Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Treaty bodies
Default title
08 August 2000
Share
CERD
57th session
8 August 2000
Afternoon
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination this afternoon started reviewing a report submitted by the Government of the Netherlands on measures put in place to combat racial discrimination.
Introducing the report, Peter Potman, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, said that over the past few years, his Government had given increasing priority to the eradication of racial discrimination. It attached great value to the integration and the protection of ethnic minorities. The main ethnic minorities had been accorded priority on the policy agenda because of their disadvantaged position in Dutch society, he added.
Brun-Otto Bryde, the Committee expert who served as country rapporteur to the report of the Netherlands, said that as a former colonial power, the Netherlands had become home to communities from the former colonies, especially Moluccans from Indonesia. However, he noted that Moluccans did not appear in most statistics prepared by the Government of the Netherlands.
The following experts also participated in the discussion: Francois Lonseny Fall, Luis Valencia Rodriguez, Ion Diaconu, Deci Zou, Regis de Gouttes, Peter Nobel and Raghavan Vasudevan Pillai.
The Dutch delegation was also made up of Jolien Schukking, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Lucia Ling Ket On, Andy Clijnk, and Carina van Eck from the Ministry of Justice; Karin van Dooren and Eric Bruinsma, from the Ministry of Interior and Kingdom Relations; Claudia Staal, from the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment; Hans Stegeman, from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, and Barend C.A.F. van der Heijden, Charge d=affaires.
As one of the 156 States parties to the Convention, the Netherlands is obligated to present periodic summaries on its efforts to implement the provisions of the treaty.
When the Committee reconvenes at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 9 August, it will continue its consideration of the report of the Netherlands.
Report of the Netherlands
The fourteenth periodic report of the Netherlands (document CERD/C/362/Add.4) enumerates the measures taken by the Government since the last report was presented to the Committee. The current report gives details of the administrative and legislative steps adopted to prevent and to combat racial bias in the country. It also contains a number of reactions to the concluding observations of the Committee emanating from the consideration of the last periodic reports. The report covers the European part of the Netherlands, the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba.
The report says that the Netherlands pursues an affirmative action policy in respect of women, minority groups and the disabled, as provided for by legislation on equal treatment. However, the law does not oblige anyone to pursue such a policy.
Presentation of the Netherlands' Report
PETER POTMAN, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, said that over the past few years, his Government had given increasing priority to the eradication of racial discrimination. It attached great value to the integration and the protection of ethnic minorities. The main ethnic minorities had been accorded priority on the policy agenda because of their disadvantaged position in Dutch society. They include Surinamese, Antilleans, Arubans, Turks, Moroccans and a number of other ethnic groups and refugees.
With the view to offering those groups of minorities the protection provided for by the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, the Government had proposed to apply that convention not only to the Frisians, but also to ethnic minorities which had migrated to the country, Mr. Potman said. Being regarded as a national minority did not depend on having Dutch nationality.
Turning to Internet discrimination, Mr. Potman affirmed that discrimination on the Internet was a growing problem; the Discrimination Hotline Internet was established to weed out discriminatory statements on Dutch Internet sites. The activities of that independent body were subsidized by the Government. By sending a warning for the offending material to be removed, the Hotline aimed at reducing the number of discriminatory or racist statements on Dutch web sites.
Further, discrimination in criminal cases took a variety of forms, Mr. Potman said; not only could it be an offence in itself, but it often played a role in other "ordinary" offences. The police and the procurator general acted as quickly and effectively as possible to combat discrimination. Nineteen public prosecutors in various parts of the country had been assigned special responsibility for discrimination cases. The Government was of the opinion that discrimination should not be tackled by the criminal justice system alone.
Discussion
BRUN-OTTO BRYDE, the Committee expert who served as country rapporteur to the report of the Netherlands, said that as a former colonial power, the Netherlands had become home to communities from the former colonies, especially Moluccans from Indonesia. He said he had noted that the Moluccans did not appear in most statistics; was that because they were too few or because they were so well integrated that they no longer were considered as a minority, he asked.
The Netherlands should be commended for adopting the charter of the Council of Europe for regional and minority languages and it could be hoped that the implementation of that charter would further guarantee the minority right of the Frisian-speaking community, Mr. Bryde said.
Mr. Bryde recalled that the Committee had expressed concern about the disadvantaged representation of minorities in the labour market. However, the current report had shown a positive trend, with considerable increase in employment among minorities. Especially commendable was the active effort to recruit members of the minorities for positions in the public service. Efforts to culturally diversify the police force were very welcome. There were, however, reports that minority members left the force in a more than proportional degree and that it might be due to an hostile internal police culture. The delegation was requested to comment on this.
The report offered little information about the situation regarding health care and social services, Mr. Bryde said. The Koppeling Act had radically abolished all social benefits for aliens without residence permits. It also applied to long-term residents whose presence had not been regularized but who had been tolerated for many years. They were entitled to health-care with the exception of acute danger to life.
Turning to the Netherlands Antilles, Mr. Bryde said that the report stated that the legacy of a racist colonial society had not been overcome completely but it did little to explain it further. In its previous conclusions, the Committee had expressed concern about the lack of attention given to Papiamento, a language used in schools. Papiamento was important only for some of the islands, while in others, the children of French- or Spanish-speaking parents with or without citizenship had to be accommodated. The report showed in principle an awareness to tackle that problem; but what kind of linguistic policy was pursued? Were there efforts to make one of the many languages the main language of instruction?
Like the Netherlands Antilles, Aruba's society was marked by migration processes which were always present but had been more massive during the last decade, especially changing the society towards a more Latin outlook.
Other Committee members also commented on the report, raising questions on such issues as the existence of racist organizations; discrimination in employment; facilities for travelling persons - the Roma; segregation in schools; educational facilities in Aruba and the Netherlands Antilles, immigration and asylum-seekers, compulsory identification act, requirement of DNA test for family reunification, among others.
An expert said that the Netherlands' immigration policy had already started in the 1980s; and the Schengen agreement was only its conclusion. The policy was part of the efforts to fortify Europe, thus making it inaccessible to non-Europeans.
* *** *
57th session
8 August 2000
Afternoon
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination this afternoon started reviewing a report submitted by the Government of the Netherlands on measures put in place to combat racial discrimination.
Introducing the report, Peter Potman, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, said that over the past few years, his Government had given increasing priority to the eradication of racial discrimination. It attached great value to the integration and the protection of ethnic minorities. The main ethnic minorities had been accorded priority on the policy agenda because of their disadvantaged position in Dutch society, he added.
Brun-Otto Bryde, the Committee expert who served as country rapporteur to the report of the Netherlands, said that as a former colonial power, the Netherlands had become home to communities from the former colonies, especially Moluccans from Indonesia. However, he noted that Moluccans did not appear in most statistics prepared by the Government of the Netherlands.
The following experts also participated in the discussion: Francois Lonseny Fall, Luis Valencia Rodriguez, Ion Diaconu, Deci Zou, Regis de Gouttes, Peter Nobel and Raghavan Vasudevan Pillai.
The Dutch delegation was also made up of Jolien Schukking, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Lucia Ling Ket On, Andy Clijnk, and Carina van Eck from the Ministry of Justice; Karin van Dooren and Eric Bruinsma, from the Ministry of Interior and Kingdom Relations; Claudia Staal, from the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment; Hans Stegeman, from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, and Barend C.A.F. van der Heijden, Charge d=affaires.
As one of the 156 States parties to the Convention, the Netherlands is obligated to present periodic summaries on its efforts to implement the provisions of the treaty.
When the Committee reconvenes at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 9 August, it will continue its consideration of the report of the Netherlands.
Report of the Netherlands
The fourteenth periodic report of the Netherlands (document CERD/C/362/Add.4) enumerates the measures taken by the Government since the last report was presented to the Committee. The current report gives details of the administrative and legislative steps adopted to prevent and to combat racial bias in the country. It also contains a number of reactions to the concluding observations of the Committee emanating from the consideration of the last periodic reports. The report covers the European part of the Netherlands, the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba.
The report says that the Netherlands pursues an affirmative action policy in respect of women, minority groups and the disabled, as provided for by legislation on equal treatment. However, the law does not oblige anyone to pursue such a policy.
Presentation of the Netherlands' Report
PETER POTMAN, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, said that over the past few years, his Government had given increasing priority to the eradication of racial discrimination. It attached great value to the integration and the protection of ethnic minorities. The main ethnic minorities had been accorded priority on the policy agenda because of their disadvantaged position in Dutch society. They include Surinamese, Antilleans, Arubans, Turks, Moroccans and a number of other ethnic groups and refugees.
With the view to offering those groups of minorities the protection provided for by the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, the Government had proposed to apply that convention not only to the Frisians, but also to ethnic minorities which had migrated to the country, Mr. Potman said. Being regarded as a national minority did not depend on having Dutch nationality.
Turning to Internet discrimination, Mr. Potman affirmed that discrimination on the Internet was a growing problem; the Discrimination Hotline Internet was established to weed out discriminatory statements on Dutch Internet sites. The activities of that independent body were subsidized by the Government. By sending a warning for the offending material to be removed, the Hotline aimed at reducing the number of discriminatory or racist statements on Dutch web sites.
Further, discrimination in criminal cases took a variety of forms, Mr. Potman said; not only could it be an offence in itself, but it often played a role in other "ordinary" offences. The police and the procurator general acted as quickly and effectively as possible to combat discrimination. Nineteen public prosecutors in various parts of the country had been assigned special responsibility for discrimination cases. The Government was of the opinion that discrimination should not be tackled by the criminal justice system alone.
Discussion
BRUN-OTTO BRYDE, the Committee expert who served as country rapporteur to the report of the Netherlands, said that as a former colonial power, the Netherlands had become home to communities from the former colonies, especially Moluccans from Indonesia. He said he had noted that the Moluccans did not appear in most statistics; was that because they were too few or because they were so well integrated that they no longer were considered as a minority, he asked.
The Netherlands should be commended for adopting the charter of the Council of Europe for regional and minority languages and it could be hoped that the implementation of that charter would further guarantee the minority right of the Frisian-speaking community, Mr. Bryde said.
Mr. Bryde recalled that the Committee had expressed concern about the disadvantaged representation of minorities in the labour market. However, the current report had shown a positive trend, with considerable increase in employment among minorities. Especially commendable was the active effort to recruit members of the minorities for positions in the public service. Efforts to culturally diversify the police force were very welcome. There were, however, reports that minority members left the force in a more than proportional degree and that it might be due to an hostile internal police culture. The delegation was requested to comment on this.
The report offered little information about the situation regarding health care and social services, Mr. Bryde said. The Koppeling Act had radically abolished all social benefits for aliens without residence permits. It also applied to long-term residents whose presence had not been regularized but who had been tolerated for many years. They were entitled to health-care with the exception of acute danger to life.
Turning to the Netherlands Antilles, Mr. Bryde said that the report stated that the legacy of a racist colonial society had not been overcome completely but it did little to explain it further. In its previous conclusions, the Committee had expressed concern about the lack of attention given to Papiamento, a language used in schools. Papiamento was important only for some of the islands, while in others, the children of French- or Spanish-speaking parents with or without citizenship had to be accommodated. The report showed in principle an awareness to tackle that problem; but what kind of linguistic policy was pursued? Were there efforts to make one of the many languages the main language of instruction?
Like the Netherlands Antilles, Aruba's society was marked by migration processes which were always present but had been more massive during the last decade, especially changing the society towards a more Latin outlook.
Other Committee members also commented on the report, raising questions on such issues as the existence of racist organizations; discrimination in employment; facilities for travelling persons - the Roma; segregation in schools; educational facilities in Aruba and the Netherlands Antilles, immigration and asylum-seekers, compulsory identification act, requirement of DNA test for family reunification, among others.
An expert said that the Netherlands' immigration policy had already started in the 1980s; and the Schengen agreement was only its conclusion. The policy was part of the efforts to fortify Europe, thus making it inaccessible to non-Europeans.
* *** *