Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases CHR subsidiary body
SUBCOMMISSION CONTINUES DEBATE ON RIGHTS OF MINORITIES
18 August 1998
Share
MORNING
HR/SC/98/20
18 August 1998
Experts Call for Unified Statement on Kosovo
The Subcommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities carried on this morning with its annual review of the rights of minorities, tangling as in previous years with such issues as how to grant such groups the "right to self-determination" while preserving the territorial integrity of existing States. It also heard charges of maltreatment of minorities in a number of regions and countries.
Among them were claims by alternate expert Vladimir Kartashkin that the Russian-speaking minority in Latvia was suffering unacceptable discrimination. The non-governmental organization (NGO) Association for World Education charged that blasphemy laws in Pakistan, which could result in death sentences, were being used to control and frighten minority Christians and Muslim reform groups; the International Prison Fellowship contended that the famine in southern Sudan was a direct result of persecution by the Islamic Government of minority groups; the Al-Khoei Foundation said anti-Islamic sentiment was increasing in Europe and the United States; the Asian Women's Human Rights Council charged that Korean schoolchildren were discriminated against in Japan; and the International Federation of Free Journalists alleged maltreatment of numerous minorities, including the Chechens, the Crimean Tartars, the Tibetans, the Tutsis, the Kashmiris, the Kurds, the East Timorese, and the Lithuanian minority in Russia. It charged that "the latest disastrous instance of genocide and scorched-earth policy" was taking place in Kosovo with the United Nations and the world community yet again standing and watching "in a stupor".
That echoed remarks at the start of the meeting by Subcommission expert Halima Embarek Warzazi, who spoke on a point of order and said the worsening situation in Kosovo required an official response by the panel. If the ethnic Albanians being routed there by the Serbs had not been Muslims -- if Muslims had caused the problem instead of being the victims -- the international community would have done something about it long ago, she said. Two other experts agreed with her remarks and it was decided to develop a joint statement, perhaps a Chairman's statement, on the matter.
Subcommission members José Bengoa, David Weissbrodt, Fan Guoxiang, Fisseha Yimer, and Ioan Maxim also spoke.
The following NGOs took the floor: Association for World Education; Prison Fellowship International; International Federation of Free Journalists; Pax Romana; Al-Khoei Foundation; International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism; Fraternités Notre Dame; International Association of Democratic Lawyers; European Union of Public Relations; Afro-Asian Peoples Solidarity Organization; International Educational Development; World Federation of Trade Unions; American Association of Jurists; International Institute for Peace; International Institute for Non-Aligned Studies; Transnational Radical Party; and Asian Women's Human Rights Council.
The Subcommission will reconvene at 3 p.m. to continue its discussion of minority rights.
Statements
HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Subcommission expert, said the panel must decide on a course of action related to the situation in Kosovo and the behaviour of the Serbs against the ethnic Albanians; if it were Muslims who had committed all these atrocities against others, something would have been done about it long ago; since Muslims were the victims, the international community had done very little. It was not acceptable. With the rapes and the deaths and the forced displacements and the refugees, the situation was rapidly becoming one of gross, massive and systematic violations of human rights.
JOSE BENGOA, Subcommission expert, supported Mrs. Warzazi’s statement and said it would be useful if there were a Chairman's statement on the situation. Mrs. Warzazi could prepare a draft and then this could be discussed. Even though Kosovo was being dealt with by the Commission on Human Rights, given the new information that was emerging, it was legitimate for the Subcommission to deal with the issue.
DAVID WEISSBRODT, Subcommission expert, said he fully supported the proposal made by Mrs. Warzazi and Mr. Bengoa.
VLADIMIR KARTASHKIN, Subcommission expert, said the Working Group on Minorities had initiated a policy of visiting States, upon State invitation, to discus, investigate and offer advice on problems involving minorities; the group also had offered a paper with commentary on the Declaration on the Rights of Minorities and had sent it to States for their reaction. The Latvian Commission on Human Rights had drawn attention to the deprivation of rights of the Russian-speaking minority of Latvia, including denial of citizenship, which also of course entailed loss of many civil and economic rights. Some non-official groups in Latvia held meetings to discuss how to drive the Russian-speaking minority out of the country; this was clearly unacceptable. The Working Group had decided to submit this information to the corresponding Governments and seek further information from them; the responses would help the Working Group with its tasks. The group also had emphasized the importance of bilateral treaties protecting minority rights; these had been very effective in some cases. He had visited Kazakhstan in March and held meetings with the country's Commission on Human Rights to discuss protecting the Russian minority in that country and the Kazakhstani minority living in the Russian Federation; a Kazakhstani delegation would visit Russia in September. Among theoretical issues that needed to be resolved involving minorities was the right to self-determination while protecting the territorial integrity of States.
FAN GUOXIANG, Subcommission expert, said it was a pleasure to see the mandate of the Working Group expanded as the question of minorities was a matter of major importance. A proper solution to the promotion of the rights of minorities contributed to the political and social stability of the state in which they lived and the region around them. The Working Group had made important achievements in several spheres: in the promotion of the rights of minorities, a balanced approach was adopted in the relations between the State, majorities and minorities; the members of the Working Group had extended all their efforts within the framework of their mandate; the active participation of Governments and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) had been impressive; a wide range of studies had been made. With regard to the report of the Working Group, the expert noted: that the members intended to prepare different papers; that much attention had been attached to further dissemination of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities; that there were suggestions that information about the issues involving minorities that had been brought to the attention of the Working Group would be transmitted to the Governments concerned; that the proper and effective settlement of existing issues related to minorities would be helpful to the political and social stability of the countries and regions concerned; and that it was a good idea to seek a more active role and more effective methods for the Working Group, especially with regard to voluntary cooperation between Governments and the Working Group.
FISSEHA YIMER, Subcommission expert, said it was good that the Working Group on Minorities had been established more or less permanently; it was an indication of the importance of the work carried out by the panel; the commentary on the Declaration on the Rights of Minorities also was a good idea -- it was helpful to have such standing guidelines, and to update them over time. The panel was to serve the function of bringing to the attention of Governments reports of problems on their territories, which he saw as a useful task; the feasibility study proposed on establishment of a data base on minorities was worth carrying out; he hoped the feasibility study would be "feasible". He also agreed with the plans to sharpen the focus on theoretical issues; the Working Group was not a court of law -- it should think carefully about the thematic issues that were pertinent to the topic.
IOAN MAXIM, Subcommission expert, said that the large number of countries and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that had participated in the Working Group was very satisfactory, and the members of the Working Group under the Chairmanship of Asbjorn Eide had demonstrated great competence. The magnitude of the debate on minorities was the best proof that the international community was acting on the subject of minorities and important progress had been made; great responsibility lay with the Subcommission and its Working Group which were well placed to make a substantial contribution to the issue. The Subcommission was even more important given the divergent views on the subject. Referring to conflicts relating to minorities, Subcommission expert José Bengoa had rightly underlined the need to understand the background to these conflicts. The working method chosen by the Chairman of the Working Group was very useful, and would facilitate understanding of the Declaration. It was necessary to make a distinction between integration and assimilation, and it was very important to actively involve persons belonging to minorities in all aspects of society in order to promote development in the society concerned. It was not enough to authorise minorities to exercise their rights, they also needed to be able to enjoy those rights; minorities needed to participate in political life in order to preserve their identity, and it was only through such participation that persons belonging to minorities would feel that they were equal citizens. The conclusions of the Working Group deserved full support.
RENE WADLOW, of the Association for World Education, said the 2 per cent Christian minority in Pakistan deserved the attention of the Subcommission; a prominent human-rights defender, Rev. Dr. John Joseph, Bishop of Faisalbad and Chairman of the National Commission for Justice and Peace and of the National Human Rights Office, had shot himself in protest against the death sentence pronounced upon Ayub Masil on 27 April 1998 on the charge of having blasphemed against Islam. He was also protesting against the continued application of Pakistan's blasphemy laws that had affected more than a dozen Christians since 1986. The previous 1985 Subcommission action concerning blasphemy legislation was appended to this statement. The fear of the consequences of blasphemy was deeply rooted in the collective unconscious; State intervention into the debate was destructive of human rights; in Pakistan, the Government had played an increasing role in attempting to define the contours of the religious debate with provisions both in the Constitution and the penal code; regressive measures were first applied to the Ahamadiyya, a reform movement that was declared to be a "non-Muslim" minority group; in 1984, it had been made a criminal offense for Ahmadis to call themselves Muslims. Since then, Pakistani blasphemy legislation had not been repealed but strengthened; the Subcommission must draw Pakistan's attention to this use of religious legislation as a weapon to control minorities and keep them in a state of fear.
ELISABETH BARTHER, of Prison Fellowship International on behalf of Christian Solidarity Worldwide, said that they were concerned about the situation of minorities in Sudan. In its coverage of the situation in southern Sudan, particularly northern Bahr-El-Ghazal, the media had failed to sufficiently emphasise the roots of this incalculable suffering. The famine in this part of Sudan had been deliberately engineered by the National Islamic Front (NIF) in pursuit of a policy of ethnic cleansing of the Dinka people. The evidence gathered from many of those taken into captivity showed consistent patterns of physical abuse and attempts to force captives to adopt Arab names and Islamic practices. While the increase in food drops to Sudan had helped to alleviate some of the suffering of the Sudanese people, it was imperative that the international community respond to the desperate situation in Sudan. The United Nations, in particular the Security Council, was urged to prevail upon the Government of Sudan to permanently cease hostilities against the people of the south, the Nuba Mountains, and the Blue Nile and Beja territories; to ensure that the Government honour international human rights and humanitarian standards; to impose sanctions of increasing severity; to press for all areas of Sudan to be open to access for human rights monitors and humanitarian agencies; and to establish a slave tracing programme.
ALGIS TOMAS GENIUSAS, of the International Federation of Free Journalists, said numerous national minorities, such as the Chechens, the Crimean Tartars, the Tibetans, the Tutsis, the Kashmiris, the Kurds, and the East Timorese suffered from deprivation of their fundamental rights. The latest disastrous instance of genocide and scorched-earth policy was taking place in Kosovo with the United Nations and the world community yet again standing and watching in a stupor. In fact there were countless ill-used national minorities and indigenous peoples who were not receiving the world's attention; those in the north Caucasus, for example, continued to be victims of Russian State-sponsored discrimination; the brutal war in Chechenia had caused hostility towards Chechen nationals and by extension towards other people from the North Caucasus, leading to arbitrary detention, beatings, harassment, and systematic job and housing discrimination. There also was discrimination against "northern minorities" in Russia, and against Uralic minority cultures; and against the Lithuanian minority living in the Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation. Discrimination also was being carried out against minorities in Belarus. Contrary to disinformation from the Russian Federation, Latvia and Estonia were not basing citizenship on ethnicity -- the situation was more complicated than Russia had indicated.
GARCIA PICOLA JOSEP, of Pax Romana, expressed total support for the Working Group on Minorities, especially with respect to its role of examining possible mechanisms to promote mutual understanding between minorities and Governments. The minorities on the African continent needed to be the major focus of attention in the near future, and the case of the Bubi minority in Equatorial Guinea could be reported during the next session of the Working Group. Even since the last meeting of the Human Rights Commission, the situation of the ethnic Bubi minority on the island of Bioko had visibly worsened. The Bubi people as a group had been systematically excluded from the processes of political participation due to certain laws that prohibited political association on an ethnic basis and the promotion of self determination. The Movement of the Self-Determination of the Island of Bioko continued illegally and though it had never advocated the use of violence, its members continued to be persecuted. Following disturbances on 21 January 1998, 116 people allegedly responsible had been tried without due guarantees to a defence, and 15 people had been condemned to death. A military tribunal had carried out the sentences, and the defence lawyers had not been able to appeal. President Obiang Nguema had not made any statement on the possibility of clemency, and the next session of the Human Rights Commission should condemn the regime of General Nguema.
YOUSIF AL-KHOEI, of the Al-Khoei Foundation, said that when it came to the Muslim world, any discussion over ethnic or religious minorities tended to be controversial and sometimes problematic; there was growing xenophobia towards Muslims; frequently there were prejudiced and antagonistic comments, mostly subtle but sometimes blatant and crude, a kind of "Islamophobia". The reaction in newspapers to the bombing in Oklahoma was an example -- before any evidence was obtained the newspapers decided the bombing was the work of Muslims; later the facts indicated otherwise; there had been attacks on Muslims and the loss of an unborn Iraqi Muslim refugee in the United States after some angry youths attacked a house. It was not fair; every time an IRA fanatic set off a bomb in Northern Ireland there was not a foray of public criticisms of the Catholic Church. In Europe, Islamophobia was on the rise; its consequences were injustice, limitations on personal freedom, poverty, deprivation, and lost opportunity; if European countries had laws against racial discrimination and anti-Semitism, why not against anti-Islamic behaviour? The Al-Khoei Foundation would continue to take part in conferences and carry out initiatives aimed at combatting racism and religious discrimination, including Islamophobia.
ATSUKO TANAKA, of International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism, said that the Working Group was making substantive progress in the examination of the ways and means to promote and protect the rights of minorities. The treatment of the minority of the Roma and Sinti in many countries of Europe was deeply concerning. Concern had been expressed at the persistence of racial hatred and acts of violence towards persons belonging to minority groups, especially Roma in the Czech Republic, and it was also concerning that the Government of the Czech Republic excluded the Roma minority from international protective agreements. The situation of the Roma minority in Slovakia and Bulgaria, and of the Roma and Sinti in France, Spain, Italy and German was also cause for concern. A second issue that was troubling was that groups of people, often minority groups and indigenous peoples, were forcibly transferred as part of economic, political, ideological or military schemes. When this happened, they often lost their culture, identity and traditional livelihood. While these issues had been studied by the Subcommission, they deserved further examination. Reference was made to the Horno community in Brandenburg, Germany, part of the Sorbs minority who were facing displacement, and it was questionable whether the projected forced removal of this community was compatible with the International Covenant on Human Rights and other international documents.
SOEUR MARIE SABRINE, of Fraternité Notre Dame, said all human beings had the same rights, whether they belonged to majorities or minorities; in many countries poor and underprivileged people were considered as minorities; they could not blend in with the majority and so were treated with contempt and discrimination. Fraternité Notre Dame ran schools, hospitals, and residences for the poor and homeless and discriminated against no one. In developed countries the association saw more and more unemployed poor; elsewhere in the world the poor literally starved; their cries often weren't heard by the hard-hearted majority, which preferred to remain blind to such suffering. Poverty hurt and even destroyed people, but it was not an incurable disease; the Fraternité's volunteers battled against it every day, despite a shortage of resources; food was distributed; it was found and paid for somehow; the extent of Fraternité's accomplishments indicated that if the world really cared it could resolve the poverty problem entirely, given the resources it had available. The poverty of minorities should not exist and could be overcome, but instead majorities did not care and did not act; it was time for that to change.
LIN TONG CHUN, of International Association of Democratic Lawyers and the Association of Foreign Schools in Hyogo Prefecture in Japan, provided information about education issues in foreign schools in Japan. The 19 full time foreign schools in Hyogo Prefecture had about 4,000 pupils from about 50 countries. The Japanese Ministry of Education categorised the schools in the lowest possible status, and as a result, the schools had limited public assistance and subsidies as compared to other schools and students had limited access to institutions of higher education. The Japanese Government did not recognise the schools as regular schools unless they conducted classes in Japanese following the curriculum established by the Education Ministry. The Government of Japan required foreign schools to conduct classes with Japanese textbooks in Japanese and teachers working for foreign schools to obtain a teacher's certificate of the Japanese Government. The Japanese Government had ignored the recommendations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child. It was clear that the treatment of foreign schools by the Japanese Government violated the International Convention on Human Rights and the Convention of the Rights of the Child, and therefore an investigation by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights was requested.
LUDOVICA VERZEGNASSI, of European Union of Public Relations, said the world had been shocked by the suicide of Bishop John Joseph to protest arrests of Christians under the controversial blasphemy law of Pakistan, a law whose repeal had been the subject of appeals from the world and from the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan; in every country there existed lunatic fringe elements who preyed on minorities -- the Ku Klux Klan, the neo-Nazis, fundamentalists of all hews; but in most countries there also was a sustained effort to protect minorities. The real problem lay in countries where constitutions, laws, and institutional structures were designed to isolate and discriminate against minorities and to protect those who attacked them; Pakistan was such a country; no person from a minority community could aspire to highest office; the Constitution in other ways had been framed so that minorities were second-class citizens; laws had been promulgated to discriminate against minority communities; Christians had lived in fear since the blasphemy law had been passed, which carried a penalty of death. There also were attacks against Ahmediyas and Hindus; fundamentalist mobs were a constant danger; Pakistan also sanctioned the existence of extremist groups with violent aims and activities, such as cadres now operating in Jammu and Kashmir.
A.M. ALI, of the Afro-Asian Peoples Solidarity Organisation, said south Asia was home to almost all the major religions of the world, and all countries had ethnic, linguistic and religious minorities. In order to protect the rights of minorities, most countries had adopted democracy as the best guarantor of freedom. Pakistan had entrenched its discriminatory practices particularly based on religion. One dangerous offshoot of the system instituted by the rulers of Pakistan was the mushrooming of extremist groups which sought to use religion, backed by weapons to terrorise minorities. The most virulent manifestation of the theology of hatred and discrimination that was coming out of Pakistan was the continuous massacre of the minority Kashmiri Pandit community by mercenaries who derived their sustenance from the system of discrimination that Pakistan had put in place to govern its own people. The threat from religious terrorism was the most potent threat facing minorities today, but fanaticism often ate its own master. The people of Pakistan should beware, and call on their leaders to introduce true democracy. Discrimination and oppression of minorities in the region would end when minorities in Pakistan could honestly proclaim that they were safe, and when Pakistan became a democracy in fact and not name alone
KAREN PARKER, of International Educational Development, said it was important to guard against labelling as "minorities" groups that had a true right to independence and self-determination. It was a difficult and complex issue, and there was a decided difference of opinion regarding the status of groups or ethnic nationalities who found themselves under the control of another ethnic group after decolonization. Historical research was needed to clarify matters, and in the case of certain nationalities under the political domination of Indonesia and Burma it was apparent that the groups should be allowed independence. In the case of Burma, the 1947 Constitution gave the ethnic Karen, Shan, Kachin, Karenni, Mon, and other peoples the right to withdraw from the "union" within 10 years, but before that time was reached certain powers took over the Government and annulled that Constitutional provision; to deny these peoples their independence now was to approve that annulment and to accept as legitimate the current, brutal regime. In Indonesia, the Netherlands had given certain peoples the option to "opt out" of what was first called the United States of Indonesia; but the Javanese majority then had brutally invaded and repressed the Moluku and Acheh peoples; now that a large Governmental change as under way in Indonesia it was time to allow these peoples their own political independence.
ALI KHAN, of the World Federation of Trade Unions, said that oppression was almost always born of disdain for those who were different. The concept of paying obescinece reminiscent of tribal and colonial times was today manifested in the practice of demanding that minorities assimilate and forget their distinctive culture. Fifty years in India and Pakistan had demonstrated how two countries and societies that became independent at the same time could evolve so differently. India had sought to put in place a Constitution and a legal and institutional structure that guaranteed equality for all. The new President of Pakistan had declared that he intended to consolidate the Islamisation of Pakistan, and ethnic minorities had protested the findings of the last census as it was seen as an attempt to downplay their numbers. Religious extremism in Pakistan had been given a fillip during the Afghan war, and the religious seminaries that had flourished then were now turning out warriors who preyed on people of other religions and sects within Pakistan. Women had been regulated to second class status, and Pakistan's constitutional and legislative structure decreed that those who did not belong to the majority were to be treated as inferior. Pakistan was guilty of using religion to deny minorities their rights. Democracy alone, free of the shackles of religion and other constrains, could guarantee minority rights.
MERCEDES MOYA, of the American Association of Jurists, said the ignominy of forgetfulness and greed about the impact of slave-dealing and holding should be made known; the Subcommission should make sure that never again should such a crime be committed anywhere in the world; Afro-Americans wished to draw attention to their past and their present; after 350 years, and after past atrocities beyond description, they still suffered extensive discrimination. They now numbered some 200 million scattered around the geographical continent; they had been depersonalized and had lost ethnic cultural identity; they had had to "white out" in order to get on in society; and even so they were never equal. Their economic and social situation was dire; wide-ranging paramilitarism was growing and they often were the victims; Africans and their descendants had been robbed of life, dreams, and soul by slavery and they were still recovering. Even at some universities one saw painted slogans -- "Be a patriot, kill a black". The various countries of the Americas were in a state of denial about their treatment of Afro-Americans. It was time for the Subcommission to do something after all these years -- to set up a study and a working group to look into the consequences of the original enslavement of Africans and the resulting 500 years of cruelty and discrimination.
TATIANA SHAUMIAN, of International Institute for Peace, said NGOs provided valuable information on promoting and protecting the rights of minorities. Since the adoption of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the world community had come a long way; however the rights of minorities were not protected everywhere to the extent required by the Universal Declaration. There were corners of the world where the population had no idea about human rights and therefore a pocket edition of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights should be prepared, as had been proposed. Analysis of the practical participation of minorities in the process of elections demonstrated that sometimes the majority made attempts to manipulate minorities, and therefore Subcommission expert Soli Sorabjee was correct when he said that the State had a duty to take positive measures to guarantee effective political participation of minorities. An essential political problem that needed to be faced now was how to reconcile two opposite demands: the right to ethnic sovereignty and the insistence on territorial integrity. Subcommission expert Gay McDougall's report on Contemporary Forms of Slavery correctly concluded that individual perpetrators of slavery, crimes against humanity and genocide had to be held responsible for their crimes at national or international level.
REENA MARWAH, of International Institute of Non-Aligned Studies, said conflicts involving minorities raised the question of self-determination repeatedly; however, that did not necessarily imply there would be as many independent States as there were ethnic groups; partitioning a country on ethnic lines, however, had generally proved inadequate because regions of a country were themselves often heterogeneous; the problem was further complicated by the fluid quality of ethnic identities -- when Pakistan was founded, for example, the Muslim religion formed the basis of ethnic solidarity that united Muslims in the eastern region with those in the western section; but later the eastern region demanded and secured a separate state of Bangladesh on grounds of language. Now Pakistan faced secessionist demands from the Pathans, the Sindhis, and the Baluchs; in the former Soviet Union, conflicts had developed along similar lines in Georgia, Moldavia, Azerbaijan, Estonia, and Latvia, along with other conflicts within Russia. The only way to deal with such difficulties was through tolerance and pluralism; what was required was an appreciation by States of the importance of reconciliation and avoidance of polemics; political and legal protections were necessary along with adoption and implementation of international standards; solutions should take into account political and economic factors as well as culture and psychology.
OLGA CECHUROVA, of Transnational Radical Party, said that in States in transition, the rights of minorities were seen as limited while the dominant community enjoyed the standard rights. Albanians in the former Yugoslavia had been living in their compact territories where they were in absolute majority, and though they were the third nation in numbers after the Serbs and Croats, politically they were treated as a minority. After the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia, Albanians were split into several new administrations, including the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM). Albanians in FYROM represented 23 per cent of the population according to the Government though other sources said they made up one-third of the population. The official language of FYROM was Cyrillic, the religion Orthodox and Albanians were obliged to communicate with the Government in the Slavic Macedonian language. There were also clear discriminatory practices regarding education, and in FYROM all institutions were presented as Macedonian which led to legitimized segregation of a group that was characterised as a minority. FYROM was an example of the legal segregation of one nation on the basis of the status of national minority. The roots of discrimination and segregation needed to be found to put an immediate end to this situation which destabilised FYROM and the entire region: this solution was that of consensual democracy or federalisation.
HAM MYONG SOK, of Asian Women's Human Rights Council, said there were severe violations of the human rights of the Korean minorities in Japan; Korean schools had been treated unequally, given less respect than Japanese schools; the Government had stated that it "does not see any positive reason that our society give legal status to Korean schools"; Korean children had unequal access to institutions of higher education and difficulty in general in exercising their right to participate in all parts of society. The Japanese Government, despite criticism from a number of sources, had taken no appropriate measures to deal with these problems; Koreans paid the same taxes as Japanese but Korean schools were not subsidized by the Government as Japanese schools were; the graduates suffered from disadvantages when job recruiting occurred or when they took entrance exams for State-run universities; meanwhile about 80,000 Korean children had to attend Japanese schools using Japanese names and being deprived of the chance to learn their own language and culture. Korean school girls had had their national costume slashed or ripped in public. The Subcommission must recommend that the Japanese Government abandon its discriminatory approach to Korean children.
HR/SC/98/20
18 August 1998
Experts Call for Unified Statement on Kosovo
The Subcommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities carried on this morning with its annual review of the rights of minorities, tangling as in previous years with such issues as how to grant such groups the "right to self-determination" while preserving the territorial integrity of existing States. It also heard charges of maltreatment of minorities in a number of regions and countries.
Among them were claims by alternate expert Vladimir Kartashkin that the Russian-speaking minority in Latvia was suffering unacceptable discrimination. The non-governmental organization (NGO) Association for World Education charged that blasphemy laws in Pakistan, which could result in death sentences, were being used to control and frighten minority Christians and Muslim reform groups; the International Prison Fellowship contended that the famine in southern Sudan was a direct result of persecution by the Islamic Government of minority groups; the Al-Khoei Foundation said anti-Islamic sentiment was increasing in Europe and the United States; the Asian Women's Human Rights Council charged that Korean schoolchildren were discriminated against in Japan; and the International Federation of Free Journalists alleged maltreatment of numerous minorities, including the Chechens, the Crimean Tartars, the Tibetans, the Tutsis, the Kashmiris, the Kurds, the East Timorese, and the Lithuanian minority in Russia. It charged that "the latest disastrous instance of genocide and scorched-earth policy" was taking place in Kosovo with the United Nations and the world community yet again standing and watching "in a stupor".
That echoed remarks at the start of the meeting by Subcommission expert Halima Embarek Warzazi, who spoke on a point of order and said the worsening situation in Kosovo required an official response by the panel. If the ethnic Albanians being routed there by the Serbs had not been Muslims -- if Muslims had caused the problem instead of being the victims -- the international community would have done something about it long ago, she said. Two other experts agreed with her remarks and it was decided to develop a joint statement, perhaps a Chairman's statement, on the matter.
Subcommission members José Bengoa, David Weissbrodt, Fan Guoxiang, Fisseha Yimer, and Ioan Maxim also spoke.
The following NGOs took the floor: Association for World Education; Prison Fellowship International; International Federation of Free Journalists; Pax Romana; Al-Khoei Foundation; International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism; Fraternités Notre Dame; International Association of Democratic Lawyers; European Union of Public Relations; Afro-Asian Peoples Solidarity Organization; International Educational Development; World Federation of Trade Unions; American Association of Jurists; International Institute for Peace; International Institute for Non-Aligned Studies; Transnational Radical Party; and Asian Women's Human Rights Council.
The Subcommission will reconvene at 3 p.m. to continue its discussion of minority rights.
Statements
HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Subcommission expert, said the panel must decide on a course of action related to the situation in Kosovo and the behaviour of the Serbs against the ethnic Albanians; if it were Muslims who had committed all these atrocities against others, something would have been done about it long ago; since Muslims were the victims, the international community had done very little. It was not acceptable. With the rapes and the deaths and the forced displacements and the refugees, the situation was rapidly becoming one of gross, massive and systematic violations of human rights.
JOSE BENGOA, Subcommission expert, supported Mrs. Warzazi’s statement and said it would be useful if there were a Chairman's statement on the situation. Mrs. Warzazi could prepare a draft and then this could be discussed. Even though Kosovo was being dealt with by the Commission on Human Rights, given the new information that was emerging, it was legitimate for the Subcommission to deal with the issue.
DAVID WEISSBRODT, Subcommission expert, said he fully supported the proposal made by Mrs. Warzazi and Mr. Bengoa.
VLADIMIR KARTASHKIN, Subcommission expert, said the Working Group on Minorities had initiated a policy of visiting States, upon State invitation, to discus, investigate and offer advice on problems involving minorities; the group also had offered a paper with commentary on the Declaration on the Rights of Minorities and had sent it to States for their reaction. The Latvian Commission on Human Rights had drawn attention to the deprivation of rights of the Russian-speaking minority of Latvia, including denial of citizenship, which also of course entailed loss of many civil and economic rights. Some non-official groups in Latvia held meetings to discuss how to drive the Russian-speaking minority out of the country; this was clearly unacceptable. The Working Group had decided to submit this information to the corresponding Governments and seek further information from them; the responses would help the Working Group with its tasks. The group also had emphasized the importance of bilateral treaties protecting minority rights; these had been very effective in some cases. He had visited Kazakhstan in March and held meetings with the country's Commission on Human Rights to discuss protecting the Russian minority in that country and the Kazakhstani minority living in the Russian Federation; a Kazakhstani delegation would visit Russia in September. Among theoretical issues that needed to be resolved involving minorities was the right to self-determination while protecting the territorial integrity of States.
FAN GUOXIANG, Subcommission expert, said it was a pleasure to see the mandate of the Working Group expanded as the question of minorities was a matter of major importance. A proper solution to the promotion of the rights of minorities contributed to the political and social stability of the state in which they lived and the region around them. The Working Group had made important achievements in several spheres: in the promotion of the rights of minorities, a balanced approach was adopted in the relations between the State, majorities and minorities; the members of the Working Group had extended all their efforts within the framework of their mandate; the active participation of Governments and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) had been impressive; a wide range of studies had been made. With regard to the report of the Working Group, the expert noted: that the members intended to prepare different papers; that much attention had been attached to further dissemination of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities; that there were suggestions that information about the issues involving minorities that had been brought to the attention of the Working Group would be transmitted to the Governments concerned; that the proper and effective settlement of existing issues related to minorities would be helpful to the political and social stability of the countries and regions concerned; and that it was a good idea to seek a more active role and more effective methods for the Working Group, especially with regard to voluntary cooperation between Governments and the Working Group.
FISSEHA YIMER, Subcommission expert, said it was good that the Working Group on Minorities had been established more or less permanently; it was an indication of the importance of the work carried out by the panel; the commentary on the Declaration on the Rights of Minorities also was a good idea -- it was helpful to have such standing guidelines, and to update them over time. The panel was to serve the function of bringing to the attention of Governments reports of problems on their territories, which he saw as a useful task; the feasibility study proposed on establishment of a data base on minorities was worth carrying out; he hoped the feasibility study would be "feasible". He also agreed with the plans to sharpen the focus on theoretical issues; the Working Group was not a court of law -- it should think carefully about the thematic issues that were pertinent to the topic.
IOAN MAXIM, Subcommission expert, said that the large number of countries and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that had participated in the Working Group was very satisfactory, and the members of the Working Group under the Chairmanship of Asbjorn Eide had demonstrated great competence. The magnitude of the debate on minorities was the best proof that the international community was acting on the subject of minorities and important progress had been made; great responsibility lay with the Subcommission and its Working Group which were well placed to make a substantial contribution to the issue. The Subcommission was even more important given the divergent views on the subject. Referring to conflicts relating to minorities, Subcommission expert José Bengoa had rightly underlined the need to understand the background to these conflicts. The working method chosen by the Chairman of the Working Group was very useful, and would facilitate understanding of the Declaration. It was necessary to make a distinction between integration and assimilation, and it was very important to actively involve persons belonging to minorities in all aspects of society in order to promote development in the society concerned. It was not enough to authorise minorities to exercise their rights, they also needed to be able to enjoy those rights; minorities needed to participate in political life in order to preserve their identity, and it was only through such participation that persons belonging to minorities would feel that they were equal citizens. The conclusions of the Working Group deserved full support.
RENE WADLOW, of the Association for World Education, said the 2 per cent Christian minority in Pakistan deserved the attention of the Subcommission; a prominent human-rights defender, Rev. Dr. John Joseph, Bishop of Faisalbad and Chairman of the National Commission for Justice and Peace and of the National Human Rights Office, had shot himself in protest against the death sentence pronounced upon Ayub Masil on 27 April 1998 on the charge of having blasphemed against Islam. He was also protesting against the continued application of Pakistan's blasphemy laws that had affected more than a dozen Christians since 1986. The previous 1985 Subcommission action concerning blasphemy legislation was appended to this statement. The fear of the consequences of blasphemy was deeply rooted in the collective unconscious; State intervention into the debate was destructive of human rights; in Pakistan, the Government had played an increasing role in attempting to define the contours of the religious debate with provisions both in the Constitution and the penal code; regressive measures were first applied to the Ahamadiyya, a reform movement that was declared to be a "non-Muslim" minority group; in 1984, it had been made a criminal offense for Ahmadis to call themselves Muslims. Since then, Pakistani blasphemy legislation had not been repealed but strengthened; the Subcommission must draw Pakistan's attention to this use of religious legislation as a weapon to control minorities and keep them in a state of fear.
ELISABETH BARTHER, of Prison Fellowship International on behalf of Christian Solidarity Worldwide, said that they were concerned about the situation of minorities in Sudan. In its coverage of the situation in southern Sudan, particularly northern Bahr-El-Ghazal, the media had failed to sufficiently emphasise the roots of this incalculable suffering. The famine in this part of Sudan had been deliberately engineered by the National Islamic Front (NIF) in pursuit of a policy of ethnic cleansing of the Dinka people. The evidence gathered from many of those taken into captivity showed consistent patterns of physical abuse and attempts to force captives to adopt Arab names and Islamic practices. While the increase in food drops to Sudan had helped to alleviate some of the suffering of the Sudanese people, it was imperative that the international community respond to the desperate situation in Sudan. The United Nations, in particular the Security Council, was urged to prevail upon the Government of Sudan to permanently cease hostilities against the people of the south, the Nuba Mountains, and the Blue Nile and Beja territories; to ensure that the Government honour international human rights and humanitarian standards; to impose sanctions of increasing severity; to press for all areas of Sudan to be open to access for human rights monitors and humanitarian agencies; and to establish a slave tracing programme.
ALGIS TOMAS GENIUSAS, of the International Federation of Free Journalists, said numerous national minorities, such as the Chechens, the Crimean Tartars, the Tibetans, the Tutsis, the Kashmiris, the Kurds, and the East Timorese suffered from deprivation of their fundamental rights. The latest disastrous instance of genocide and scorched-earth policy was taking place in Kosovo with the United Nations and the world community yet again standing and watching in a stupor. In fact there were countless ill-used national minorities and indigenous peoples who were not receiving the world's attention; those in the north Caucasus, for example, continued to be victims of Russian State-sponsored discrimination; the brutal war in Chechenia had caused hostility towards Chechen nationals and by extension towards other people from the North Caucasus, leading to arbitrary detention, beatings, harassment, and systematic job and housing discrimination. There also was discrimination against "northern minorities" in Russia, and against Uralic minority cultures; and against the Lithuanian minority living in the Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation. Discrimination also was being carried out against minorities in Belarus. Contrary to disinformation from the Russian Federation, Latvia and Estonia were not basing citizenship on ethnicity -- the situation was more complicated than Russia had indicated.
GARCIA PICOLA JOSEP, of Pax Romana, expressed total support for the Working Group on Minorities, especially with respect to its role of examining possible mechanisms to promote mutual understanding between minorities and Governments. The minorities on the African continent needed to be the major focus of attention in the near future, and the case of the Bubi minority in Equatorial Guinea could be reported during the next session of the Working Group. Even since the last meeting of the Human Rights Commission, the situation of the ethnic Bubi minority on the island of Bioko had visibly worsened. The Bubi people as a group had been systematically excluded from the processes of political participation due to certain laws that prohibited political association on an ethnic basis and the promotion of self determination. The Movement of the Self-Determination of the Island of Bioko continued illegally and though it had never advocated the use of violence, its members continued to be persecuted. Following disturbances on 21 January 1998, 116 people allegedly responsible had been tried without due guarantees to a defence, and 15 people had been condemned to death. A military tribunal had carried out the sentences, and the defence lawyers had not been able to appeal. President Obiang Nguema had not made any statement on the possibility of clemency, and the next session of the Human Rights Commission should condemn the regime of General Nguema.
YOUSIF AL-KHOEI, of the Al-Khoei Foundation, said that when it came to the Muslim world, any discussion over ethnic or religious minorities tended to be controversial and sometimes problematic; there was growing xenophobia towards Muslims; frequently there were prejudiced and antagonistic comments, mostly subtle but sometimes blatant and crude, a kind of "Islamophobia". The reaction in newspapers to the bombing in Oklahoma was an example -- before any evidence was obtained the newspapers decided the bombing was the work of Muslims; later the facts indicated otherwise; there had been attacks on Muslims and the loss of an unborn Iraqi Muslim refugee in the United States after some angry youths attacked a house. It was not fair; every time an IRA fanatic set off a bomb in Northern Ireland there was not a foray of public criticisms of the Catholic Church. In Europe, Islamophobia was on the rise; its consequences were injustice, limitations on personal freedom, poverty, deprivation, and lost opportunity; if European countries had laws against racial discrimination and anti-Semitism, why not against anti-Islamic behaviour? The Al-Khoei Foundation would continue to take part in conferences and carry out initiatives aimed at combatting racism and religious discrimination, including Islamophobia.
ATSUKO TANAKA, of International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism, said that the Working Group was making substantive progress in the examination of the ways and means to promote and protect the rights of minorities. The treatment of the minority of the Roma and Sinti in many countries of Europe was deeply concerning. Concern had been expressed at the persistence of racial hatred and acts of violence towards persons belonging to minority groups, especially Roma in the Czech Republic, and it was also concerning that the Government of the Czech Republic excluded the Roma minority from international protective agreements. The situation of the Roma minority in Slovakia and Bulgaria, and of the Roma and Sinti in France, Spain, Italy and German was also cause for concern. A second issue that was troubling was that groups of people, often minority groups and indigenous peoples, were forcibly transferred as part of economic, political, ideological or military schemes. When this happened, they often lost their culture, identity and traditional livelihood. While these issues had been studied by the Subcommission, they deserved further examination. Reference was made to the Horno community in Brandenburg, Germany, part of the Sorbs minority who were facing displacement, and it was questionable whether the projected forced removal of this community was compatible with the International Covenant on Human Rights and other international documents.
SOEUR MARIE SABRINE, of Fraternité Notre Dame, said all human beings had the same rights, whether they belonged to majorities or minorities; in many countries poor and underprivileged people were considered as minorities; they could not blend in with the majority and so were treated with contempt and discrimination. Fraternité Notre Dame ran schools, hospitals, and residences for the poor and homeless and discriminated against no one. In developed countries the association saw more and more unemployed poor; elsewhere in the world the poor literally starved; their cries often weren't heard by the hard-hearted majority, which preferred to remain blind to such suffering. Poverty hurt and even destroyed people, but it was not an incurable disease; the Fraternité's volunteers battled against it every day, despite a shortage of resources; food was distributed; it was found and paid for somehow; the extent of Fraternité's accomplishments indicated that if the world really cared it could resolve the poverty problem entirely, given the resources it had available. The poverty of minorities should not exist and could be overcome, but instead majorities did not care and did not act; it was time for that to change.
LIN TONG CHUN, of International Association of Democratic Lawyers and the Association of Foreign Schools in Hyogo Prefecture in Japan, provided information about education issues in foreign schools in Japan. The 19 full time foreign schools in Hyogo Prefecture had about 4,000 pupils from about 50 countries. The Japanese Ministry of Education categorised the schools in the lowest possible status, and as a result, the schools had limited public assistance and subsidies as compared to other schools and students had limited access to institutions of higher education. The Japanese Government did not recognise the schools as regular schools unless they conducted classes in Japanese following the curriculum established by the Education Ministry. The Government of Japan required foreign schools to conduct classes with Japanese textbooks in Japanese and teachers working for foreign schools to obtain a teacher's certificate of the Japanese Government. The Japanese Government had ignored the recommendations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child. It was clear that the treatment of foreign schools by the Japanese Government violated the International Convention on Human Rights and the Convention of the Rights of the Child, and therefore an investigation by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights was requested.
LUDOVICA VERZEGNASSI, of European Union of Public Relations, said the world had been shocked by the suicide of Bishop John Joseph to protest arrests of Christians under the controversial blasphemy law of Pakistan, a law whose repeal had been the subject of appeals from the world and from the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan; in every country there existed lunatic fringe elements who preyed on minorities -- the Ku Klux Klan, the neo-Nazis, fundamentalists of all hews; but in most countries there also was a sustained effort to protect minorities. The real problem lay in countries where constitutions, laws, and institutional structures were designed to isolate and discriminate against minorities and to protect those who attacked them; Pakistan was such a country; no person from a minority community could aspire to highest office; the Constitution in other ways had been framed so that minorities were second-class citizens; laws had been promulgated to discriminate against minority communities; Christians had lived in fear since the blasphemy law had been passed, which carried a penalty of death. There also were attacks against Ahmediyas and Hindus; fundamentalist mobs were a constant danger; Pakistan also sanctioned the existence of extremist groups with violent aims and activities, such as cadres now operating in Jammu and Kashmir.
A.M. ALI, of the Afro-Asian Peoples Solidarity Organisation, said south Asia was home to almost all the major religions of the world, and all countries had ethnic, linguistic and religious minorities. In order to protect the rights of minorities, most countries had adopted democracy as the best guarantor of freedom. Pakistan had entrenched its discriminatory practices particularly based on religion. One dangerous offshoot of the system instituted by the rulers of Pakistan was the mushrooming of extremist groups which sought to use religion, backed by weapons to terrorise minorities. The most virulent manifestation of the theology of hatred and discrimination that was coming out of Pakistan was the continuous massacre of the minority Kashmiri Pandit community by mercenaries who derived their sustenance from the system of discrimination that Pakistan had put in place to govern its own people. The threat from religious terrorism was the most potent threat facing minorities today, but fanaticism often ate its own master. The people of Pakistan should beware, and call on their leaders to introduce true democracy. Discrimination and oppression of minorities in the region would end when minorities in Pakistan could honestly proclaim that they were safe, and when Pakistan became a democracy in fact and not name alone
KAREN PARKER, of International Educational Development, said it was important to guard against labelling as "minorities" groups that had a true right to independence and self-determination. It was a difficult and complex issue, and there was a decided difference of opinion regarding the status of groups or ethnic nationalities who found themselves under the control of another ethnic group after decolonization. Historical research was needed to clarify matters, and in the case of certain nationalities under the political domination of Indonesia and Burma it was apparent that the groups should be allowed independence. In the case of Burma, the 1947 Constitution gave the ethnic Karen, Shan, Kachin, Karenni, Mon, and other peoples the right to withdraw from the "union" within 10 years, but before that time was reached certain powers took over the Government and annulled that Constitutional provision; to deny these peoples their independence now was to approve that annulment and to accept as legitimate the current, brutal regime. In Indonesia, the Netherlands had given certain peoples the option to "opt out" of what was first called the United States of Indonesia; but the Javanese majority then had brutally invaded and repressed the Moluku and Acheh peoples; now that a large Governmental change as under way in Indonesia it was time to allow these peoples their own political independence.
ALI KHAN, of the World Federation of Trade Unions, said that oppression was almost always born of disdain for those who were different. The concept of paying obescinece reminiscent of tribal and colonial times was today manifested in the practice of demanding that minorities assimilate and forget their distinctive culture. Fifty years in India and Pakistan had demonstrated how two countries and societies that became independent at the same time could evolve so differently. India had sought to put in place a Constitution and a legal and institutional structure that guaranteed equality for all. The new President of Pakistan had declared that he intended to consolidate the Islamisation of Pakistan, and ethnic minorities had protested the findings of the last census as it was seen as an attempt to downplay their numbers. Religious extremism in Pakistan had been given a fillip during the Afghan war, and the religious seminaries that had flourished then were now turning out warriors who preyed on people of other religions and sects within Pakistan. Women had been regulated to second class status, and Pakistan's constitutional and legislative structure decreed that those who did not belong to the majority were to be treated as inferior. Pakistan was guilty of using religion to deny minorities their rights. Democracy alone, free of the shackles of religion and other constrains, could guarantee minority rights.
MERCEDES MOYA, of the American Association of Jurists, said the ignominy of forgetfulness and greed about the impact of slave-dealing and holding should be made known; the Subcommission should make sure that never again should such a crime be committed anywhere in the world; Afro-Americans wished to draw attention to their past and their present; after 350 years, and after past atrocities beyond description, they still suffered extensive discrimination. They now numbered some 200 million scattered around the geographical continent; they had been depersonalized and had lost ethnic cultural identity; they had had to "white out" in order to get on in society; and even so they were never equal. Their economic and social situation was dire; wide-ranging paramilitarism was growing and they often were the victims; Africans and their descendants had been robbed of life, dreams, and soul by slavery and they were still recovering. Even at some universities one saw painted slogans -- "Be a patriot, kill a black". The various countries of the Americas were in a state of denial about their treatment of Afro-Americans. It was time for the Subcommission to do something after all these years -- to set up a study and a working group to look into the consequences of the original enslavement of Africans and the resulting 500 years of cruelty and discrimination.
TATIANA SHAUMIAN, of International Institute for Peace, said NGOs provided valuable information on promoting and protecting the rights of minorities. Since the adoption of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the world community had come a long way; however the rights of minorities were not protected everywhere to the extent required by the Universal Declaration. There were corners of the world where the population had no idea about human rights and therefore a pocket edition of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights should be prepared, as had been proposed. Analysis of the practical participation of minorities in the process of elections demonstrated that sometimes the majority made attempts to manipulate minorities, and therefore Subcommission expert Soli Sorabjee was correct when he said that the State had a duty to take positive measures to guarantee effective political participation of minorities. An essential political problem that needed to be faced now was how to reconcile two opposite demands: the right to ethnic sovereignty and the insistence on territorial integrity. Subcommission expert Gay McDougall's report on Contemporary Forms of Slavery correctly concluded that individual perpetrators of slavery, crimes against humanity and genocide had to be held responsible for their crimes at national or international level.
REENA MARWAH, of International Institute of Non-Aligned Studies, said conflicts involving minorities raised the question of self-determination repeatedly; however, that did not necessarily imply there would be as many independent States as there were ethnic groups; partitioning a country on ethnic lines, however, had generally proved inadequate because regions of a country were themselves often heterogeneous; the problem was further complicated by the fluid quality of ethnic identities -- when Pakistan was founded, for example, the Muslim religion formed the basis of ethnic solidarity that united Muslims in the eastern region with those in the western section; but later the eastern region demanded and secured a separate state of Bangladesh on grounds of language. Now Pakistan faced secessionist demands from the Pathans, the Sindhis, and the Baluchs; in the former Soviet Union, conflicts had developed along similar lines in Georgia, Moldavia, Azerbaijan, Estonia, and Latvia, along with other conflicts within Russia. The only way to deal with such difficulties was through tolerance and pluralism; what was required was an appreciation by States of the importance of reconciliation and avoidance of polemics; political and legal protections were necessary along with adoption and implementation of international standards; solutions should take into account political and economic factors as well as culture and psychology.
OLGA CECHUROVA, of Transnational Radical Party, said that in States in transition, the rights of minorities were seen as limited while the dominant community enjoyed the standard rights. Albanians in the former Yugoslavia had been living in their compact territories where they were in absolute majority, and though they were the third nation in numbers after the Serbs and Croats, politically they were treated as a minority. After the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia, Albanians were split into several new administrations, including the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM). Albanians in FYROM represented 23 per cent of the population according to the Government though other sources said they made up one-third of the population. The official language of FYROM was Cyrillic, the religion Orthodox and Albanians were obliged to communicate with the Government in the Slavic Macedonian language. There were also clear discriminatory practices regarding education, and in FYROM all institutions were presented as Macedonian which led to legitimized segregation of a group that was characterised as a minority. FYROM was an example of the legal segregation of one nation on the basis of the status of national minority. The roots of discrimination and segregation needed to be found to put an immediate end to this situation which destabilised FYROM and the entire region: this solution was that of consensual democracy or federalisation.
HAM MYONG SOK, of Asian Women's Human Rights Council, said there were severe violations of the human rights of the Korean minorities in Japan; Korean schools had been treated unequally, given less respect than Japanese schools; the Government had stated that it "does not see any positive reason that our society give legal status to Korean schools"; Korean children had unequal access to institutions of higher education and difficulty in general in exercising their right to participate in all parts of society. The Japanese Government, despite criticism from a number of sources, had taken no appropriate measures to deal with these problems; Koreans paid the same taxes as Japanese but Korean schools were not subsidized by the Government as Japanese schools were; the graduates suffered from disadvantages when job recruiting occurred or when they took entrance exams for State-run universities; meanwhile about 80,000 Korean children had to attend Japanese schools using Japanese names and being deprived of the chance to learn their own language and culture. Korean school girls had had their national costume slashed or ripped in public. The Subcommission must recommend that the Japanese Government abandon its discriminatory approach to Korean children.