RACIAL DISCRIMINATION COMMITTEE DISCUSSES URGENT ACTION PROCEDURE AND ARTICLE 15 QUESTIONS

Committee on the Elimination
of Racial Discrimination

15 August 2008



The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination this morning discussed issues under its early warning and urgent action procedures, as well as the implementation of article 15 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination concerning Non-Self-Governing Territories.

Patrick Thornberry, Chairperson of the Committee's Working Group on Early Warning and Urgent Action Procedures, looked at complaints relating to Canada, Czech Republic, Italy, Panama, Brazil, India, Peru, Philippines, and Belize, which were just some of the cases considered by the Working Group, and made recommendations in each case. Following discussions among Experts, the Committee agreed to adopt the Working Group's recommendations to send letters to the State parties concerned requesting additional information on the cases raised.

Introducing the situation in the Non-Self-Governing Territories, addressed under Article 15 of the Convention, Committee Expert Dilip Lahiri recommended that the communication received by the Committee on 14 August 2008 from the "Indigenous Peoples and Nations Coalition" regarding the situation of Alaska and Hawaii be forwarded to the relevant United Nations body, as the General Assembly had issued a resolution removing Alaska and Hawaii from the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Committee Experts also expressed concern with regard to the Committee's mandate in this case, and the Committee adopted his recommendation.

When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it is scheduled to adopt its annual report to the General Assembly.


Presentation on Early Warning and Emergency Action Procedure

PATRICK THORNBERRY, Chairperson of the Committee's Working Group on Early Warning and Urgent Action Procedures, said that the working group had considered a number of unresolved situations, and discussed new situations, over a number of meetings. The first set of guidelines for this procedure appeared in the annual report of 1993, and the criteria for receivability of complaints had been revised in 2007. It was also the case that the Committee could act on receipt of information from non-governmental organisations and indigenous organization and act on its own volition. Some cases were activated by non-governmental organisations submissions, while others came directly from the working group. There was also a certain overlap of the recommendations made to the Committee in the review and follow-up procedure. The cases presented today did not represent the full list of cases discussed.

On Canada, with regard to the case of the Lubicon Lake Indian Nations, specifically with regard to the rights of indigenous peoples to their land, the Working Group, in the context of the accelerated follow-up, had requested further information in a letter sent to the Government of Canada, which also reminded Canada of the follow-up procedure. Concerning the Czech Republic, the Working Group had received new information on the threat of expulsion facing the Roma communities, and had expanded on its original request for further information from the Czech Republic. With regard to Italy, the in addition to submissions received, on their own volition the Working Group had recently raised concern regarding Italy's adopted security package, and the destruction of Roma camps, among other things. A letter was sent to Italy, which joined a statement made in July 2008 by various United Nations bodies on these cases. The Working Group had requested information by 30 October 2008.

On Panama, regarding a damn construction project that had been raised by the Special Rapporteur on indigenous issues in past visits and more recently, on 8 August 2008, the Working Group had reminded Panama that it was scheduled for review as it was overdue, and had sent a letter on the indigenous issues raised by the Special Rapporteur, Mr. Thornberry said. For Brazil, the issue of the Government's implementation in December 2005 of the removal of non-indigenous peoples had been raised, and the Working Group had reminded Brazil of the draft request sent by the Working Group in March 2008 requesting additional information on that case, and had requested additional information based on information received from non-governmental organization sources.

On India, Mr. Thornberry said concerns had been raised on discrimination and violence against the peoples in the north of India, as well as the issue of whether free prior and informed consent from the Imphal's people had been received on the Tipaimukh dam. The Working Group had concluded that it was not yet time to take up these situations under this procedure as of yet. In Peru, exploitation activities by private companies on the Quechua indigenous people had been raised. A letter had been sent to Peru highlighting to the Government the contradicting information received from various sources to that which had been provided by the Government (see press release of 6 August 2008, CERD/08/22/REV.1).

Concerning the Philippines, mining projects, and the implementation of the procedures to reach agreement on concessions had been focused on. The Working Group had been briefed by non-governmental organisations, and had met with the deputy permanent representative and a small delegation. In light of conflicting information received, the Working Group had decided to send a letter with regard to the Subonon area and the situation of the indigenous peoples requesting for further information. On Belize, allegations concerning activities that threatened the Maya peoples, specifically on the occupation and use of their land. Belize was scheduled for review this year partly due to that issue. This situation was not to be considered under the early warning and urgent action procedure. A letter had been sent to remind Belize to send information on a number of subjects.

FATIMATA-BINTA VICTOIRE DAH, Chairperson of the Committee, noted that the bureau had concluded that Peru would be considered under the early action and urgent action procedure if Peru's periodic report had not been received by the end of 2008.

DILIP LAHIRI, Committee Expert reporting under article 15 of the Convention, said that, under that article, the Committee was empowered to consider petitions and reports relating to Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories, and to submit to the General Assembly its expressions of opinion and recommendations in relation thereto. He noted that it was difficult for the Committee to fulfil its functions comprehensively under this article due to the fact that the copies of the reports received pursuant to article 15 contained only scant information directly relating to questions of racial discrimination, though some of the Territories had a significant ethnic diversity. He proposed therefore to reiterate in the annual report of the Committee to the General Assembly that greater efforts should be made to generate awareness about the provisions of the Convention in Non-Self-Governing Territories, and the need for States parties administering Non-Self-Governing Territories to include details on their efforts in this regard in their periodic reports to the Committee.

Mr. Lahiri noted that the Committee had received a communication dated 14 August 2008 from the Indigenous Peoples and Nations Coalition regarding the situation of Alaska and Hawaii in the light of Article 15 of the Convention. He recommended that the Committee decide that the matter did not fall within its purview in light of the United Nations General Assembly resolution removing Alaska and Hawaii from the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories.

Committee Experts noted concern with regard to its mandate in this situation, and whether the Committee was competent to receive such communications, which were intended to be forwarded on to the relevant United Nations bodies concerned. The Chairperson of the Committee said that in light of the fact that the communication was not received through official channels it was to be ignored. In conclusion, the Committee agreed that the communication would not be included into the annual report to the General Assembly.

The Committee decided accordingly to forward the communication to the appropriate United Nations body on the matter in this case the Special Committee with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples."

This afternoon the Committee will hold a public meeting to make present its concluding observations on the reports examined at this session before officially closing its seventy-third session.

_____________

For use of the information media; not an official record