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

AFTERNOON

HR/CERD/99/25
16 March 1999


Committee Adopts Concluding Observations on Report of Austria


The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination this afternoon started its consideration of a report presented by the Government of Mongolia on how it was implementing the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Sorogjoogiin Tumur, a member of Mongolia’s Parliament and Chairman of the Parliamentary Sub-Committee on Human Rights, introduced her country’s report, saying that as a result of the democratic reforms which had started in 1990, a parliamentary governance and multiparty system had been set up after the old regime was abolished. Mongolia was also making a steady transition from a centrally planned economy into a market-oriented economy, he added.

Deci Zou, the Committee expert who served as country rapporteur to the report of Mongolia, said that the report had largely followed the general guidelines of the Committee. However, it was too simple in content and the information on specific legal provisions and actual implementation of the Convention was not ample enough.

The following Committee experts also participated in the discussion: Luis Valencia Rodriguez, Peter Nobel, Régis de Gouttes, Theodoor van Boven, Michael E. Sherifis, and Mahmoud Aboul-Nasr.

As one of the 153 States parties to the Convention, Mongolia must submit periodic reports to the Committee summarizing the measures undertaken to implement the treaty.

Also this afternoon the Committee adopted its concluding observation on the report of Austria. It expressed concern about reports of serious police brutality in dealing with persons of foreign origin and ethnic minorities, including the Roma.

When the Committee meets at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 17 March, it will conclude its consideration of the report of Mongolia.

Report of Mongolia

The periodic report of Mongolia (document CERD/C/338/Add.3) reviews a summary of measures taken by the Government in line with the Convention. It says that the Constitution of Mongolia constitutes the main source of legal guarantees for protection from discrimination. The 6-page report further says that the Constitution fully guarantees the political, civil, social, economic, and cultural rights of citizens of the country. The right of citizens to take part in the Government of the country directly or through a representative body is proclaimed in the Constitution.

The report also says that the State explored every opportunity to protect and develop national cultures and traditions. In order to restore and spread the traditional heritage of various ethnic groups, the Folk Art Festival had been organized at the national level every three to four years since 1961, says the report.

Presentation of Report of Mongolia

SOROGJOOGIIN TUMUR, a member of Mongolia’s Parliament and Chairman of the Parliamentary Sub-Committee on Human Rights, said that as a result of the democratic reforms which had started in 1990, a parliamentary governance and multiparty system was set up after the old regime was abolished. Mongolia was making a steady transition from a centrally planned economy into a market-oriented economy, he said.

The new Constitution of Mongolia which was adopted in 1992 proclaimed all human rights and fundamental freedoms, Mr. Tumur went on to state. Mongolia had conducted a whole series of legal reforms related to human rights. Some 50,000 legal acts had been adopted, he added.

Mr. Tumur said that in addition to the adoption of legal instruments relating to the implementation of the Convention and thus ensuring human rights in Mongolia, the Government had given particular importance to human rights education.

Discussion of Mongolia's Report

DECI ZOU, the Committee expert who served as country rapporteur to the report of Mongolia, said that the report had largely followed the general guidelines of the Committee. However, it was too simple in content and the information on specific legal provisions and actual implementation of the Convention was not ample enough.

Mrs. Zou said that among the more than 2.3 million people of Mongolia, there were 15 ethnic groups, including Khalkhas, who accounted for 81 per cent of the total. The other 14 groups were ethnic minorities, altogether accounting for 19 per cent of the total population. The Kazaks were the largest minority group, accounting for 6.1 per cent. They constituted the most important non-Mongol ethnic minority. They had their own language, religious beliefs and customs and were concentrated in the western part of the country. She wanted to know about the measures undertaken by the Government to preserve their identities and customs.

Referring to the political and economic changes made in Mongolia, Mrs. Zou asked the delegation to provide specific information on the impact of the transition to a market economy on property ownership rights among the ethnic minorities, their involvement in animal husbandry, and their participation in the national economy. She also wanted to know whether the minority ethnic groups were encouraged and allowed to take part in the national and local political processes through their participation in public affairs.

Mrs. Zou said that there were about 3,000 foreigners living in Mongolia, mainly Russians and Chinese. She requested the delegation to provide information on the activities of those foreigners. Were there any demands for naturalization among the foreigners residing in Mongolia, she asked.

The expert said that Mongolia had enacted a new Constitution in 1992. It was in the process of amending laws that already existed and formulating new laws in accordance with the new Constitution. Mrs. Zou said she was pleased that the Mongolian Government was carrying out this work. She asked if the Government was also intending to elaborate laws on ethnic minorities in accordance with the new Constitution and the provisions of the Convention.

Referring to the report, Mrs. Zou said that it had stated that there were no cases involving instances of discrimination on grounds of race or ethnic origin. It said none had been reported nor tried in Mongolian courts. She said that in her opinion, there were two possible reasons for such a situation. The first one was that there were indeed no problems in that regard, therefore no cases had been reported or tried. The second possible reason was that due to insufficient information and education, people did not know that racial discrimination constituted a crime, especially the minority populations who did not know that they could protect their rights by resorting to legal means and going through the courts.

In response to questions raised by Committee experts, the Mongolian delegation said that many of the members of the National Parliament belonged to ethnic minorities. In addition, they ran their own local affairs and had their own local newspapers and electronic media transmissions. The Kazak ethnic minority group, which was mentioned by the country rapporteur, had their own Mosques and enjoyed other rights as the majority ethnic group.

The delegation said that the minorities actively participated not only in local affairs but also at the national level. They could exercise any profession of their choice and could freely move around the country.

Concluding Observations on Austria's Report

In its concluding observations, the Committee noted with satisfaction that Austria had condemned genocide as a crime under international law and trusted that all acts of genocide would be condemned without any distinction as to time, place or group of victims. It welcomed the establishment of the National Fund for Victims of National Socialism which offered a scheme for compensation of all victims of genocide.

Among the Committee's concerns were that the immigration policy of Austria classified foreigners on the basis of their national origin. The Committee considered the concept and effect of the policy might be stigmatizing and discriminatory, and therefore contrary to the principles and provisions of he Convention.

While the Committee welcomed the measures taken by the Government of Austria for the protection of the rights of Slovenian, Croatian and Hungarian minority groups, there were still concerns at the lack of corresponding measures for other "national ethnic minorities", in particular for Czechs, Slovaks and Roma, as well as for those who were sometimes referred to as "new minorities".

Further, the Committee expressed concern about reports of serious cases of police brutality in dealing with persons of foreign origin and ethnic minorities, including the Roma.

The Committee recommended that Austria introduce comprehensive legislation to prohibit racial discrimination in all its forms, covering both citizens and foreigners. It encouraged the Government to continue exploring ways of providing specific protection to all ethnic groups living in the country. It also urged the State party to review those elements of its current immigration policy which classified foreigners on the basis of their national origin. The Committee requested Austria to include in its forthcoming report information on current asylum practices.

Some Committee experts were of the view that paragraph 18 of the adopted concluding observations on the report of Austria was weak. Paragraph 18 of the adopted text reads as follow: "It is noted that the State party has not made a declaration provided for in article 14 of the Convention, and some members of the Committee requested the possibility of such a declaration be considered." Article 14 concerns recognition of the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by that State party or of the rights set forth in the Convention.