COMMITTEE ON ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION STARTS CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS OF ARMENIA

CERD
61st session
7 August 2002
Afternoon


Armenia Considers Endorsing the Obligations
Contained in the Convention a Priority



The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination this afternoon started its consideration of the third and fourth periodic reports of Armenia on how that country was implementing the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
Introducing the reports, Ashot Kocharian, Director of the Legal Department of International Organizations at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Armenia, said that his country fully shared the concerns of the international community over problems arising from the limited application of the International Convention. Discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance were serious barriers to the creation of social cohesion and genuine democracy in a State. It was a priority for Armenia to endorse the obligations contained in the Convention by developing effective anti-discrimination strategies and mechanisms.
Mr. Kocharian said that since its independence, Armenia had been committed to the protection and promotion of human rights; and the country had made great strides in setting up a pluralistic political system by establishing the rule of law and by observing human rights and fundamental freedoms.
Committee Expert Mario Jorge Yutzis, who served as country rapporteur to the reports of Armenia, said they contained valuable information in addition to the demographic data provided with the historical background. He said that the concept of Armenia being a mono-ethnic State, as mentioned in the reports, was not applicable to Armenia where a number of ethnic groups were living alongside the majority Armenians.
The following Committee Experts also participated in the debate: Mahmoud Aboul-Nasr, Regis de Gouttes, Luis Valencia Rodriguez, Morten Kjaerum, Patricia Nazipho January-Bardill, Agha Shahi, Linos Alexander Sicilianos; Mohamed Aly Thiam, Patrick Thornberry, Mark Bossuyt, Jose Augusto Lindgren Alves and Tang Chengyuan.
The Armenian delegation was also made up of Zorab Mnatsakanian, Permanent Representative of Armenia to the United Nations Office at Geneva; Arthur Osikyan, Director, Legal Department of Armenia; and Tigran Samvelian, First Secretary of the Permanent Mission of Armenia in Geneva.
Armenia is among the 162 States parties to the International Convention and as such it must submit periodic reports to the Committee on its activities designed to implement the provisions of the treaty.
When the Committee reconvenes at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 8 August, it will continue its consideration of the reports of Armenia. The Committee will also discuss the situation in Fiji under its review procedure for seriously overdue reports.

Reports of Armenia
The third and fourth periodic reports of Armenia are contained in document CERD/C/372/Add.3 and describe the measures taken by the State party with the view to implementing the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The reports say that the Republic of Armenia has in recent years continued its efforts to ensure full implementation of all conventions it has adhered to in the spheres of law and administration. The State party rejected racial supremacy. Armenians make up 97 to 98 per cent of the population and the country was also home to over 10 nationalities, who accounted for between 2 to 2.5 per cent of the indigenous population.
The reports say that the new Criminal Code is currently in the final stage of consideration. In order to meet the commitments which it made in order to join the Council of Europe, Armenia will shortly be drawing up laws establishing the institution of an ombudsman, governing alternatives to military service, and concerning the mass media, national minorities and non-governmental organizations.
A Human Rights Commission which reported to the President was established in 1998, the reports say. It deals with cases involving the examination and restoration of infringed rights, and also acts to prevent human rights violations. The Commission is made up of 17 representatives of voluntary organizations, State structures, independent legal experts and journalists. In addition, a Coordinating Council of National Minorities was established in 2000 to promote and protect minority rights.
National minorities are not represented in the National Assembly, the reports say. Approximately 15 representatives of national minorities occupy high-level posts in local self-government bodies in rural areas. Plans are in hand to establish committees and supporting organizational structures in the administrative bodies and local governments of areas inhabited by national minorities.

Introduction of Reports
ASHOT KOCHARIAN, Director, Legal Department of International Organizations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Armenia, said that his country fully shared the concerns of the international community over the problems arising from the limited application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance were serious barriers to the creation of social cohesion and genuine democracy in a State. For Armenia, it was a priority to endorse the obligations contained in the Convention by developing effective anti-discrimination strategies and mechanisms.
Mr. Kocharian said that there were still extreme forms and manifestations of discriminatory policies carried out in various parts of the world. One of the vivid examples was the discriminatory policies, massacres and pogroms which were organized against the Armenian population in the Azerbaijani towns and cities some 14 years ago. About 500,000 Armenians had also been made refugees.
Since its independence, Armenia had been committed to the protection and promotion of human rights, Mr. Kocharian said. The country had made great strides in setting up a pluralistic political system by establishing the rule of law, observing human rights and fundamental freedoms, and anchoring democratic values. Armenia had ratified 40 international human rights instruments and it was committed to implementing all of them.
Mr. Kocharian said that his country's human rights situation was directly linked to external factors and the regional environment. The country was endeavouring to achieve healthier economic standards and to ensure the basic human rights of its population.
Armenia was actively participating in the work of the United Nations and cooperated with various bodies of the Organization, Mr. Kocharian said. Armenia was a democratic State where all citizens enjoyed equal rights and protection under the law.
ARTHUR OSIKYAN, Director, Legal Department of Armenia, also highlighted the legislative measures undertaken by the Government with the view to implementing the provisions of the International Convention. Legislation had also been adopted prohibiting any form of racial discrimination and penalties had been provided for racially motivated crimes.

Discussion
MARIO JORGE YUTZIS, the Committee Expert who served as country rapporteur to the reports of Armenia, noted that the economic blockades by Turkey and Azerbaijan had further exacerbated the economic and social difficulties facing Armenia. The country had already been a victim of an earthquake and other problems.
Mr. Yutzis said that the reports contained valuable information besides the demographic data and the historical background. A Human Rights Commission and a Coordinating Council of National Minorities for the protection and promotion of minority rights had also been set up.
Referring to paragraph 5 of the reports which said that Armenia was a mono-ethnic State, Mr. Yutzis said if that was taken in absolute terms, the assertion was not acceptable. There were a number of other ethnic groups living in the country. The State party should rethink its use of the term "mono-ethnic".
With regard to paragraph 37 of the reports, Mr. Yutzis said that article 69 of the criminal code provided for penalties for racially motivated crimes; however, there were no statistics on the complaints or cases of such crimes. Were the victims afraid to bring their complaints to the competent authorities? Had article 69 succeeded in discouraging people from using hate speech or airing propaganda of racial superiority? What was the situation of article 4 of the Convention which prohibited propaganda based on racial superiority? The delegation should provide further information on these issues.
Concerning refugees in Armenia, Mr. Yutzis said that 264,000 ethnic Armenians who fled Azerbaijan during the 1988-1993 conflict were living in Armenia; the vast majority were eligible to become Armenian citizens and faced little threat of forced return to Azerbaijan; they had largely integrated into Armenia. In contrast, Armenia did not recognize as refugees an estimated 11,000 persons, almost all ethnic Armenians, who fled conflicts in Chechnya (Russian Federation) and Abkhazia (Georgia). He asked for clarification on this point.
Mr. Yutzis asked if the Armenian Apostolic Church was the only official church to engage in charity activities. The Church held the status of national church and enjoyed special privileges. He said that according to his information, individuals wanting to send funds to other churches in the country could not do so because it was prohibited.
Other members of the Committee also raised a series of questions on different issues relating to the contents of the reports. Some Experts, subscribing to the comment made by the country rapporteur, said that the concept of "mono-ethnic" was not appropriate to the Armenia situation where other minority groups lived. They wanted to know about the demographic composition of the population, if possible, with the economic and social indicators of the minority population.
An Expert, affirming that Armenia did not make a declaration under article 14 of the Convention, asked the delegation about the position of the Government on that subject. Article 14 stipulates that a State party might declare that it recognized 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 of the rights set forth in the treaty.
The same Expert asked the delegation if the Human Rights Commission, which was established in April 1998, was competent to receive individual complaints and to investigate cases of human rights violations.
Another Expert said that the reports indicated that the unemployment rate was still high in the country; he asked about statistical data concerning minorities, and the measures taken to remedy the situation.
Referring to paragraph 63 of the reports, which gave prison figures as of 1 March 2000 to be 7,000, an Expert requested information on the composition of the prison population. The Expert also asked if training was provided to officials of correctional institutions and if the 930 local municipalities had a code of conduct to uphold the Convention.
An Expert said that there were more than 350,000 refugees in Armenia and most of them were ethnic Armenians who fled conflicts from neighbouring countries.
Another Expert, referring to the continued complaints echoed by Armenia against its neighbour, asked if the Government was contemplating to use article 11 of the Convention, which had never been used by any State party. Article 11 stipulates that if a State party considered that another State party was not giving effect to the provisions of the Convention, it might bring the matter to the attention of the Committee.



* *** *