SUBCOMMISSION DISCUSSES PLANS FOR SOCIAL FORUM

Subcommission on the Promotion
and Protection of Human Rights
53rd session
13 August 2001
Afternoon




Continues Debate on Discrimination Against Indigenous Peoples,
Other Issues


The Subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights this afternoon discussed preparations for its Social Forum with a group of high-level experts debating what should be the main topics of the meeting which is tentatively scheduled for next year.

Mary Robinson, the United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights, said such a forum should not duplicate what was already being done. She said the Forum should ensure meaningful and effective participation, and should gather all international, national and regional actors around a common objective, addressing the goal of eliminating extreme poverty, for example. She said the conference had to reach out to those who did not generally have access to a forum.

Jose Bengoa, a Subcommission Expert and the Special Rapporteur for the Social Forum, explained that the Commission on Human Rights this year had authorized the Subcommission to hold a Social Forum next year, which, among other objectives, would focus on globalization, free trade, and threats to poor countries in the labour markets. Many actors in the globalized economy were not eager to take up these topics, Mr. Bengoa said, but it was necessary to create a debate with them.

Rubens Ricupero, the Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, said that when setting the issues the Social Forum hoped to cover, it was best to understand that it would be impossible to effectively cover all deserving matters. Two major phenomena were prevalent today within the context of their topics -- the growing movement against certain aspects of globalization, and the deteriorating global economy. The economic slowdown, he said, should be kept in mind when forming the debate and formulating realistic goals for the Forum.

Hina Jilani, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights defenders, recommended that the Social Forum examine a host of issues, including the fallout of the lack of access to economic, social and cultural rights. Regardless of the uneven economic development and the uneven status of people in a given society, she said, there was a lack of democratic response to such problems, and the result was a threat to democracy itself. Further, Ms. Jilani said, concern should be given to the future of labour rights.

Additional ideas for the Social Forum, brought up by other speakers, ranged from linking the right to drinking water to the right to adequate housing and designing strategies to eradicate poverty to taking a human rights approach to development. Further, Subcommission Experts addressed myriad topics, including the policies that must be carried out by recipient countries when they received loans from the international financial institutions and how States justified claims of national security to camouflage the suppression of human rights.

Other participants were George Abi Saab, an Appelate Body Member of the World Trade Organization's Dispute Settlement Body; Andrew Clapham, a Professor at the Graduate Institute of International Studies; Miloon Kothari, the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing; Paul Hunt, Special Rapporteur of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; Alfredo Sfeir-Younis of the World Bank; Lee Swepston of the International Labour Organization; and Patricia Feeney of Oxfam.

Later, as the meeting was extended until 9 p.m., the Subcommission continued its deliberations on various forms of discrimination, including discrimination against indigenous peoples, and other human rights issues.

Subcommission Expert Manuel Rodriguez-Cuadros introduced a working paper on the promotion and consolidation of democracy, saying that the attributes and conditions for operation of a democratic system were wide-ranging. His paper dealt with the interrelation of various relevant instruments. He had taken a methodological approach and had tried to avoid a discussion of a definition of democracy.

Several speakers continued to praise the report on indigenous peoples and their relationship to land, which was presented earlier in the day by Subcommittee Expert Erica-Irene Daes. Subcommission Expert Godfrey Bayour Preware said land was the most important thing for indigenous peoples -- it was central to their existence. This created friction between indigenous peoples and nation States.

The following Subcommission Experts and Alternate Experts delivered statements: Alonso Gomez-Robledo Veduzco, Vladimir Kartashkin, Asbjorn Eide, and Erica-Irene Daes.

Speaking on the discrimination of indigenous people were representative of various NGOs, including the Food First Information Action Network; the Transnational Radical Party; the World Federation for Mental Health; Public Service International; Franciscans International; the Shimin Gaikou Centre; the Indian Movement Tupaj Amaru; the International League for the Rights and Liberation of Peoples; the International Indian Treaty Council; Japan Fellowship of Reconciliation; the Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights; the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions; the World Federation of Democratic Youth; and Interfaith International.

The Subcommission will meet at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 14 August to begin discussions on other human rights issues, including women and human rights and contemporary forms of slavery.


Statements on the Social Forum

JOSE BENGOA, Subcommission Expert and Special Rapporteur for the Social Forum, said the Commission on Human Rights had decided this year to authorize the Subcommission to hold a Social Forum; it seemed necessary after preliminary discussions this spring on holding a preparatory meeting at which persons of high standing in the field could give their opinions. Among the objectives of the Forum would be to focus on the theme of globalization, which seemed to be a dominating characteristic of current life; free trade, free-trade treaties, flexible labour markets, opportunities and threats were emerging, particularly for the poor. Countries around the world were struggling to place themselves in a good position to participate in the global economy. Disputes over globalization were now debated, even violently, in the streets of the world's major cities.

Globalization, with its "upward" characteristics, also had to mean globalization of the rights of citizens, and especially of the poor. Globalization had to direct itself "downstream", Mr. Bengoa said. The objectives of the Forum, which had been under discussion for five years, would be to achieve an effective agglomeration of economic, social and cultural rights into a global policy; to create partnerships between private enterprise and international financial institutions to help economic development in the Third World; to enhance consideration of the environmental aspects and responsibilities of globalization; to increase social accountability; and especially to set up a process whereby the impacts of economic globalization would be considered ahead of time, before policies were set, so as to ensure that their positive effects were shared equitably with the poor and with developed countries, and to ensure that their negative effects on vulnerable populations were reduced. It was to be hoped that a new look at these issues would be possible through the Forum, and that new proposals would result.

Many actors in the globalized economy were not eager to take up these topics, Mr. Bengoa said, but it was necessary to create a debate with them. Given current electronic and communications technology, perhaps the debate could be extended as well to those who were generally unable to attend international conferences. It also would be necessary to consider when the Social Forum could take place; he thought that given the hectic pace of the Subcommission's work it would be difficult to hold it during the Subcommission's annual session. Perhaps the Commission on Human Rights would allow a separate time and occasion for the Social Forum.

RUBENS RICUPERO, Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), said there were two major phenomena that defined the parameters for the discussion -- the growing movement against certain aspects of globalization, and the deteriorating global economy. The recent tragic events in Genoa had shown that globalization had to move out from behind closed doors. Matters pertaining to the structure and functioning of the global economy, like trade rules and structural adjustment, should be discussed in the open. Economic realities like the slowdown of growth had to be considered when trying to figure out how to realize economic, social and cultural rights. Only $ 168 billion of private investment went into emerging markets last year, as opposed to more than $ 300 billion in the previous year, and that showed that there was going to be a problem with development. When the Social Forum became a reality next year, it would be evident that not all goals would be compatible. A note of caution and sobriety would help form the debate and enable the formation of realistic goals.

How would the most urgent issues for the Social Forum be identified? It was impossible to cover effectively all deserving matters? Guidelines needed to be set. Most likely next year there would be two major attempts at controlling globalization. One would be the meetings of the World Trade Organization (WTO), which would probably address the need of the least developed countries. And this Forum would take place after the Conference on Finance and Development in Monterey, which would look at issues of financing in general. Instead of trying to cover all possible issues, there should be certain targeted issues. As UNCTAD was one of the organizations invited to the Social Forum, it would conduct an analyses of issues within its jurisdiction to come up with some suggestions for the Forum.

HINA JILANI, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for human rights defenders, said too little attention was being paid to the fallout of the lack of access to economic, social and cultural rights. Regardless of the uneven economic development and the uneven status of people in a given society, there was a lack of democratic response to such problems; the result was a threat to democracy itself. Vulnerable populations were growing more restive, and globalization was creating a lack of transparency -- Governments were making important decisions without consulting their populations.

She was concerned about the future of labour rights, Ms. Jilani said. To sustain the imperatives of globalization, States, big businesses, and the more powerful forces in the economic field had become partners in devising methods to dilute and diminish these already recognized human rights, rights for which strong frameworks already existed. It would be very hard for new protective frameworks to be developed. And there was the question of land rights; in the Indian subcontinent and perhaps in all of South Asia, the issue of land rights was the most critical issue. Powerful forces had to be confronted, and many South Asians would point out that large-scale evictions were leading to the loss of this right much more often than anyone was acting to strengthen it. Another trend was the rise of militarism; there appeared to be a distinct trend among States to confront militaristically their security concerns. Large portions of countries had become military zones, affecting the rights of people to autonomy over their own resources and land. Environmental questions also hung in the balance.

The Social Forum not only should identify issues but should be aware of the fact that confronting these issues involved mustering political will, Ms. Jilani said.

GEORGE ABI SAAB, Appellate Body Member of the World Trade Organization's Dispute Settlement Body, said for the last 40 years, at every human rights meeting, there had always been a great paradox, with someone saying that while this was the time when there was so much talk about human rights, this was also the time when there were more human rights violations than ever before. But it was not a paradox. The deeper the feeling of injustice, the more efforts were made to obtain justice. That meant that the first step was heightening awareness of the problems. That was related to most of the work being done at the Subcommission. The Subcommission had been good at identifying the problem and proposing the solution. There was a missing link, which was the transition. People knew what the problems were, and people knew the solutions. The problem was how to get there, from problem to solution. Every year the Human Development Report, and other reports, identified the problems. The Social Forum could help in heightening awareness, of course, because that was when politicians started to listen. But the Forum could also work on that transition.

As experts on human rights, people had been trained to use a microscope. Human rights, traditionally, were violations against an individual using a specific act. It was very individualistic. It could be large, but generally, it was individualistic. The problem with social, culture and political rights was that a macroscope was needed. Nobody had constructed one yet. Development rights were collective rights. Without giving a community the right to development, individual human rights could not be achieved. The right to development was about respecting human rights when something else -- development -- was being undertaken. That was squaring the circle.

There needed to be a restructuring of the international environment in a serious way. Rich people were more amenable to give to charity than to change the structure of the way things were done. That was why they were willing to do smaller things. Restructuring the environment could be discussed at the Social Forum.

ANDREW CLAPHAM, Professor at the Graduate Institute of International Studies, said that as an outsider he was struck by the complexity of the phenomena the Subcommission confronted; it grappled with complex social interactions, particularly those related to trade, economics, and social and cultural rights. There had been efforts to shift responsibilities to transnational corporations, to States, even to non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Trying to assign responsibilities in the Social Forum would not be a good idea, he felt; responsibilities would depend on the particular situation and would have to be considered in particular cases. Under customary international law any institution that was legally chartered had human rights obligations under international human rights law; it would be best if such institutions considered the human rights impacts of their activities and tried to include persons affected by their activities in their decision-making processes. The States that were the homes of such institutions also had human rights obligations. Government officials representing States at human rights fora and Government officials representing States at international financial institutions perhaps did not have much to do with each other -- perhaps the Social Forum could help to connect these often disconnected officials.

The Social Forum also could enable a serious discussion of the pressures facing the different State ministries -- those of health and education, for example -- when a State's foreign ministry was negotiating the terms of an international loan, Mr. Clapham said. There also could be discussion at the Forum of how to avoid becoming complicit partners in human rights violations committed by other actors, whether they were States, transnational corporations, or other agents. Defining the boundaries of complicity in such a complex situation was not easy. The Social Forum could debate what the expectations were of the behaviour of a transnational corporation. These expectations could go beyond strict legal obligations.

MILOON KOTHARI, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on adequate housing, said there was a need to look at the link between the right to adequate housing and the right to adequate drinking water. There was a problem with segregation in developing communities, as well as forced evictions. There was also a need to further look at women's rights, with regard to property. The Social Forum could play a particular role in changing international policy formulation that led to marginalization. It was unlikely that the policies of the World Bank would lead to the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights, and the Social Forum could play a role in identifying changes to help reform that. There was an important meeting held last May at the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, in which three issues -- drinking water, poverty and Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers, and international cooperation -- were brought up that could be further addressed at the Social Forum.

PAUL HUNT, Rapporteur and Member of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, said the Committee was dedicated to enhancing cooperation in the pursuit of such rights; it felt the Social Forum was a very important development and agreed that the Forum must provide something new. It should complement existing efforts, and so should not repeat some of the things the Committee was doing. The bread-and-butter work of the Committee was the consideration of States parties reports. The conclusions offered on the country reports, among other things, identified positive initiatives taken by States -- and the Forum might promote such good practices; and identified concerns in relation to economic, social and cultural rights -- and the Forum might be able to identify trends in this area. The Committee also issued general comments on articles of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Social Forum might consider whether such normative work could be included on its own agenda.

Poverty was a recurring theme in the Committee=s dialogue with States parties, Mr. Hunt said. Poverty eradication today, in fact, was the overarching goal of the United Nations. The Committee hoped a statement it recently had issued on poverty and its relation to the Covenant would help the United Nations system and other actors, including the Social Forum, to design effective, practical strategies for combatting poverty.

MARY ROBINSON, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said it was clear that there was a strong sense that the Social Forum had to be different -- it should not duplicate what was already there. There were three aspects that were becoming clear -- it should ensure meaningful and effective participation; it should gather all international, national, and regional actors around a common objective, addressing the goal of eliminating extreme poverty, for example; and it should identify new human rights issues that needed more attention.

How could meaningful and effective participation be achieved? The Social Forum should be seen as an opportunity to listen to the most vulnerable advocates, because they did not have many opportunities to be heard. It would be necessary to be innovative, and communications technology could be used to have interactive discussions. The Social Forum could a link. At the moment there was no formal link. As Mr. Ricupero said, there would be two events before the Social Forum would be convened. The Social Forum could usefully focus on human rights in poverty reduction, and ending social exclusion. There was not enough inter-linkage, and it was hoped that the Forum would reach out to those who did not have access to a Forum presently. That should be one of the priorities.

ALFREDO SFEIR-YOUNIS, Special Representative of the World Bank to the United Nations and the World Trade Organization, said it was necessary to focus on basic institutional considerations. Paradigms had to be designed for attaining human rights in practical ways. One matter of concern was the issue of human rights and income distribution; the topic had to be addressed in a way that went beyond strictly legal obligations. A framework or cause-and-effect relationship had to be designed, and more than income concerns were involved; there were a huge number of non-material dimensions, things that were ethical and moral.

The Social Forum should be an intellectual antechamber, considering issues that previously were separated and dealt with by specialized institutions. Part of the uniqueness of the Social Forum should be a forward-looking approach to social policy. Among other things, it should be pluralistic and transparent and should embrace a pragmatic rather than dogmatic process. It should conduct social analyses that led to the formation of new value systems that went beyond economics and finance. Many problems could not be solved by material concerns -- this suggested that a new architecture was required, and the Social Forum could play a major role in designing such an architecture.

LEE SWEPSTON, of the International Labour Organization (ILO), said the ILO would actively participate in the Social Forum. The dominant theme appeared to be to make the Social Forum a body to address globalization, and how it would affect the developing world. As Mr. Abi Saab said, a macroscope was needed. The Social Forum could make a valuable contribution by looking at the microscope views and bringing them into a macroscopic framework through a human rights lens. The ILO was doing a lot of work with the social effects of globalization. The Social Forum could go beyond this by drawing the consequences of the work by different international organizations to the work being done in the field. No institution of the United Nations system tried to link the advisory work of the system with the work being done by the regional offices. This could be a task of the Social Forum. It should also look at the different aspects of the human rights approach to development.

PATRICIA FEENEY, of Oxfam, said the organization put a lot of faith in the potential of the Social Forum. The frustration and disconnection felt by many had been apparent on the streets of Genoa; a few scraps and sops for the poor were not enough for the process of globalization to provide. More attention was needed for social justice. More needed to be done to see if indeed there had been a transfer of former State responsibilities to fairly anonymous corporations which made decisions behind closed doors that affected millions of people. It also had to be studied if international financial institution decisions and policies were actually going against the needs of many of the world's citizens.

A new approach was needed to development; the "losers" in the process were in a vulnerable position indeed; as the process continued, such "losers" were at the point where they had to accept and be thankful for any small benefits the winners deigned to throw their way. She was concerned about the proliferation of regional investment and trade regimes and thought the effects of this trend should be scrutinized by the Social Forum. She hoped the Forum would not turn into just another "talk shop". Instead of talking about electronic information connections as a way of spreading its influence, perhaps the Social Forum should consider moving away from Geneva and visiting the poor, who did not have much access to computers anyway.

Discussion on the Social Forum

Subcommission Experts and other participants in the preparatory discussions made observations on the following topics: the policies that must be carried out by recipient countries when they received loans from the international financial institutions; including as participants in the Social Forum people from developing countries, particularly Africa; the effect the policies of the international financial institutions had on the macroeconomic situation of developing countries; how States justified claims of national security to camouflage the suppression of human rights; how the financial institutions determined which countries did not meet the conditions of their loans; policies formulated by regional organizations; having a human rights approach in addressing economic, social and cultural rights; including representatives of local non-governmental organizations (NGOs), especially minority NGOs, which did not often have access to such fora, in the Social Forum; examining the need to adopt new instruments and mechanisms to protect economic, social and cultural rights, including the Draft Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; addressing foreign indebtedness at the Social Forum; and discussing in the Social Forum the requirements associated with development aid.

Statements on Prevention of Discrimination; Other Human Rights Issues

MANUEL RODRIGUEZ-CUADROS, Subcommission Expert, introducing a working paper (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2001/32) on the promotion and consolidation of democracy (a report available for the moment only in Spanish), said the attributes and conditions for operation of a democratic system were wide-ranging. His paper dealt with the interrelation of various relevant instruments. He had taken a methodological approach and had tried to avoid a discussion of a definition of democracy; it seemed to him much better to have an approach that could resolve the matter on the basis of trends in various international and regional efforts aimed at bolstering democracy. Such positive law, political commitments and undertakings could be seen as leading to the development of a legal regime to defend, promote and consolidate human rights.

Clearly all human rights -- individual, political, economic, social and cultural -- could be realized, infringed or promoted within a given society, Mr. Rodriguez-Cuadros said. The legal and political structure of a State, therefore, could foster human rights or have an adverse effect on them. His paper made it clear that in the social practice of the various States, the development of the rule of law was compatible with the international bill of human rights and the safeguards and guarantees required for their realization. The paper then went on to discuss the relationship between human rights and democracy, focusing on the linkage between the individual and society. It reviewed the various ways of enhancing those links and enhancing democracy based on developments over the last 20 years. In Latin America, democracy was a requisite for being a member of the Organization of American States; democracy clauses amounted to a kind of collective reaction in the region when there was any kind of infringement or breach of democracy -- the rights of such a member country within the Organization of American States were suspended.

In Africa, there had been developments of the highest importance, Mr. Rodriguez-Cuadros said; an African Union had been established that ultimately would replace the Organization of African Unity; and the Union required democracy of its members. There also was a strong emphasis on human rights. Through provisions and standards of this kind -- which had their echos in the Council of Europe and the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe and the legal provisions for the Francophone group of nations -- a trend was emerging in which law and doctrine amounted to a progressive awareness of a right to democracy, and to linking democracy and human rights inextricably. It was a holistic approach -- democracy and the rule of law guaranteeing civil and political rights, allowing a gradual permeation of the population with such values and attitudes, allowing the process to become self-sustaining.

GODFREY BAYOUR PREWARE, Subcommission Expert, said Mrs. Daes over the years had done stupendous work on indigenous peoples and minorities. Land was the most important thing for indigenous peoples -- it was central to their existence. This still created friction between indigenous peoples and nation States. The report identified the issues from the standpoint of the human rights principles identified in the various international human rights treaties. The report made it clear that discrimination against indigenous peoples resulted in destruction of property, at times slavery, and unfortunately, in the worst scenarios, outright extermination. International law at times actually had abridged the rights of indigenous peoples. International law, the report said, mainly benefitted European-type States. Was there any hope that fairness and justice could be achieved, if these were the standards of international law? The answer was yes. Some national courts had recognized the discriminatory laws. There had been positive movement in a growing number of societies, especially regarding land rights, equality before the law, and development for indigenous peoples.

The appointment of a Special Rapporteur with peace-seeking powers was an idea that the Subcommission at some point in the future should consider. Mrs. Daes was urged to continue with her work in this field.

JOSE SEBASTIAN JANSASOY, of the Foodfirst Information Action Network, said the indigenous peoples of Colombia were in a very dangerous situation; many of their political, civil and even spiritual rights were being violated. Over the last two years a civil war had been declared against them -- paramilitary and guerrilla armies had made them victims within their own indigenous areas. The spraying of drug crops had resulted in the displacement of thousands of people near the Ecuadorean border, along with the loss of traditional crops. These threats were worse for indigenous peoples, whose health and economic situations were more fragile; in addition, such attacks damaged the very spiritual well-being of these peoples.

The international community was called upon to help end the forcible destruction policies in Colombia; and the United States Congress should send the Department of State to see just what impact these assaults were having on the environment in Colombia. There had to be protective measures, particularly for the Amazon Indian peoples. International organizations must help the Colombian indigenous peoples and peasantry.

KOK KSOR, of the Transnational Radical Party, said last February, thousands of indigenous peoples in central Viet Nam had asked the Government to stop destroying their land and carrying out human rights abuses, and the Vietnamese Government responded by sending thousands of troops into the homelands to stop the protests. The Government had executed some people, and had burned down churches. Viet Nam had offered bounties to those who had helped capture the people who fled the crackdown. These people had been taken to prisons and tortured. The refugees who left for Cambodia were in doubt. The Vietnamese Government began its violence against these people in 1975 because they served as allies of the United States. Viet Nam had never ended the aggression against them, and took their land the way so many other Governments did to other indigenous groups. All of these violations were confirmed by independent news reports. The International Commission of Jurists said Viet Nam had carried out systematic persecution since 1975. In 1975, the Government had publicly executed an indigenous senator. This year, the Government had tortured and threatened to kill an 80-year-old woman.
WILDA SPALDING, of the World Federation of Mental Health, said the Working Group on indigenous populations had to continue its work. The creation of the new forum had a different mandate. If this Working Group was going to be phased out, indigenous peoples would lose a place to put forth new ideas. Youth from around the world who were attending the YES Youth Empowerment Summit this year in Geneva served both at the initial Indigenous Peoples Pre-Caucus and as full non-governmental organization (NGO) observers at the Working Group. May their voices and those of many others joining theirs calling for the continuation of the Working Group be heard in the depth of the minds and hearts of those making this important decision about the future of the Working Group. The future of the world would be shaped by it.

SONIA SANCHEZ, of Public Services International, said indigenous peoples were an important part of the organization's struggle for justice in the workplace. Indigenous peoples had stated that trade unions and in particular public service trade unions needed to play a more active and responsible role in the promotion of the rights of indigenous populations. Public Services International had sought to establish relationships between trade unions and indigenous peoples to, among other things, promote employment for such peoples and to facilitate and finance networking among them to meet the aims of human rights and the constitution of the organization. Where discrimination existed, collective bargaining efforts could combat it, among other things by providing indigenous employees with preference for promotions and through providing leaves when needed for traditional activities.

Public Services International would continue to fight for social justice in the workplace. No worker should face discrimination.

PHILIPPE LEBLANC, of Franciscans International, said indigenous peoples had suffered from aggression and violations of human rights for hundreds of years. Money and profit in the era of globalization had not helped the situation. As Mrs. Daes had noted, States among other things had failed to acknowledge indigenous rights to lands, territories and resources; discriminatory laws and policies affected indigenous peoples in relation to their land; and States had failed to demarcate indigenous lands. In addition, there were displacements of vulnerable groups of people, encroachment on land, and damage to the environment.

The tribal people in the state of Jharkhand in India had been resisting non-violently the mega project of KOEL-KARO dam for the last 30 years. The dam would submerge 135 villages and displace more than 100,000, many of whom were tribal people. In Bangladesh, there were protests against the development of an "Eco-Park" in the northeast of the country. Franciscans International also was concerned about the situation of indigenous people in Mexico. These peoples aspired to be responsible for their own political, social and economic development, and to elaborate their own programmes to ensure they were not incompatible with their cultures and their traditional approaches to their natural resources.

YUKI HASEGAWA, of the Shimin Gaiko Centre, said that on July 2 of this year, two influential members of Japan's Liberal Democratic Party had stated publicly in separate venues that Japan was an ethnically homogenous nation. This statement was particularly offensive to the indigenous people of the country because one of the members was a long-time director of the Government's Hokkaido-Okinawa Development Agency. Therefore, he was certainly aware of the existence of the Uchinanchu people in Japan. At present, Japan did not have any domestic laws that addressed racial or ethnic discrimination. The Government's lack of effort to eliminate discrimination contributed to the impunity with which the Government officials made statements such as these. It was time for the international community to elaborate mechanisms that would ensure the enforcement of corresponding rules of international law. Indigenous peoples in Japan and throughout Asia and Africa struggled for indigenous rights, especially acknowledgement that they existed.

LAZARO PARY, of the Indian Movement Tupaj Amaru, said the main debate in the World Conference against Racism was the question of the acknowledgement of colonialism, and the compensation for the victims of colonialism. The matter had to be taken up. There had been genocide carried out in aboriginal communities, with the losers becoming slaves. They were treated as goods and cattle, and were bought and sold. Incalculable riches were stolen from the Amaruian lands, and were brought back to the monarchy of Spain. Great wealth was stolen from the Americas as well. Today there were new colonial powers. They should be forced to apologize to the millions of victims, and they should recognize what they had done.

ORETTA BANDETTINI DI POGGIO, of the International League for the Rights and Liberation of Peoples, said indigenous peoples made up only 5 per cent of the world's population, but they represented roughly 90 per cent of the world's cultural diversity and 80 per cent of the world's biodiversity was to be found on their territories. Merely for the sake of short-term myopic financial gains, pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies as well as timber, tourism, oil, mining and energy industries pushed Governments to oppose, weaken or disregard the rights of indigenous populations. On top of this, indigenous spiritual, cultural and social values and deep relationships with the natural world were damaged or destroyed.

In Alaska, the recently approved "Energy Securities Act" sounded like a death sentence for the Gwich'in Nation. In Chiapas, indigenous peoples still waited for Mexican President Fox to really address and propose solutions for their problems. The Western Shoshone people, despite a recent treaty of peace signed with the United States, were still denied the rightful possession and enjoyment of their ancestral lands. Self-determination was the critical issue in matters relating to indigenous peoples, and this sensitive topic should be discussed by the Subcommission.

MARIO IBARRA, of the International Indian Treaty Council, said there was an enormous contradiction between international progress made in the legal and philosophical debate on the rights of indigenous peoples and the disintegrating situation in some countries. "Development" and "progress" were terms used to disguise such ill-treatment. In Mexico, there had been timid hopes for improvement, but the environment of serious and systematic violations of indigenous populations continued, including torture, military occupation of indigenous lands, and other offenses. The Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous people should first and foremost concentrate on the situation in Mexico.

Chile, also, was one of the most backward countries in terms of indigenous rights. Lies and deceptions appeared to make up the national policy -- there was no legal framework to protect indigenous populations, and there had been no change in mining and other policies. There was no political will to act on recommendations made by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Subcommission should adopt a resolution on the situation of indigenous peoples in Chile and a resolution on recent steps by the United States to despoil Alaska in order to obtain more oil.

ALONSO GOMEZ-ROBLEDO VEDUZCO, Subcommission Expert, said it was fine that the non-governmental organization express its feelings about Mexico, it was just hoped that there would be a little more objectivity.

VLADIMIR KARTASHKIN, Subcommission Alternate Expert, said the report on indigenous peoples and their relationship to land was distinguished by its lengthy series of recommendations and conclusions which would be quite helpful if followed. The annex provided the basic legal documents on indigenous peoples and their relationship to land included International Labour Office Convention 167 on indigenous peoples and people living tribal lives in independent countries. He wondered why many -- or at least some -- countries had not ratified this Convention? He had in mind those countries which had indigenous and tribal peoples on their territories. A study of the reasons for non-ratification might be useful. Answers to the question might further enrich an already valuable report.

ASBJORN EIDE, Subcommission Expert, said that at the end of the session of the Working Group, all the members of the Working Group had congratulated Mrs. Daes for her success. It was hoped that all members of the Subcommission shared in this feeling. Mrs. Daes had moved the issue forward. She had been requested to continue working on this subject -- she was invited to present a paper on the contributions of indigenous peoples to the United Nations. This was an honour, and reflected her contribution in the field. The African Commission on Human Rights had established a Working Group on indigenous peoples. This was a reflection that this effort was truly becoming global, and it reflected the contributions of the work of Mrs. Daes.

ERICA-IRENE A. DAES, Subcommission Expert, said she had attended recently two meetings of an Inter-American working group related to indigenous peoples. At these gatherings, in Washington, D.C., the United States had said it would accept the concept of self-determination for its indigenous peoples; and someone had indicated Canada was inclined in favour of referring to indigenous peoples with an "s." She hoped this sort of cooperation and progress would continue.

She was grateful for the remarks other Subcommission members had made about her report on indigenous peoples and land. As for the question of why various countries had not ratified the relevant International Labour Office Convention, as far as she knew, many States were considering ratification; this kind of thing took time. Often studies were carried out on every single word. Certainly the Convention was important and deserved to be ratified.

SONG HESUK, of the Indian Movement Tupaj Amaru, in the second half of a statement, said the Korean minority in Japan were facing eviction from their homes. They were forced to work in factories and mines. The discussions had centered around reparations for victims of colonialism, and the Subcommission was requested to keep these victims in mind.

ETSURO TOTSUKA, of Japan Fellowship of Reconciliation, said the organization was working on various programmes related to human rights education and non-violence. It stressed the importance of education, which often was neglected, and the Subcommission should discuss this subject, as should the World Conference against Racism. The website operated by the High Commissioner for Human Rights was useful and effective, but the organization had found that many were not able to read it as they could not read the official United Nations languages; the Office should make every effort to solve this language problem.

Japan Fellowship of Reconciliation regretted some adverse actions in public education, such as the recent approval by the Japanese Government of a new middle-school history textbook which glossed over Japan's wartime atrocities. It also regretted plans by Prime Minister Koizumi to pay tribute to war criminals enshrined in the Yasukuni Shrine. If the Japanese judiciary seriously applied international instruments such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Japan had ratified, wrong actions by the administration could be justly corrected. Japan also had not ratified the optional protocol to the Covenant that would allow individuals to submit communications to the Human Rights Committee.

CHIP PITTS, of the Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights, said that vital statistics, such as infant mortality rates, could be an important indirect measure of racism and racial discrimination. The most fundamental of all human rights was the right to survive. For example, for infants of colour in the United States, this fundamental human right was consistently undermined. African American and Native American communities had the highest infant mortality rates, while white infants had continually the lowest rates. Racial disparities in infant mortality rates had been documented from the 1940s through the late 1990s. During this time, these racial disparities had worsened. In the late 1990s, African American infants died at more than two times the rate of white infants. Native American infants died at 1.6 times the rate of white infants.

The disproportionate death rates of minority infants was the result of discrimination in the provision of a wide range of services which led to extreme poverty and inequitable access to economic and social resources. What this meant in concrete terms was that minority infants in the United States were dying at a disproportionately high rate as a result of racial discrimination in medical care, housing, education, and employment. While overt racial discrimination might be less acceptable in the international community, certain forms of overt racism still continued today, and new types of more covert racism were emerging. This was very troubling.

ANNA BIONDI, of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), said there was a frightening level of workplace racism; unions were among the principle actors in raising awareness of this problem; combatting racism and xenophobia was part of their struggle for freedom and social justice for all. Activities included specially targeted campaigns and training programmes; raising awareness among shop stewards and general membership; changing trade union structures and statutes to encourage the full participation of diverse groups; and providing information and advice. Above all trade unions were engaging employers at the workplace, urging them to adopt equal-opportunity policies that recognized and combatted abuses.

Governments should pave the way by ratifying and implementing the various International Labour Office (ILO) Conventions on equal treatment of workers. The rights of individuals and groups vulnerable to discrimination could only be affirmed if people were free to raise their voices and to organize. Many were still denied the right to form or join trade unions. The Subcommission and the World Conference against Racism should make strong statements on the importance and full observance of the core labour standards enshrined by the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work.

MOHAMMED AHSAN, of the World Federation of Democratic Youth, said the report emphasized the importance of helping each minority group preserve its identity and character. It was believed that in order to ensure the promotion of healthy democracy, unity in diversity of cultures, ethnicity and language was of primary importance. As the largest ethno-linguistic minority in Pakistan, the Mohajirs firmly believed in the principle of unity in diversity. However, the issue at stake was that of providing adequate means to Mohajirs by which they could reinforce their identity and personality. Today, the Mohajirs were being subjected to repression, discrimination and isolation in the urban centres. The ethnic Punjabis who ruled in Pakistan were bent upon denying the Mohajirs their right to preserve and protect their specific identity and character. The Federation strongly recommended that the Government of Pakistan withdraw the policy of repression, oppression and persecution against the Mohajir nation. It asked the Subcommission to ensure that human rights of the Mahajir minority were fully protected and preserved by the Government of Pakistan.

CHARLES L. GRAVES, of Interfaith International, said the Subcommission should take up the topic of "sacrilization of the State", by which the State became a semi-sacred entity; even Western countries did this when they promoted the idea of integrating foreigners, migrants and refugees which placed the newcomers in a lower position until they adopted the prevailing values. Such a process was affecting some countries in Asia. In Pakistan, Mohajirs, Sindhis and Baluchis as well as Northern Territory peoples were dominated by the central military Punjabi power. The Kashmiri people were suffering from this approach as well.

In India, a sacrilization process was under way whereby certain State-supported academics were making efforts to prove that the Sikh religion was really a Hindu religion -- something the Sikhs strongly contest. Sacrilization of the State had been practised in the colonial period, which was one of the reasons the victims of colonialism now wanted reparations. If everyone wanted to protect religious and ethnic minorities, it would be helpful for some Western powers to admit that the same thing had been done since the sixteenth century. It was important to fight racism in all its aspects.



* *** *