COMMITTEE ON ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION STARTS CONSIDERATION OF ESTONIA'S REPORT

CERD
61st session
16 August 2002
Afternoon




The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination this afternoon started its consideration of a fifth periodic report from Estonia on how that country was complying with the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Introducing to her country's report, Marina Kaljurand, Deputy Under-Secretary at the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Estonia, said that a seminar devoted to issues relating to the elimination of discrimination would be held in Estonia on 26 September 2002. The aim of the seminar was to raise the awareness of the public on this issue, with special emphasis on the integration of minorities and the elimination of manifestations of discrimination.
Committee Expert Morten Kjaerum, who served as country rapporteur to the report of Estonia, said that a number of positive initiatives had been taken by the Government in order to secure the legal status of stateless people. It was noted that the number of people residing in Estonia with a temporary permit had dropped significantly, and there had been a similar increase in the number of permanent residence permits. Despite those positive steps, there was concern about figures in the report showing that 64 per cent of those residing in Estonia with valid residence permits were stateless; and the number of stateless people had not decreased significantly over the past 3 or 4 years and constituted 12 per cent of the population.
Also taking part in the discussion were Committee Experts Mohamed Aly Thiam, Luis Valencia Rodriguez, Patrick Thornberry, Nourredine Amir, Yuri A. Reshetov, Marc Boussuyt and Raghavan Vasudevan Pillai.
The Estonian delegation was also made up of Clyde Kull, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Estonia to the United Nations Office at Geneva; Mai Hion, Director of the Human Rights Division, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Rasmus Lumi, Assistant to the Permanent Under-Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Erika Ellamaa, Political Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; and Merike Kokajev, First Secretary at the Permanent Mission of Estonia in Geneva.
Estonia is among the 162 States parties to the International Convention and as such it is compelled, under article 9 of the treaty, to submit periodic reports to the 18-member Committee.
After adjourning its consideration of the report, the Committee briefly discussed organizational matters contained in document CERD/C/62/Misc. 4.
The Committee will continue its consideration of the report of Estonia when it reconvenes at 10 a.m. on Monday, 19 August.

Report of Estonia
The fifth periodic report of Estonia (document CERD/C/373/Add.2), notes that the basic principles of legal protection against discrimination can be found in the Constitution of the Republic. The general guarantee of rights and freedoms is the duty of the legislative, executive and judicial powers, and of local governments. The ministries and public authorities are responsible within their own spheres of activity for implementing the principle of equality within the judicial system and for promoting such equality.
It further notes that the major challenge facing the Estonian State today is the integration of its sizeable non-Estonian community into the society. The Government has taken measures to make a significant reduction in the number of persons with undetermined citizenship.
The report says that the Government has taken further measures to combat racism and ethnic discrimination. These measures can be divided into judicial measures, measures within the framework of the State Integration Plan and measures taken to grant equal opportunities. On 31 March 1998, the Government established the Non-Estonian Integration Foundation to develop and coordinate the national integration process. In May 1997, a new post of Minister for Population and Ethnic Affairs was instituted, with responsibility for integration issues.

Introduction of Report
MARINA KALJURAND, Deputy Under-Secretary of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Estonia, said that a seminar devoted to issues relating to the elimination of discrimination would be held in the capital on 26 September 2002. The aim of the seminar was to raise the awareness of the public on this issue, with special emphasis on the integration of minorities and the elimination of manifestations of discrimination.
She said that as it had been recommended by the Committee in its previous concluding observations on the recognition of its competence under article 4 to receive and consider communications, the Government was preparing the necessary formality to that end. In addition, there had been some discussions about the possible role of the Legal Chancellor, who was also acting as an Ombudsman, to receive and consider petitions from individuals and groups of individuals.
Mrs. Kaljurand said that the implementation of the State Integration Programme continued according to the Action Plans for Sub-programmes for the years 2000-2003 as approved by the Government. The priorities were linguistic, legal, political and socio-economic integration. The budget of the programme amounted to 55 million EEK during the current year.
On 26 March 2002, the Estonian Parliament had amended the Basic and Upper Secondary Schools Act, providing for the use of language of instruction other than Estonian in municipal upper secondary schools beyond 2007, Mrs. Kaljurand said. By then, the transformation from non-Estonian language education to Estonian language education in state and municipal schools was scheduled to start.
With regard to the process of examination of citizenship, Mrs. Kaljurand said that from the beginning of 2002, the naturalization procedure for graduates from upper secondary schools had been simplified by new regulations. The Government had also simplified the citizenship exam by reviewing the questions of the exam and lowering the required percentage of correct answers necessary to pass it. The new questions reflected the democratic spirit of the Constitution, and the principles of a state based on the rule of law, among other things.

Questions and Comments by Committee Experts
MORTEN KJAERUM, the Committee Expert who served at country rapporteur to the report of Hungary, said that the report was detailed and comprehensive and contained useful and instructive information concerning the legislative reforms and initiatives conducted in Estonia. He said that the Committee recognized in its General Recommendations 11 and 20, based on article 1, paragraph 2, of the Convention, that a State - on a number of issues -legitimately differentiated between citizens and non-citizens. However, the particular case in relation to Estonia was that members of one particular minority had resided in the country for most or all of their lives. It was recognized that the history of the Russian minority in Estonia made it a sensitive and difficult issue for the Government.
Mr. Kjaerum recalled that Estonia had ratified a large number of regional and international conventions and protocols. However, in relation to the protection against discrimination, the Government still had not ratified some important UN conventions, such as the UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness of 1961; the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons of 1954; and the UNESCO Convention against Discrimination in Education of 1960. Those conventions were relevant to Estonia because of the particular composition of the population.
In relation to the issues concerning the fairly large number of stateless people residing in Estonia, a number of positive initiatives had been taken to secure the legal status of that group. It was noted that the number of people residing in Estonia with a temporary permit had dropped significantly, and there had been a similar increase in the number of permanent residence permits. Despite those positive steps, there was concern about figures in the report showing that 64 per cent of those residing in Estonia with valid residence permits were stateless. The number of stateless people had not decreased significantly over the past 3 or 4 years and constituted 12 per cent of the population.
On immigration quotas, Mr. Kjaerum asked if the Supreme Court's decision on immigration had led to changes in practice and to amendments in the Aliens Act. Could the Estonian delegation provide statistical information concerning immigration quotas as a whole? How many applications were filed for family reunification, and how many were accepted or rejected?
Mr. Kjaerum said that Estonia had made an important change in the election laws eliminating the language requirement from the Election Act and the Local Government Council Election Act. That last amendment ought to have as a consequence a change in the Language Act, which required that all public information should be provided in Estonian and thereby prohibited electoral advertisements posted in the language of a minority. Was that being considered?
Mr. Kjaerum said that it was difficult to understand why the State was regulating language requirements for private companies. In a market driven society, the free market mechanisms should regulate the issue. It seemed like an unnecessary barrier for accessing the labour market for vulnerable minority groups.
Other Committee Experts also raised a number of questions. An Expert asked about the Government's position on dual nationality; the acquisition of nationality by birth and naturalization; the presence of a high number of stateless persons; the exigencies of the Estonian language requirements in business; and the expulsion of asylum-seekers.
Another Expert asked about the participation of minority groups in the institutions promoting their rights; if they were represented in the country's national parliament; if foreigners residing in the country were allowed to participate in local elections; and if compensation was given to victims of racial discrimination.
An Expert, referring to paragraph 103 of the report, asked about the nature of activities that might be considered to go against the independence and sovereignty of the Republic; and the criteria allowing foreigners from some countries to enter the country without any restrictions.
What were the conditions for foreigners residing in Estonia to acquire property, asked another Expert. Did the same conditions apply for Estonians who were purchasing land, for example? What was the general policy of marriage involving foreigners? What inheritance went to the children born out of a marriage of a Muslim and Estonian? Were there mosques for people of the Islamic confession?
An Expert said that the Estonian society was multicultural and the use of the Russian language was a matter of dissemination of information. The country was preparing itself to enter into the European Union. He said that linguistic restrictions might undermine other rights, as in the case of Estonia concerning the Russian language. The process of naturalization in the country had left many persons without any status. The non-fulfilment of some of the requirements for naturalization might hamper candidates from obtaining Estonian citizenship.



* *** *