Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Treaty bodies
Default title
23 March 2000
Share
23 March 2000
Morning
As Mongolia continued to answer specific questions on its compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights this morning, members of the Human Rights Committee once again underscored the brevity of responses and the lack of detailed examples provided by the delegation.
As the Committee met to conclude its consideration of Mongolia’s fourth periodic report, experts remarked that replies had again been of a very general nature, especially those pertaining to the advancement of women’s rights. The delegation was asked to be more detailed in their replies so that the Committee could make recommendations on the specific situation in Mongolia.
Experts also questioned the status of the action plan for the advancement of women. They wanted to know whether a conviction in the case of rape required proving the use of physical force. Further clarification was requested on Mongolia’s policy regarding trafficking in women.
Dash Ganbold, Minister for Justice of Mongolia, said his Government had adopted a special programme for the advancement of women. Unfortunately, the report distributed had not been translated correctly. For that reason, the Committee had been given a different impression of what was taking place.
He emphasized, however, that the women’s programme was being implemented. Some questions had arisen due to financial difficulties and as a result, some provisions of the programme had not been implemented completely. That was not an isolated situation, as it had happened to many other programmes before. The Government was still concerned with the problems encountered by women, particularly prostitution.
He said maternal mortality and unsafe abortions were acute problems that occupied the Government. Its agencies were involved with measures that addressed the education of women on a healthy way of life. Other measurers were being taken to address the prevention of unwanted pregnancy. Also, in the area of business activity, no discrimination was practiced against women.
The issue of the death penalty was again raised this morning with one expert stating that it was not clear whether Mongolia had considered abolishing it. She also asked if there were any concrete mechanisms to disseminate the Covenant and the Committee’s recommendations in both the educational and legal spheres?
Mr. Ganbold said he had already explained that the scope of the death penalty had been gradually reduced. While in 1994 it had applied to 18 categories of crimes, now only four crimes were subject to it. At this stage, Mongolia was trying to move to a point where that terrible punishment could be abolished completely.
He said the Government of Mongolia published the Covenant and other final documents of the Committee and disseminated them free of charge, through the media and separate programmes. In all the secondary schools in the country, subjects such as social sciences were taught. In the course content of those subjects, there was a separate category devoted to the rights and responsibilities of citizens. In the institutions of higher learning, there was also a separate course devoted to that as well.
In her closing remarks, Committee Chairwoman Cecilia Medina Quiroga (Chile) said that the Committee was aware of the difficult situation facing Mongolia, a country in transition. Of serious concern was the status of the Covenant, with respect to the Mongolian legal system. It had not been made clear what the relationship was between the Covenant and the Constitution.
The Committee will meet again 3 p.m. tomorrow to take up the second periodic report of Guyana on compliance with the Covenant.
Committee Work Programme
The Human Rights Committee met this morning to continue its consideration of Mongolia’s fourth periodic report on compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (document CCPR/C/103/Add.7). The Committee was expected to hear the delegation’s responses to questions posed yesterday, following the presentation of the country report. Under article 40 of the Covenant, all States parties agree to submit periodic reports on the implementation of the agreement. (For further background on Mongolia’s report, see Press Release HR/CT/555 issued on 22 March.)
Responses by Delegation
DASH GANBOLD, Minister for Justice of Mongolia, said that the questions raised yesterday had been grouped into three or four categories. The first area he wanted to address was the equality of rights for men and women and women’s rights within Mongolia. The equality of men and women was clearly provided for in the Mongolian Constitution. Men could take family leave and receive a special grant for childcare. The law had established different ages for retirement for men and women, as well as different types of work entitled for women. Those differences were not a sign of discrimination; rather they reflected the way the State took care of Mongolian women.
He acknowledged the critical remarks made yesterday concerning the lack of legal protection for women against violence, especially within the family. The Criminal Code contained special provisions dealing with violence against women. The Government was also concerned by the high maternal mortality rate and supported efforts by non-governmental organizations, which provided assistance for women and children. Women in Mongolia had a high level of education. Nearly 70 per cent of the country’s lawyers were women. In addition, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Director of the Department of Statistics were women.
Turning to the Constitutional Court, he said that the Court exercised supreme control over implementation of the Constitution and passed judgment on violations of its provisions. The Court considered about 10 cases a year, brought by citizens complaining about violations of their rights, and passed its judgment along to the Parliament (Great State Hural). Foreigners also had the right to address the Constitutional Court.
He said the Great State Hural established and changed the structure of or dissolved courts based on proposals by Mongolia’s General Council of Courts. Those proposals were also agreed upon by the Government. The new Constitution established the principle of sovereignty and independence of the law. No one, the President included, had the right to interfere with the implementation of any procedural activities by the judges -- legal authority belonged only to judges.
Judges of the Supreme Court were appointed by decisions of the Great State Hural, he said. The rest of the judges were appointed by the General Council of Courts or by the President. Judges could be dismissed only in cases where they violated the law or by their own personal request.
He said the presumption of innocence was provided for in the new Constitution and laws of the Court. All proceedings were also open. Claims and compensation for damages caused by illegal court actions were passed on to a superior court in accordance with the Law on Damages caused by illegal actions.
He said that within the court system, there were a number of measures to address violated human rights, their restitution, payment of fines according to law and treaty, and the loss of income due to impinged rights. Those responsible for the illegal actions could also be punished. In accordance with Mongolian law, such legal action should be implemented by the Economic bodies Organization and the citizens of Mongolia and implemented according to law.
He agreed with Committee members that the salaries of judges in Mongolia were low in comparison with other countries. A legal plan was being developed by the Government which should be implemented based on the legal reform of Mongolia. The post of the Ombudsman was still not functioning, but the Minister of Justice’s draft law had been presented to the Government.
Under national legislation, he said, measures for detention could be taken against a person for severe crimes and attempts to avoid his or her legal responsibilities. Such measures were taken upon the decision of the prosecutor and the person could be detained up to two months based on the prosecutor’s decision. If the person was found not guilty or the case was dismissed, the person should be released immediately. He admitted that there were sometimes cases in which police officers violated those procedures and violated the rights of detainees.
Temporary detention was a matter left up to the police, he said. He believed that the extended periods of detention needed to be reduced and reminded the Committee that the Government had already initiated legal reforms to regulate that problem and proceed with a complete reform of the legal system. According to Mongolian law, the maximum period of detention should not be more than 26 months.
Under the law, he continued, every person had the right to legal assistance. If that was not provided for, that could be a reason for dismissal of a case. That right covered everyone, including those who could not pay for such assistance. The State also financed legal investigations for those who could not pay.
He said that the activities of the temporary detention bodies should be controlled by the State. As far as violations of human rights by State security bodies were concerned, that was under the prosecutor’s control. It was not always the case that officials responded to claims of violations by citizens. The Government intended to establish a special administrative legal system to deal with that issue. If damages were incurred due to the illegal actions of State bodies and officials, a claim could be made to the supreme state administrative bodies. Those bodies should consider those claims and adopt decisions within 15 days from the date of receipt of the claim.
The Government was gradually narrowing the sphere of crimes punishable by the death penalty, he said. Turning to the issue of those persons discriminated against during the communist regime, he said that according to State law, the Parliament had established a rehabilitation committee to deal with that issue. That Committee could pass decisions on the granting of compensation of $1,000 to the families of victims of discrimination.
With regard to the rights of foreigners, he said that they had the same rights and responsibilities as Mongolian citizens, with the exception of participating in elections and serving as State officials. The Government believed that Mongolia was not yet ready at this point to join the 1951 Convention on Refugees.
Comments and Questions by Experts
An expert remarked that many members had mentioned yesterday that the replies given were of a very general nature. Today too, answers had been very general, especially concerning women’s rights. He requested the delegation to be more detailed in their replies so that the Committee could make recommendations on the specific situation in Mongolia.
Also, what was the status of the action plan for the advancement of women, he asked. Was it indeed true that in order to convict in the case of rape, the use of physical force had to be proved? What was Mongolia’s policy regarding trafficking in women?
An expert said the Committee had been told that the enforcement of court justice was in the hands of an executive department. He asked how a person got the executive department to act when a court decision was in his or her favour? Also, how many cases had that department taken up and how much success had there been in providing effective remedies to people who had been granted court justice?
Another expert asked about the security of tenure in Mongolia’s judiciary. Were the terms of Judges fixed, or were they for life? Addressing article 11 (prohibition of detention for non-performance of a contractual obligation), he asked whether there was any provision in Mongolian law, which prevented such detention.
Response to Questions
MR. GANBOLD, replying to a question raised this morning on the rights of women, said his Government, at some point, had adopted a special programme for the advancement of women. Unfortunately, the report distributed had not been translated correctly. As such, the Committee had been given a different impression of what was taking place. He emphasized, however, that the women’s programme was being implemented. Some questions had arisen due to financial difficulties and as a result, some provisions of the programme had not been completely implemented.
That was not an isolated situation, he continued, saying that it had happened to many other programmes adopted by the Government before. The Government, nevertheless, was concerned with the problems encountered by women, particularly prostitution, and specifically organized prostitution.
Responding to a question raised on the appointment of judges, he said the selection of judicial officials fell within the purview of the General Council of Courts -- a deliberative body comprised of the General Court, the Supreme Courts, representatives of the lower branches of the court, the Prosecutor General and the Minister of Justice. That deliberative body, based on secret ballot, submitted judicial candidates to the President, and he could either approve or reject them.
He said Judges were appointed for life. As he had said earlier, only in cases of gross violation of the law could they be dismissed from their positions. A judge could also go to another duty station, and then he could also be dismissed from his judicial position.
Addressing the implementation of judicial decisions, he said the Executive Department was a State body that functioned strictly in accordance with the law. It looked after the implementation of all legal decisions regardless of the level at which the decision was taken. Recently, there were many cases of violation of the law where officials had not taken care of the timely implementation of judicial decisions. The Government, however, still intended to further strengthen such structures.
He said that, according to present legislation, when the liable party was not capable of paying a contractual obligation, he or she was allowed to postpone the implementation of the Court decision. That was granted by the body responsible for the implementation of the Court decision. There was, however, no legal provisions with respect to article 11 of the Covenant.
Regarding personal secrecy, he said that the Constitution provided for a personal secret to be protected by a special law. When a person believed his secret had been published without his consent, he had recourse to the Courts for restoration of the violated rights. In such cases, the violator could be fined and had to publicly apologize. That person could also be found guilty of criminal action.
Addressing a question raised on freedom of thought, conscience and religion, he said that when the decision of the Constitutional Court on 12 January 1994 had declared that relations between State and Church were not in compliance with the New Constitution, the Government had prepared several draft amendments to the law.
Responding to a question on the rights of minorities, he said the Chinese and Uzbeks who lived in Mongolia were not a minority, and as foreigners, had the same rights and privileges as those provided to other foreigners. The Chinese even had their own schools and social clubs.
He said that State and prison officials had to undergo special programmes concerning human rights protection, which were established by specific laws. Special establishments, such as the police academy, had developed and conducted different roundtables on specific issues. Sometimes non-governmental organizations also participated in those seminars. In addition, all institutions of higher learning and secondary schools had their own programmes on human rights protection.
Concerning the dissemination of the country report and its consideration by the Committee, he said that that information was published and distributed throughout the country. From 1992 to 1999, the Government had issued the Covenant as a brochure and freely distributed among all State bodies.
Questions and Comments by Experts
An expert, while impressed with the rapid move towards democracy in Mongolia, said that he had not heard enough about privatization. Both democracy and privatization had raised problems regarding the equality of women and he wanted to hear more about that. Also, what problems had arisen out of privatization besides those affecting women?
On the subject of religion, he wanted to know how religious associations became legal in Mongolia. Also, were there any provisions in Mongolian law that might conflict with the right to freedom of religion and right to association?
Many of the issues discussed pertained to life in the city, but a large number of the population resided in rural areas, the expert noted. What was being done to give all Mongolian citizens knowledge of their rights and the ability to act on those rights, particularly for those living in rural areas? In addition, he asked about property rights for women, foreign nationals and citizens, in general, and how those rights compared with those articulated in the Covenant.
Another expert was also concerned about Mongolia’s transition to democracy and requested more information on that issue. Where did the process stand now and, in particular, what constitutional and legal guarantees did legal associations have? With regard to article 22 of the Covenant (right to association), the expert requested more detailed information on the existence of unions and the right of citizens to union membership.
It was also not clear whether Mongolia had considered abolishing the death penalty, she continued. And were there any concrete mechanisms to disseminate the Covenant and the Committee’s recommendations in both the educational and legal spheres?
Most of the answers given yesterday were not sufficient to enable the Committee to properly evaluate the country’s human rights situation, stated one expert. Today, the situation had been the same. He had hoped for more information on women and their role and rights. Mongolia’s clear compliance with article 17 (right to security of privacy and the home) of the Covenant could not be seen. More details on compliance with that article in the context of domestic legislation was needed.
He was satisfied with the decision of the Constitutional Court in delivering the ruling promoting freedom of religion. Was the bill, which included that ruling and would alter the law, still simply a bill or had it been approved? If it had not been approved, why was it taking almost six years to implement freedom of thought, conscience and religion?
The Committee had been told that the Chinese, Uzbeks and Uguirs were not national minorities but foreigners, he said. However, they were minorities, at least linguistically, if nothing else. He asked the delegation to provide more information on the Uzbeks and the Uguirs and their rights.
He also asked what the effect of educational programmes had been in improving the situation of human rights and their protection. Was there a programme to disseminate the Committee’s final observations?
Another expert asked what steps had been adopted to prevent women from undergoing unsafe abortions and whether any family planning services were provided. If such services were not provided, what was the Government planning to do about it?
He noted that there was a considerable amount of discrimination between men and women in the private sector regarding types of work and pay. Were there any measures being taken to eliminate that discrimination against women and any mechanism set up by the Government to monitor the situation? Also, were there any provisions for pre-appointment training for judges and for continuing education for judges at all levels?
Concerning the dominant position of Buddhism in Mongolia, an expert asked how the special respect accorded to Buddhism vis-à-vis other religions manifested itself. Also, how far could that respect be protected without impinging on the freedom of religion and freedom of conviction of those professing other religions or no religion at all?
Continuing, he asked what legal provisions governed religions -- their existence and their practice -- while the current bill was under consideration. So far, only Buddhism, Islam, Christianity and Shamanism were currently recognized by the State. What about Judaism? he asked. Were there no Jews in Mongolia? Could minority religious movements operate within a religious sphere in accordance with the freedom of religion or did they need special authorization? On the question of proselytizing, he asked to what extent the peaceful expression of other religions was permitted.
Another expert requested more information on those Mongolian citizens who were part of an ethnic minority. He could not believe that there were not people belonging to different cultural backgrounds, who lived within Mongolia and were its citizens. What was the extent of the protection given to the culture, language and education of those ethnic groups, other than the Kazakhs, who wished to maintain their own culture and identity?
About 40 per cent of the population lived in the countryside, which was an enormous area, he continued. They were nomadic people and were an important part of the society. In the cities, there were educational, medical and other facilities available, while in the countryside, due to the dispersed nature of population, those facilities were more difficult to obtain. What was being done to build up a network of educational and medical facilities for those living in the countryside? If the same facilities were not being made available to those living in the countryside, that would constitute discrimination.
Response to Questions
MR. GANBOLD said the ethnic Chinese in Mongolia comprised about 1,640 people who had kept their nationality. They were not considered foreigners, in the full sense of the word, since they had lived in Mongolia for several generations.
He said it was difficult to develop cultures and traditions in the remote regions of the country. He reminded the Committee that 80 per cent of the population was literate. The Government continued to develop the school system, especially secondary schools, even though it was a difficult task to accomplish.
Addressing the freedom of religion and relations between the State and the Church, he said the Constitution only delineated the roles of the State and the Church. The State, according to the 1993 law, registered those churches which themselves wanted to be registered in the Ministry of Justice. There were many churches of the Lamai Buddhist faith. That was the main religion in the country. That did not mean, however, that followers of other religions or beliefs were persecuted or punished.
Turning to the issue of jurisdiction, the education and preparation of members of the judiciary and their appointments, he assured the Committee that Judges in his country were not subject to any administrative bodies, and that even included the office of the Prosecutor, which was also independent and separate from Government structures. He reminded members of the Committee that the Mongolian judicial system corresponded to the Roman-German system of jurisprudence. Also, the lawyers in his country were prepared for their appointment as Judges. In that respect, it was mandatory to have a higher level of legal education. They were also subject to an age limitation, in that they could not be younger than 24.
He said maternal mortality and unsafe abortions were acute problems that occupied the central attention of the Government. Government agencies were involved with measures which addressed the education of women on a healthy way of life. Other measurers were being taken to address the prevention of unwanted pregnancy. Also, in the area of business activity, no discrimination was practiced against women, he added.
Turning to the point raised by experts on privatization of State property, he said, about 40 per cent of the gross national product (GNP) had already been passed on to the private sector through privatization schemes. The implementation of some large privatization projects in the banking sector and major industries, however, had been slowed down somewhat. According to the law, foreign citizens and companies had also been provided with opportunities to participate in privatization programmes through the issuance of shares or direct buyouts of stakes in State property.
Responding to a question on the party system, he said that since 1990, the country had witnessed the formation of democratic parties. Those parties had formed coalitions today. In fact, at this particular point, a coalition of those parties was leading the country. Mongolia now had 22 political parties which were registered in the Supreme Court. While there were no parties with fascist or nationalist tendencies, there were four representatives of such parties in the Great State Hural.
He said there was also a special law on the legal status of trade union bodies. Under the law, they had very extensive rights to maintain supervision over the implementation of the joint agreements between employers and the representative of employees.
Addressing the question posed on the abolition of the death penalty, he said he had already explained that the scope of that sentence had been gradually reduced. In 1994, it had applied to 18 categories of crimes. Now only four crimes were subject to that form of punishment. At this stage, Mongolia was trying to move to a point where that terrible punishment could be abolished completely.
He said the Government of Mongolia did publish the Covenant and other final documents of the Committee and disseminated them free of charge, through the media and separate programmes. In all the secondary schools in the country, subjects such as social sciences were taught. In the course content of those subjects, there was a separate category devoted to the rights and responsibilities of citizens. In the institutions of higher learning, there was also a separate course devoted to that as well. There were 17 higher learning institutions in the country, including those for legal education. They provided a more in-depth education on fundamental rights and the provisions of the Covenant.
He said Mongolia had recently established a special centre for the education of judges. Annually, every judge must pass a special programme that was specifically designed for them.
Returning to the issue of women, he said the draft labour law and the civil code sought to protect the rights and legal status of women in the private sector. Revisiting the issue of relations between the State and religions, he said the law stated that those religious trends which preached violence were the only ones that could not be registered according to existing procedures.
Questions and Comments by Experts
An expert noted that the replies by the delegation were either very general or scattered and thus prevented a grasp of the general picture of human rights in Mongolia.
He wanted to know what the current regulation for opening television stations was, how many were there, and whether there were any private stations existing or envisaged? He also wanted to know whether there were any foreign language newspapers available in Mongolia?
Referring to the family, and the civil law status of women, he requested clarification on the matrimonial property system in the new civil code. On the issue of divorce, he asked whether men and women had the same grounds to ask for divorce and how matrimonial property was divided in such instances? He also asked who had custodial rights to children in a divorce.
He also asked whether Mongolia had a bar association and a national bar examination. What were the qualifications for lawyers, judges and other legal officials? It was stated that Mongolian legislation did not contain provisions on detention for the inability to fulfil a contractual obligation. Did that mean civil debtors were not imprisoned under any circumstances?
He also said that he was confused by the answers relating to religion. While Covenant article 18 dealt with freedom of thought, conscience and religion, the Mongolian report only dealt with the freedom of religion under article 18. With regard to the law on registration of religions, what happened to those that were not registered? Were they prohibited from being practiced? What were the differences between those who had registered and those who had not? The delegation had not discussed freedom of conscience and the situation concerning those who did not practice a religion. What were the consequences of the fact that Buddhism was the dominant religion? For example, was it preferred that public officials and members of Parliament be Buddhists?
He said it was difficult for him to share the delegation’s optimism that everyone in Mongolia knew their rights. How did the Government reach those in the countryside, particularly nomadic groups? Were there any forms of mobile dispensaries to reach nomads?
Response to Questions
Mr. GANBOLD replied that, as rightly pointed out, Mongolia used the Roman German legal system. According to its laws, the bar association was not a State body, but rather a free association of people united by professional qualifications. After undergoing two years of practice with a lawyer, young legal graduates could participate in a process of selection for the bar association. After they were accepted by the bar association, the Ministry of Justice issued them special certificates enabling them to practice on their own.
The Government did not have State television or mass media, he said. After the adoption in 1999 of a law on the mass media, the Government could no longer finance television or radio stations from the State budget. Those stations that were active now had been converted into public organizations. The country had both public and private television stations, some of which participated with the assistance of foreign capital. There were also many registered newspapers and magazines, but only a few could be published on a regular basis due to financial and administrative difficulties.
Regarding matrimonial property, he said that recently a law on family had been adopted, which provided that spouses could, after concluding a matrimonial agreement, prepare an agreement with regard to their property. Both marriage and divorce were the free choice of both the man and the woman. When children were orphaned or people had no family, then local authorities could appoint a trustee for minor children or old people to help them manage their property. He added that children over the age of 10 could select their own nationality.
With regard to the State and religion, he said that churches were registered as associations. Everyone had the freedom of conscience and belief, which was not subject to any permission from, or registration with, the authorities. The registration of churches did not mean that they acquired a priority over other beliefs that had not registered themselves.
Closing Remarks by Committee Chairwoman
In her closing remarks, Committee Chairwoman CECILIA MEDINA QUIROGA (Chile) thanked Mongolia for having sent the Minister of Justice to report to the Committee, which was seen as a sign of the country’s commitment to its reporting obligations. The Committee was aware of the difficult situation facing a country in transition, such as Mongolia, as well as the serious effort on the delegation’s part to answer questions. Of serious concern was the status of the Covenant with respect to the Mongolian legal system. The relationship between the Covenant and the Constitution had not been made clear.
Another important issue was the population’s knowledge of their human rights, she continued. It was the State’s obligation to disseminate that information. The lack of cases before the Committee under the Optional Protocol led experts to conclude that there was a general lack of knowledge about human rights.
She added that the problem included not just the means of dissemination, but also the creation of a new culture to teach individuals that they had rights. That was particularly important in a country that had had rights for many years. It was not only a difficult and long-term task, but also a crucial one.
A problem stressed by many experts was that of discrimination between men and women, she noted. The situation of women had worsened and several unanswered questions remained regarding the de facto situation of women. The Committee had not learned about the causes of violence, discrimination against women in financial situations and personal freedom. There was also a lack of clarity in terms of who had the power to detain someone. Who controlled the police? What was the situation regarding the problem of impunity in relation to victims of the past regime? Also, what were the consequences of the fact that Buddhism was the dominant religion in the State?
She suggested that for its next report, Mongolia review the report of the current session and use it as a guide to what should be included. The United Nations, the Committee and the Office of the High Commissioner were always at the disposal of States in assisting in the technical preparation of reports.
Response by Government
Mr. GANBOLD said that said the delegation had indeed drawn many lessons from its dialogue with the Committee. Mongolia had its share of problems, especially since it had not completely formed its new democratic society. It lacked knowledge and practical experience, which could assist it in protecting all human rights for its citizens. However, it was determined to continue in the path towards a democratic civil society and was grateful for the Committee’s comments and recommendations, as well as the offer of technical assistance.
* *** *
Morning
As Mongolia continued to answer specific questions on its compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights this morning, members of the Human Rights Committee once again underscored the brevity of responses and the lack of detailed examples provided by the delegation.
As the Committee met to conclude its consideration of Mongolia’s fourth periodic report, experts remarked that replies had again been of a very general nature, especially those pertaining to the advancement of women’s rights. The delegation was asked to be more detailed in their replies so that the Committee could make recommendations on the specific situation in Mongolia.
Experts also questioned the status of the action plan for the advancement of women. They wanted to know whether a conviction in the case of rape required proving the use of physical force. Further clarification was requested on Mongolia’s policy regarding trafficking in women.
Dash Ganbold, Minister for Justice of Mongolia, said his Government had adopted a special programme for the advancement of women. Unfortunately, the report distributed had not been translated correctly. For that reason, the Committee had been given a different impression of what was taking place.
He emphasized, however, that the women’s programme was being implemented. Some questions had arisen due to financial difficulties and as a result, some provisions of the programme had not been implemented completely. That was not an isolated situation, as it had happened to many other programmes before. The Government was still concerned with the problems encountered by women, particularly prostitution.
He said maternal mortality and unsafe abortions were acute problems that occupied the Government. Its agencies were involved with measures that addressed the education of women on a healthy way of life. Other measurers were being taken to address the prevention of unwanted pregnancy. Also, in the area of business activity, no discrimination was practiced against women.
The issue of the death penalty was again raised this morning with one expert stating that it was not clear whether Mongolia had considered abolishing it. She also asked if there were any concrete mechanisms to disseminate the Covenant and the Committee’s recommendations in both the educational and legal spheres?
Mr. Ganbold said he had already explained that the scope of the death penalty had been gradually reduced. While in 1994 it had applied to 18 categories of crimes, now only four crimes were subject to it. At this stage, Mongolia was trying to move to a point where that terrible punishment could be abolished completely.
He said the Government of Mongolia published the Covenant and other final documents of the Committee and disseminated them free of charge, through the media and separate programmes. In all the secondary schools in the country, subjects such as social sciences were taught. In the course content of those subjects, there was a separate category devoted to the rights and responsibilities of citizens. In the institutions of higher learning, there was also a separate course devoted to that as well.
In her closing remarks, Committee Chairwoman Cecilia Medina Quiroga (Chile) said that the Committee was aware of the difficult situation facing Mongolia, a country in transition. Of serious concern was the status of the Covenant, with respect to the Mongolian legal system. It had not been made clear what the relationship was between the Covenant and the Constitution.
The Committee will meet again 3 p.m. tomorrow to take up the second periodic report of Guyana on compliance with the Covenant.
Committee Work Programme
The Human Rights Committee met this morning to continue its consideration of Mongolia’s fourth periodic report on compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (document CCPR/C/103/Add.7). The Committee was expected to hear the delegation’s responses to questions posed yesterday, following the presentation of the country report. Under article 40 of the Covenant, all States parties agree to submit periodic reports on the implementation of the agreement. (For further background on Mongolia’s report, see Press Release HR/CT/555 issued on 22 March.)
Responses by Delegation
DASH GANBOLD, Minister for Justice of Mongolia, said that the questions raised yesterday had been grouped into three or four categories. The first area he wanted to address was the equality of rights for men and women and women’s rights within Mongolia. The equality of men and women was clearly provided for in the Mongolian Constitution. Men could take family leave and receive a special grant for childcare. The law had established different ages for retirement for men and women, as well as different types of work entitled for women. Those differences were not a sign of discrimination; rather they reflected the way the State took care of Mongolian women.
He acknowledged the critical remarks made yesterday concerning the lack of legal protection for women against violence, especially within the family. The Criminal Code contained special provisions dealing with violence against women. The Government was also concerned by the high maternal mortality rate and supported efforts by non-governmental organizations, which provided assistance for women and children. Women in Mongolia had a high level of education. Nearly 70 per cent of the country’s lawyers were women. In addition, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Director of the Department of Statistics were women.
Turning to the Constitutional Court, he said that the Court exercised supreme control over implementation of the Constitution and passed judgment on violations of its provisions. The Court considered about 10 cases a year, brought by citizens complaining about violations of their rights, and passed its judgment along to the Parliament (Great State Hural). Foreigners also had the right to address the Constitutional Court.
He said the Great State Hural established and changed the structure of or dissolved courts based on proposals by Mongolia’s General Council of Courts. Those proposals were also agreed upon by the Government. The new Constitution established the principle of sovereignty and independence of the law. No one, the President included, had the right to interfere with the implementation of any procedural activities by the judges -- legal authority belonged only to judges.
Judges of the Supreme Court were appointed by decisions of the Great State Hural, he said. The rest of the judges were appointed by the General Council of Courts or by the President. Judges could be dismissed only in cases where they violated the law or by their own personal request.
He said the presumption of innocence was provided for in the new Constitution and laws of the Court. All proceedings were also open. Claims and compensation for damages caused by illegal court actions were passed on to a superior court in accordance with the Law on Damages caused by illegal actions.
He said that within the court system, there were a number of measures to address violated human rights, their restitution, payment of fines according to law and treaty, and the loss of income due to impinged rights. Those responsible for the illegal actions could also be punished. In accordance with Mongolian law, such legal action should be implemented by the Economic bodies Organization and the citizens of Mongolia and implemented according to law.
He agreed with Committee members that the salaries of judges in Mongolia were low in comparison with other countries. A legal plan was being developed by the Government which should be implemented based on the legal reform of Mongolia. The post of the Ombudsman was still not functioning, but the Minister of Justice’s draft law had been presented to the Government.
Under national legislation, he said, measures for detention could be taken against a person for severe crimes and attempts to avoid his or her legal responsibilities. Such measures were taken upon the decision of the prosecutor and the person could be detained up to two months based on the prosecutor’s decision. If the person was found not guilty or the case was dismissed, the person should be released immediately. He admitted that there were sometimes cases in which police officers violated those procedures and violated the rights of detainees.
Temporary detention was a matter left up to the police, he said. He believed that the extended periods of detention needed to be reduced and reminded the Committee that the Government had already initiated legal reforms to regulate that problem and proceed with a complete reform of the legal system. According to Mongolian law, the maximum period of detention should not be more than 26 months.
Under the law, he continued, every person had the right to legal assistance. If that was not provided for, that could be a reason for dismissal of a case. That right covered everyone, including those who could not pay for such assistance. The State also financed legal investigations for those who could not pay.
He said that the activities of the temporary detention bodies should be controlled by the State. As far as violations of human rights by State security bodies were concerned, that was under the prosecutor’s control. It was not always the case that officials responded to claims of violations by citizens. The Government intended to establish a special administrative legal system to deal with that issue. If damages were incurred due to the illegal actions of State bodies and officials, a claim could be made to the supreme state administrative bodies. Those bodies should consider those claims and adopt decisions within 15 days from the date of receipt of the claim.
The Government was gradually narrowing the sphere of crimes punishable by the death penalty, he said. Turning to the issue of those persons discriminated against during the communist regime, he said that according to State law, the Parliament had established a rehabilitation committee to deal with that issue. That Committee could pass decisions on the granting of compensation of $1,000 to the families of victims of discrimination.
With regard to the rights of foreigners, he said that they had the same rights and responsibilities as Mongolian citizens, with the exception of participating in elections and serving as State officials. The Government believed that Mongolia was not yet ready at this point to join the 1951 Convention on Refugees.
Comments and Questions by Experts
An expert remarked that many members had mentioned yesterday that the replies given were of a very general nature. Today too, answers had been very general, especially concerning women’s rights. He requested the delegation to be more detailed in their replies so that the Committee could make recommendations on the specific situation in Mongolia.
Also, what was the status of the action plan for the advancement of women, he asked. Was it indeed true that in order to convict in the case of rape, the use of physical force had to be proved? What was Mongolia’s policy regarding trafficking in women?
An expert said the Committee had been told that the enforcement of court justice was in the hands of an executive department. He asked how a person got the executive department to act when a court decision was in his or her favour? Also, how many cases had that department taken up and how much success had there been in providing effective remedies to people who had been granted court justice?
Another expert asked about the security of tenure in Mongolia’s judiciary. Were the terms of Judges fixed, or were they for life? Addressing article 11 (prohibition of detention for non-performance of a contractual obligation), he asked whether there was any provision in Mongolian law, which prevented such detention.
Response to Questions
MR. GANBOLD, replying to a question raised this morning on the rights of women, said his Government, at some point, had adopted a special programme for the advancement of women. Unfortunately, the report distributed had not been translated correctly. As such, the Committee had been given a different impression of what was taking place. He emphasized, however, that the women’s programme was being implemented. Some questions had arisen due to financial difficulties and as a result, some provisions of the programme had not been completely implemented.
That was not an isolated situation, he continued, saying that it had happened to many other programmes adopted by the Government before. The Government, nevertheless, was concerned with the problems encountered by women, particularly prostitution, and specifically organized prostitution.
Responding to a question raised on the appointment of judges, he said the selection of judicial officials fell within the purview of the General Council of Courts -- a deliberative body comprised of the General Court, the Supreme Courts, representatives of the lower branches of the court, the Prosecutor General and the Minister of Justice. That deliberative body, based on secret ballot, submitted judicial candidates to the President, and he could either approve or reject them.
He said Judges were appointed for life. As he had said earlier, only in cases of gross violation of the law could they be dismissed from their positions. A judge could also go to another duty station, and then he could also be dismissed from his judicial position.
Addressing the implementation of judicial decisions, he said the Executive Department was a State body that functioned strictly in accordance with the law. It looked after the implementation of all legal decisions regardless of the level at which the decision was taken. Recently, there were many cases of violation of the law where officials had not taken care of the timely implementation of judicial decisions. The Government, however, still intended to further strengthen such structures.
He said that, according to present legislation, when the liable party was not capable of paying a contractual obligation, he or she was allowed to postpone the implementation of the Court decision. That was granted by the body responsible for the implementation of the Court decision. There was, however, no legal provisions with respect to article 11 of the Covenant.
Regarding personal secrecy, he said that the Constitution provided for a personal secret to be protected by a special law. When a person believed his secret had been published without his consent, he had recourse to the Courts for restoration of the violated rights. In such cases, the violator could be fined and had to publicly apologize. That person could also be found guilty of criminal action.
Addressing a question raised on freedom of thought, conscience and religion, he said that when the decision of the Constitutional Court on 12 January 1994 had declared that relations between State and Church were not in compliance with the New Constitution, the Government had prepared several draft amendments to the law.
Responding to a question on the rights of minorities, he said the Chinese and Uzbeks who lived in Mongolia were not a minority, and as foreigners, had the same rights and privileges as those provided to other foreigners. The Chinese even had their own schools and social clubs.
He said that State and prison officials had to undergo special programmes concerning human rights protection, which were established by specific laws. Special establishments, such as the police academy, had developed and conducted different roundtables on specific issues. Sometimes non-governmental organizations also participated in those seminars. In addition, all institutions of higher learning and secondary schools had their own programmes on human rights protection.
Concerning the dissemination of the country report and its consideration by the Committee, he said that that information was published and distributed throughout the country. From 1992 to 1999, the Government had issued the Covenant as a brochure and freely distributed among all State bodies.
Questions and Comments by Experts
An expert, while impressed with the rapid move towards democracy in Mongolia, said that he had not heard enough about privatization. Both democracy and privatization had raised problems regarding the equality of women and he wanted to hear more about that. Also, what problems had arisen out of privatization besides those affecting women?
On the subject of religion, he wanted to know how religious associations became legal in Mongolia. Also, were there any provisions in Mongolian law that might conflict with the right to freedom of religion and right to association?
Many of the issues discussed pertained to life in the city, but a large number of the population resided in rural areas, the expert noted. What was being done to give all Mongolian citizens knowledge of their rights and the ability to act on those rights, particularly for those living in rural areas? In addition, he asked about property rights for women, foreign nationals and citizens, in general, and how those rights compared with those articulated in the Covenant.
Another expert was also concerned about Mongolia’s transition to democracy and requested more information on that issue. Where did the process stand now and, in particular, what constitutional and legal guarantees did legal associations have? With regard to article 22 of the Covenant (right to association), the expert requested more detailed information on the existence of unions and the right of citizens to union membership.
It was also not clear whether Mongolia had considered abolishing the death penalty, she continued. And were there any concrete mechanisms to disseminate the Covenant and the Committee’s recommendations in both the educational and legal spheres?
Most of the answers given yesterday were not sufficient to enable the Committee to properly evaluate the country’s human rights situation, stated one expert. Today, the situation had been the same. He had hoped for more information on women and their role and rights. Mongolia’s clear compliance with article 17 (right to security of privacy and the home) of the Covenant could not be seen. More details on compliance with that article in the context of domestic legislation was needed.
He was satisfied with the decision of the Constitutional Court in delivering the ruling promoting freedom of religion. Was the bill, which included that ruling and would alter the law, still simply a bill or had it been approved? If it had not been approved, why was it taking almost six years to implement freedom of thought, conscience and religion?
The Committee had been told that the Chinese, Uzbeks and Uguirs were not national minorities but foreigners, he said. However, they were minorities, at least linguistically, if nothing else. He asked the delegation to provide more information on the Uzbeks and the Uguirs and their rights.
He also asked what the effect of educational programmes had been in improving the situation of human rights and their protection. Was there a programme to disseminate the Committee’s final observations?
Another expert asked what steps had been adopted to prevent women from undergoing unsafe abortions and whether any family planning services were provided. If such services were not provided, what was the Government planning to do about it?
He noted that there was a considerable amount of discrimination between men and women in the private sector regarding types of work and pay. Were there any measures being taken to eliminate that discrimination against women and any mechanism set up by the Government to monitor the situation? Also, were there any provisions for pre-appointment training for judges and for continuing education for judges at all levels?
Concerning the dominant position of Buddhism in Mongolia, an expert asked how the special respect accorded to Buddhism vis-à-vis other religions manifested itself. Also, how far could that respect be protected without impinging on the freedom of religion and freedom of conviction of those professing other religions or no religion at all?
Continuing, he asked what legal provisions governed religions -- their existence and their practice -- while the current bill was under consideration. So far, only Buddhism, Islam, Christianity and Shamanism were currently recognized by the State. What about Judaism? he asked. Were there no Jews in Mongolia? Could minority religious movements operate within a religious sphere in accordance with the freedom of religion or did they need special authorization? On the question of proselytizing, he asked to what extent the peaceful expression of other religions was permitted.
Another expert requested more information on those Mongolian citizens who were part of an ethnic minority. He could not believe that there were not people belonging to different cultural backgrounds, who lived within Mongolia and were its citizens. What was the extent of the protection given to the culture, language and education of those ethnic groups, other than the Kazakhs, who wished to maintain their own culture and identity?
About 40 per cent of the population lived in the countryside, which was an enormous area, he continued. They were nomadic people and were an important part of the society. In the cities, there were educational, medical and other facilities available, while in the countryside, due to the dispersed nature of population, those facilities were more difficult to obtain. What was being done to build up a network of educational and medical facilities for those living in the countryside? If the same facilities were not being made available to those living in the countryside, that would constitute discrimination.
Response to Questions
MR. GANBOLD said the ethnic Chinese in Mongolia comprised about 1,640 people who had kept their nationality. They were not considered foreigners, in the full sense of the word, since they had lived in Mongolia for several generations.
He said it was difficult to develop cultures and traditions in the remote regions of the country. He reminded the Committee that 80 per cent of the population was literate. The Government continued to develop the school system, especially secondary schools, even though it was a difficult task to accomplish.
Addressing the freedom of religion and relations between the State and the Church, he said the Constitution only delineated the roles of the State and the Church. The State, according to the 1993 law, registered those churches which themselves wanted to be registered in the Ministry of Justice. There were many churches of the Lamai Buddhist faith. That was the main religion in the country. That did not mean, however, that followers of other religions or beliefs were persecuted or punished.
Turning to the issue of jurisdiction, the education and preparation of members of the judiciary and their appointments, he assured the Committee that Judges in his country were not subject to any administrative bodies, and that even included the office of the Prosecutor, which was also independent and separate from Government structures. He reminded members of the Committee that the Mongolian judicial system corresponded to the Roman-German system of jurisprudence. Also, the lawyers in his country were prepared for their appointment as Judges. In that respect, it was mandatory to have a higher level of legal education. They were also subject to an age limitation, in that they could not be younger than 24.
He said maternal mortality and unsafe abortions were acute problems that occupied the central attention of the Government. Government agencies were involved with measures which addressed the education of women on a healthy way of life. Other measurers were being taken to address the prevention of unwanted pregnancy. Also, in the area of business activity, no discrimination was practiced against women, he added.
Turning to the point raised by experts on privatization of State property, he said, about 40 per cent of the gross national product (GNP) had already been passed on to the private sector through privatization schemes. The implementation of some large privatization projects in the banking sector and major industries, however, had been slowed down somewhat. According to the law, foreign citizens and companies had also been provided with opportunities to participate in privatization programmes through the issuance of shares or direct buyouts of stakes in State property.
Responding to a question on the party system, he said that since 1990, the country had witnessed the formation of democratic parties. Those parties had formed coalitions today. In fact, at this particular point, a coalition of those parties was leading the country. Mongolia now had 22 political parties which were registered in the Supreme Court. While there were no parties with fascist or nationalist tendencies, there were four representatives of such parties in the Great State Hural.
He said there was also a special law on the legal status of trade union bodies. Under the law, they had very extensive rights to maintain supervision over the implementation of the joint agreements between employers and the representative of employees.
Addressing the question posed on the abolition of the death penalty, he said he had already explained that the scope of that sentence had been gradually reduced. In 1994, it had applied to 18 categories of crimes. Now only four crimes were subject to that form of punishment. At this stage, Mongolia was trying to move to a point where that terrible punishment could be abolished completely.
He said the Government of Mongolia did publish the Covenant and other final documents of the Committee and disseminated them free of charge, through the media and separate programmes. In all the secondary schools in the country, subjects such as social sciences were taught. In the course content of those subjects, there was a separate category devoted to the rights and responsibilities of citizens. In the institutions of higher learning, there was also a separate course devoted to that as well. There were 17 higher learning institutions in the country, including those for legal education. They provided a more in-depth education on fundamental rights and the provisions of the Covenant.
He said Mongolia had recently established a special centre for the education of judges. Annually, every judge must pass a special programme that was specifically designed for them.
Returning to the issue of women, he said the draft labour law and the civil code sought to protect the rights and legal status of women in the private sector. Revisiting the issue of relations between the State and religions, he said the law stated that those religious trends which preached violence were the only ones that could not be registered according to existing procedures.
Questions and Comments by Experts
An expert noted that the replies by the delegation were either very general or scattered and thus prevented a grasp of the general picture of human rights in Mongolia.
He wanted to know what the current regulation for opening television stations was, how many were there, and whether there were any private stations existing or envisaged? He also wanted to know whether there were any foreign language newspapers available in Mongolia?
Referring to the family, and the civil law status of women, he requested clarification on the matrimonial property system in the new civil code. On the issue of divorce, he asked whether men and women had the same grounds to ask for divorce and how matrimonial property was divided in such instances? He also asked who had custodial rights to children in a divorce.
He also asked whether Mongolia had a bar association and a national bar examination. What were the qualifications for lawyers, judges and other legal officials? It was stated that Mongolian legislation did not contain provisions on detention for the inability to fulfil a contractual obligation. Did that mean civil debtors were not imprisoned under any circumstances?
He also said that he was confused by the answers relating to religion. While Covenant article 18 dealt with freedom of thought, conscience and religion, the Mongolian report only dealt with the freedom of religion under article 18. With regard to the law on registration of religions, what happened to those that were not registered? Were they prohibited from being practiced? What were the differences between those who had registered and those who had not? The delegation had not discussed freedom of conscience and the situation concerning those who did not practice a religion. What were the consequences of the fact that Buddhism was the dominant religion? For example, was it preferred that public officials and members of Parliament be Buddhists?
He said it was difficult for him to share the delegation’s optimism that everyone in Mongolia knew their rights. How did the Government reach those in the countryside, particularly nomadic groups? Were there any forms of mobile dispensaries to reach nomads?
Response to Questions
Mr. GANBOLD replied that, as rightly pointed out, Mongolia used the Roman German legal system. According to its laws, the bar association was not a State body, but rather a free association of people united by professional qualifications. After undergoing two years of practice with a lawyer, young legal graduates could participate in a process of selection for the bar association. After they were accepted by the bar association, the Ministry of Justice issued them special certificates enabling them to practice on their own.
The Government did not have State television or mass media, he said. After the adoption in 1999 of a law on the mass media, the Government could no longer finance television or radio stations from the State budget. Those stations that were active now had been converted into public organizations. The country had both public and private television stations, some of which participated with the assistance of foreign capital. There were also many registered newspapers and magazines, but only a few could be published on a regular basis due to financial and administrative difficulties.
Regarding matrimonial property, he said that recently a law on family had been adopted, which provided that spouses could, after concluding a matrimonial agreement, prepare an agreement with regard to their property. Both marriage and divorce were the free choice of both the man and the woman. When children were orphaned or people had no family, then local authorities could appoint a trustee for minor children or old people to help them manage their property. He added that children over the age of 10 could select their own nationality.
With regard to the State and religion, he said that churches were registered as associations. Everyone had the freedom of conscience and belief, which was not subject to any permission from, or registration with, the authorities. The registration of churches did not mean that they acquired a priority over other beliefs that had not registered themselves.
Closing Remarks by Committee Chairwoman
In her closing remarks, Committee Chairwoman CECILIA MEDINA QUIROGA (Chile) thanked Mongolia for having sent the Minister of Justice to report to the Committee, which was seen as a sign of the country’s commitment to its reporting obligations. The Committee was aware of the difficult situation facing a country in transition, such as Mongolia, as well as the serious effort on the delegation’s part to answer questions. Of serious concern was the status of the Covenant with respect to the Mongolian legal system. The relationship between the Covenant and the Constitution had not been made clear.
Another important issue was the population’s knowledge of their human rights, she continued. It was the State’s obligation to disseminate that information. The lack of cases before the Committee under the Optional Protocol led experts to conclude that there was a general lack of knowledge about human rights.
She added that the problem included not just the means of dissemination, but also the creation of a new culture to teach individuals that they had rights. That was particularly important in a country that had had rights for many years. It was not only a difficult and long-term task, but also a crucial one.
A problem stressed by many experts was that of discrimination between men and women, she noted. The situation of women had worsened and several unanswered questions remained regarding the de facto situation of women. The Committee had not learned about the causes of violence, discrimination against women in financial situations and personal freedom. There was also a lack of clarity in terms of who had the power to detain someone. Who controlled the police? What was the situation regarding the problem of impunity in relation to victims of the past regime? Also, what were the consequences of the fact that Buddhism was the dominant religion in the State?
She suggested that for its next report, Mongolia review the report of the current session and use it as a guide to what should be included. The United Nations, the Committee and the Office of the High Commissioner were always at the disposal of States in assisting in the technical preparation of reports.
Response by Government
Mr. GANBOLD said that said the delegation had indeed drawn many lessons from its dialogue with the Committee. Mongolia had its share of problems, especially since it had not completely formed its new democratic society. It lacked knowledge and practical experience, which could assist it in protecting all human rights for its citizens. However, it was determined to continue in the path towards a democratic civil society and was grateful for the Committee’s comments and recommendations, as well as the offer of technical assistance.
* *** *