continue to promote the implementation of the recommendations adopted by the Working Group during its second and third sessions.

DAVID LITTMAN, of Association for World Education, said that eight years ago, a joint article had concluded that the struggle to combat racism in all its forms, including anti-Semitism, through serious scholarship and freedom of thought, opinion and expression, should not be curtailed at the United Nations by self-censorship as a result of doctrinal accusations of blasphemy whose demands were legion. The speaker said his worst fears were confirmed when the former Special Rapporteur on Racism, Maurice Glele-Ahanhanzo, had avoided any reference to the ongoing plague of Judeophobic anti-Semitism in the Arab/Muslim world for five years. Spinoza had said that every man should think what he likes and say what he thinks; that was a fundamental human right, which should apply without interference at the Commission and elsewhere in the United Nations.

JAIME VALDES AGUAYO, of American Association of Jurists, said while the world was commemorating the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Nazi concentration camp Auschwitz in 1945, it was essential to preserve that memory which was the result of the racist ideology and economic superiority of the Nazi regime and which had also resulted in the Holocaust. A number of German enterprises that were still operating at present were involved in creating labour slaves during the Nazi regime and had contributed to the Holocaust. The speaker noted that in the past non-governmental organizations had requested for compensation to be paid for the victims of the Holocaust by those companies who were concerned.

BORIS CASTILLO BARROSO, of Movimiento Cubano por la paz y la Soberanía de los Pueblos, said that the United States was a State party to the Convention against Torture, as well as the International Covenant on Human Rights. Yet, three years and two months ago, the first Afghan prisoners began to arrive in the special prison of the illegal base at Guantanamo Bay. The United States administration referred to these prisoners as illegal combatants, denying their status as prisoners of war, and maintained them in a sort of legal limbo in which their most elementary human rights were being violated. Interrogators tortured people day and night. The international community was also aware that among the prisoners there were children.

LES MALEZER, of Foundation for Aboriginal and Islander Research Action, said the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination had already found that Australia was in breach of the Convention on the elimination of racial discrimination, as it had enacted legislation which extinguished or otherwise impaired traditional Aboriginal title to land. The Committee had expressed concern in other areas, including that Australia did not have an entrenched guarantee against racial discrimination. There should be strong words of commitment from this session of the Commission to target those States, such as Australia, which continued overt acts of racial discrimination against indigenous peoples, and should be given particular attention to the most blatant violations of the rights of indigenous peoples under existing human rights treaties.

HALEEM BHATTI, of Interfaith International, said Sindh, currently a province of Pakistan, had long been the victim of Islamabad’s discrimination and oppression. The Government had adopted policies that blatantly discriminated against the Sindhi people, who had always been at the forefront of democratic and secular movements in the country. It had also generated an acute, unprecedented, man-made shortage of water. Justice was required for Sindh and Sindhis, and the United Nations should encourage the Pakistani regime to recognize their rights and those of people of other nations who had joined or were forced to join Pakistan.

FRANCES FABREGUES, of UNESCO Centre of Catalonia speaking on behalf of Pax Romama, said the irreparable collateral damage caused to universal human rights standards by the 11 September 2001 attacks, as well as the subsequent response, had demonstrated the urgent need for an intellectual strategy for combating racism in the domain of ideas, concepts, images, perceptions and value systems. Only this kind of strategy would endow globalizing societies with a truly pluralist dimension. The confusion between religious and political dimensions was intimately linked to religious phobia, and religious fundamentalisms were one of the most radical expressions of religious phobia. Inter-religious dialogue should refer to the value of other religions, and not justify any form of discrimination or intolerance. A self-critical exercise inside each religion in a dialogue was key to internal pluralism and to respect for the freedom of conscience and of religion.

LAZARO PARY, of World Peace Council, said four years after the Durban Conference and after the painful events of 11 September, acts of discrimination committed against many people was dramatic in proportion. In the context of the globalization of capital companies, the rich countries of the North were dividing markets and building a wall to divide themselves from the poor and the excluded. Indigenous peoples were dispossessed of their lands and deprived of their means of survival. Racism and racial discrimination had caused new forms of violence against indigenous peoples. It was becoming more and more difficult for indigenous peoples to have access to human rights organizations. The United Nations was turning into a type of protected bunker.

JUANITA OLIVER, of European Union of Public Relations, said the denial of true democracy was often characterized by the prevalence of discriminatory practices that could take the form of racial discrimination, religious intolerance and xenophobia. All human beings desired recognition, acceptance with dignity, and equality among their peers. The perpetuation of practices that encouraged discrimination deprived human beings of these rights. States had to define for themselves the kind of environment they provided for their citizens. Educational structures were of critical importance since the teachings of the right values to young and impressionable minds could do much to fashion future generations’ that shunned intolerance and discrimination. Unfortunately, increased global interaction, which had resulted from advances in communications technology, had not brought people closer, but had aggravated the fracturing of the human body into mutually hostile groups. Practices of racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia could not be ended unless every nation treated their citizens on equal footing.

KEITH BENNET, of Afro-Asian People’s Solidarity Organization, said heterogeneity was Nature’s law, and it was this that had given rise to and perpetuated the evils of racism, xenophobia and discrimination of all sorts. The impact of these tendencies was felt in the economic sphere through economic exploitation and deprivation; in the social sphere, through the bigotry which governed the conduct of the majority and minority groups, and in the political sphere, where rights of individuals were denied based on the colour of their skin, their race, their ethnicity, religion, gender or creed. The methodologies adopted to fight terrorism were strengthening tendencies that could only aggravate the tensions that existed between groups and communities.

CAROLINA AMADOR, of Federation of Cuban Women, said the "superpowers" were engaged as false bearers of peace that imposed neo-liberalism and forgot about the impoverished world in which people had little opportunity for advancement on the basis of their skin colour. While 30 million citizens of the United States continued to suffer from hunger, especially Hispanics and African-Americans, that country had led a war against Iraq supposedly based on principles of social assistance. The Government also engaged in torture, supposedly on grounds of fighting terrorism, but really on the basis of hatred for their supposed origins. Restrictions and discrimination also characterized the migration policies of the European Union.

RAJAI REMANADHA BABU, of International Humanist and Ethical Union, said caste was a discriminatory and oppressive system. It victimized the majority of Hindus but its worst effects were felt by the Dalits - nearly 200 million people in India who were considered untouchable. They lived in segregated colonies throughout the country, were traditionally excluded from sacred rites, and all social contacts with higher castes. The caste system had been sustained by Hindu religious orthodoxy, and it was pernicious and all pervading. Discrimination against untouchables was outlawed in the Indian Constitution, and the State had tried to redress the wrongs. Legislation and programmes of affirmative action had been introduced. He called for the appointment of a United Nations Special Rapporteur to examine the plight of lower castes in India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.

NARENDER KUMAR, of Voluntary Action Network India, said in India, the phenomenon of caste-based discrimination had been experienced by the Dalit people. Caste discrimination as it existed today needed to take into consideration a process by which upward mobility was sought by the so-called backward castes in the caste hierarchy. In doing so, some people who had been able to garner the benefits of the State's affirmative action programmes and risen in status also became the immediate oppressors of the Dalits. The experience of current relief operations in the wake of the tsunami disaster in southern India, where the people had discriminated against Dalits belonging to fishing communities was a clear indication and testimony to that phenomenon.

IVONNE PEREZ GUTTIEREZ, of National Union of Jurists of Cuba, said that, year after year, the organization took the floor to denounce how different the Commission’s meetings were from the principles of cooperation, respect and dialogue that should characterize them. The Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism had stated quite rightly that the phenomena under his mandate continued to recur. The people and Government of Cuba remained ready to implement the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. The United States constituted the most flagrant violator of human rights, including through its institutionalized racism against those that did not conform externally to the ideal of a North American, and in its activities in Iraq and at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The actions by the United States were joined by the common denominator of discrimination against those whose cultures were not of the "first world".

RONALD BARNES, of Indigenous World Association, said the fact that there had never been a treaty of cession or an agreement to relinquish indigenous sovereignty or territory should be a strong indication that a level of sovereign equality still existed between the indigenous peoples and the colonizing States. Institutional racism could easily be masked so that agreements that were created without the consent and best interest of the indigenous peoples most affected by the decision-making was non-existent. The manufactured consent usually entailed a process that evaded information dissemination to the real benefit and protection of the indigenous peoples concerned. They called on the Special Rapporteur against Racism, Mr. Diène, to conduct a special study on political platforms of racism for indigenous peoples.

DAVID LITTMAN,of World Union for Progressive Judaism, said religious defamation of Judaism continued to take place in Muslim States. In addition, an Egyptian satellite television network had been transmitting television series, which carried messages with anti-Judaism connotations.

Right of Reply

CHARLES NTWAAGAE (Botswana), speaking in a right of reply, referred to a statement by the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom which mentioned "forcible eviction of Bushmen" from the Central Kalahari Game Reserve. The Government was accustomed to these accusations, which it viewed as malicious propaganda. Botswana was a liberal democracy that consulted extensively on measures affecting specific communities, and the move of Bushmen was done in full consultation with them. No citizens had been forcibly evicted and confined to spaces outside the reserve. Further, allegations of cultural genocide and beatings were all entirely untrue. The truth was that the report of the Special Rapporteur had failed to corroborate these allegations. Finally, the Government of Botswana had a long-standing invitation to any who wished to investigate the situation. The Commission was urged to dismiss all of these allegations, as the non-governmental organization had not investigated the issue.

HIDENOBU SOBASHIMA (Japan), speaking in exercise of the right of reply in respone to the statement by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, said his delegation had already expressed its position on the past issues cited, and would not reiterate them here. Moreover, any territorial issue had nothing to do with the subject of agenda item six.

BALA CHANDRAN THARMAN (Malaysia), speaking in a right of reply in reference to a statement made by a non-governmental organization which spoke this afternoon on the growing hate culture with regard to the statement made by the Prime Minister of Malaysia, said the reference made to the Prime Minster’s statement was out of context.
KIM YONG HO (Democratic People's Republic of Korea), speaking in a right of reply with regard to the allegations made by Japan, said the crimes against humanity committed by Japan in the past should be considered as a priority if the Commission was sincere in its work. These crimes constituted unprecedented crimes against humanity and resulted from xenophobic attitudes. There could be no reconciliation without apology. The territorial issue was linked to the hatred by Japan for Koreans and their ambitions for territorial expansion. This was a violation of sovereignty, and the highest manifestation of human rights violations. Japan should accept legal responsibility, apologize and compensate for the crimes against humanity committed in the past, including the military sexual slavery imposed upon thousands during its occupation. The Commission should teach Japan how to deal with its past and behave as a member of the international community.

HIDENOBU SOBASHIMA (Japan), speaking in a second right of reply, recalled that his delegation had already stated all of its views with regard to the issues raised by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. He recalled them now.

KIM YONG HO (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea), speaking in a second right of reply, said the past crimes committed by Japan were not yet resolved and that Japan should accept its past crimes and make sincere apologies.

* *** *

For use of the information media; not an official record