COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS DISCUSSES EQUAL RIGHT OF MEN AND WOMEN TO ENJOYMENT OF ALL RIGHTS

CESCR
28th session
13 May 2002
Morning



Need for Temporary Special Measures for
Equality of Women Emphasized



The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights this morning started its day of general discussion on the equal right of men and women to the enjoyment of all economic, social and cultural rights.
The Committee is holding the day of general discussion on article 3 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights with the view to drafting a general comment on the issue.
In her opening remarks, Committee Chairperson Virginia Bonoan Dandan said that women were the most unprivileged group living in the privileged men's world; women also had to bear unequal conditions which society imposed on them; the inequality of women and men was showing widening poles in many societies; and the issue of equality was between the powerless and the powerful.
Ms. Bonoan-Dandan said that no society could claim that men and women enjoyed equal rights, regretting that stereotyped forms of discrimination against women continued and were deeply entrenched in many societies, putting women in conditions which prevented them from the full enjoyment of their economic, social and cultural rights. Women were subjected to de facto inequality and they were greatly disadvantaged by the worldwide discrimination against them, she added.
Other Committee Experts also participated in the discussion, raising issues which they said needed to be included in the draft general comment the Committee was envisaging to adopt in a year's time.
Guest speakers from the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women and other private organizations also made statements in which they said that temporary special measures should be adopted by States parties in order to attain the equality of women in enjoying their economic, social and cultural rights. The Committee was advised to encourage affirmative action to be taken by Governments favouring equality between women and men.
Article 3 of the Covenant states that States parties to the International Covenant must ensure the equal rights of men and women to the enjoyment of all economic, social and cultural rights set forth in the Covenant.
When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m., it will conclude its day of general discussion on article 3 of the Covenant.

Statements
VIRGINIA BONOAN-DANDAN, Committee Chairperson, in her opening remarks, said that women were the most unprivileged group living in the privileged men's world. Women had to bear unequal conditions which the society imposed on them. The inequality of women and men was showing widening poles in many societies. The issue of equality was between the powerless and the powerful.
No society could claim that men and women enjoyed equal rights, Ms. Bonoan-Dandan said. She regretted that stereotyped forms of discrimination continued, and were deeply embedded in many societies putting women in conditions which prevented them from the full enjoyment of their economic, social and cultural rights. Since the 1993 Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action on Human Rights and the 1995 Beijing Platform on Women, the Committee had gathered sufficient experience on article 3 of the Covenant. Women were subjected to de facto inequality and they were greatly disadvantaged by the worldwide discrimination against them.
Ms. Bonoan-Dandan asked if the Committee was looking for the adoption of a general comment on the equal rights of men and women to the enjoyment of all economic, social and cultural rights as set forth in the Covenant or a general comment on equality of men and women. The process of the drafting of the general comment on the issue of equal rights of men and women to the enjoyment of all economic, social and cultural rights might take one year.
SAVITRI GOONESEKERE, Member of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), said many women lived in poverty because of the denial of their access to socio-economic rights. Socio-economic rights needed a time-frame for their implementation with regards to women. The Committee had been demanding the integration of socio-economic rights at the level of Constitutions and not only at policy levels. When the rights were put in legislation, such as Constitutions, the next step would be their application. CEDAW believed that States should play a vital role in the implementation of the rights, including affirmative action, even if the economy was in the hands of the private sector.
CEDAW focused on shared family and society responsibility for women, Ms. Goonesekere said. The balance within the family should be based on equality and governments should be accountable for the respect of women in the areas of education and reproductive health rights. Domestic violence and the right to inheritance should be dealt with as areas where discrimination was usually committed against women. In addition, the enforcement of policies and legal measures should be addressed in the field of women's work, including the formal and informal sectors. CEDAW emphasized that the cultural impact of bias against women was a denial of their equality and the enjoyment of their cultural rights.
HANNA BEATE SCHOPP-SCHILLING, Member of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), said that CEDAW had been working for the last twenty years to ensure the equality of women. With regard to article 4 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, which was mandatory, there was a sense in the Committee that in order to reach a de facto equality, temporary special measures, to last for some time, should be applied. Referring to a report compiled by Marc Bossyut, member of the Human Rights Committee, she said that although she did not agree with all the terms used by him, the de facto equality -- substantive equality, as it was also termed -- should be supported by measures, such as positive action, positive discrimination or affirmative action. Without temporary special measures, it would be impossible to attain the desired target of de facto equality. Temporary social measures could be based on supra-constitutional measures or other legislative provisions. They could also be based on preferential measures, such as quota systems.
In many areas of politics, it was easy to establish quota systems, but it was difficult to implement them in education where there was a need to take temporary special measures, Ms. Schopp-Schilling said. CEDAW was endeavouring to ensure that temporary special measures be used in achieving the goal of equality. If the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights was envisaging to adopt a general comment on article 3 of the Covenant, it should also focus on the application of temporary measures in achieving the goal of equality.

Discussion
Following the statements, Committee Experts expressed their views. An Expert said that if the Committee was to adopt a general comment, he preferred that the emphasis should be on the equal access of women and men to the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights. With regard to work, there was always discrimination and it was difficult to come out with evidence that such discrimination existed. It was also some women, because of children, who abandoned their professions. He asked if the Committee would recommend "affirmative action" in its general comment.
The same Expert also said that the Government of France, for example, had decreed legislation on the right to equal access of women to political activities; however, it had been difficult to apply it for many reasons. There were not enough women candidates to enter politics or to represent themselves in elections. The international community should have faith in the movements of women, particularly in the third world. African women were vocal in cases of female genital mutilation, for example.
Another Expert said that as for the cooperation with CEDAW, it was historic and it was important that there should be close collaboration on the converging aspects. On temporary special measures and affirmative action, there were a number of positions to be expressed. He said he was in favour of propagating affirmative action, and was against the use of strict quota systems, which might raise contradictions. The Committee should take more time to adopt a general comment on the issue.
Another Expert also said that if the idea of a general comment would be an interpretation of the articles of the Covenant beyond the initial idea to which States parties adhered to, he was afraid there would be contradictions on the issue. He was sympathetic about the application of temporary special measures. Abortion, for example, was not restricted in some countries while it was prohibited in others, so the Committee should be careful in such matters. The Committee had many things to learn from the experience of CEDAW.
An Expert asked if a radical form of affirmative action was not to the detriment of equality among individuals. It was a tricky issue that should be dealt with very carefully. The issue of the rights of women was not only a special sphere of CEDAW because gender-based discrimination was raised with regard to transsexuals or homosexuals which the Committee was familiar with.
Another Expert said that if one approached women as a vulnerable group, it would be wrong, since many women enjoyed their rights within the society. The use of language in the general comment should be carefully chosen. In the draft, it would be better to use "positive discrimination" instead of "affirmative action".
Ms. Goonesekere said that with regard to temporary special measures, there was inequality from one country to another, as seen over the course of CEDAW's examination of country reports. Article 4 of the Convention assumed that States parties should take special measures but without saying that their omission might amount to discrimination. The issue of violence against women had been a key issue at the CEDAW debate. It was the role of the Committee to interpret the provisions of the Convention in order to attain its goals. The protocol to the Convention had been adopted to handle complaints; however, the Committee had not so far received any individual or group complaints.
Ms. Schoop-Schilling said she was happy that the members of the Committee had apprehended the essence of substantive equality, which was dear to CEDAW. The temporary special measures should be incorporated in Constitutions as had been done by Germany and Finland, for instance. There were also other States that incorporated measures at the legislative level. Special measures should be permanent in their application and not temporary. According to reports received by CEDAW, some countries legalized prostitution as a profession, while others outlawed it. She said she was not in favour of establishing a rigid quota system so that it would not end up in courts.
Asked if CEDAW had taken a position on the issue of prostitution, Ms. Schopp-Schilling said that no stand had been taken so far but the issue was being dealt with as a form of exploitation.
Responding to a Committee Expert, Ms. Goonesekere said that couples were supposed to complement each other in an ideal partnership, but sadly, by recognizing the historic reality, one observed the unequal position of women in the deeply entrenched men-preferred patriarchal society.

Statements
MARSHA A. FREEMAN, Director of the International Women's Rights Action Watch (USA), said that if equality in the enjoyment of rights should be thought of as equality between men and women, a power mechanism for the enjoyment of rights should be established. Equality in the essence should be the issue of how men and women established the society and how to enact the laws to run the society. Historically, women were shackled by inequality and were prevented from exercising their choice and maintaining it. The issue of rights was to restore equality but not to take away from the other. The term gender had been misused in many aspects; and it did not refer to women, it was an analytical tool. If there was equality to the right to education, for instance, the consequence for boys and girls should be considered.
Ms. Freeman said that there was a case in which the education of women had been seen as over-privileged because of their number exceeding that of men in some societies. There should be fairness for both women and men in all aspects. Fundamental fairness should be dealt with by the Committee in its drafting of the general comment.
SHELAGH DAY, Consultant on women's human rights and economic equity issues (Canada), of the Women's Economic Equality Project (international coalition), said that the situation of women should be given special attention and the issues impeding their enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights should be highlighted. In Canada, for example, the Supreme Court had recognized the jurisprudence of human rights and had ruled out that a person who might face the death penalty should be extradited. Further, the cuts in social assistance rates below subsistence level had forced Canadian courts to examine the situation within the domestic context and the international treaties. With regard to the general comment, the harms committed against women and their lack of equal rights to the enjoyment of their economic, social and cultural rights should be considered. The issue of the enjoyment of the rights by women should be seen from the sex-specific prospective.
Ms. Day said that women did not enjoy autonomy, did not enjoy their economic, social and cultural rights, and were not participating in decision-making. When improvements were made concerning women's well-being, they would have a positive impact on all women's rights. Some countries still maintained laws that discriminated against women and that considered them as inferior. Policies and laws were gender-neutral in some countries, but still women were not enjoying their rights. In many societies, men were considered the main beneficiaries with women being their dependents. The overall impact of the conduct of States parties should be considered in light of the attainment of equality among men and women.



* *** *