SUBCOMMISSION HEARS FROM EXPERTS, NGOs ABOUT PROTECTING RIGHTS OF MINORITIES

MORNING

HR/SC/99/19
18 August 1999


The Subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights continued discussion this morning of the prevention of discrimination against minorities, hearing from a host of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) alleging maltreatment of minority groups around the world and calling for greater respect by States for all their ethnic and religious populations.

A representative of International Institute for Peace said Constitutional frameworks that accorded a predominant position to a particular religion or group ensured that the rights of minorities would not be preserved. In a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-cultural world, she said, the absence of tolerance created the danger of violence and infringed upon human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well as threatened democratic pluralism, and endangered peace and stability both domestically and internationally.

Other NGOs alleged specific discriminatory practices in various countries, including persecution based on religious belief, forced displacement, and suppression of inter-cultural education.

Subcommission Expert David Weissbrodt said special attention should be paid to the Roma, as they often migrated across national borders in Europe and the de facto discrimination they suffered was not exclusive to any one nation. He suggested that the Subcommission undertake a study of the problems Roma faced and explore ways to improve their situation.

Alternate Expert Deepika Udagama said a worldwide database on minorities currently under development should be expanded. Expert Erica-Irene A. Daes, while conceding that it was exceptionally difficult to produce a single definition of a “minority”, nonetheless suggested drafting criteria to determine if a person belonged to a minority group or not.

Subcommission Expert Sang Yong Park and several other speakers expressed concern over the recent earthquake in Turkey and offered condolences to the Turkish Government.

Experts or Alternates Ahmad Khalifa, Fan Guoxiang, Oleg Shamshur, Miguel Alfonso Martinez, El-Hadji Guisse, Jose Bengoa, Francoise Jane
Hampson, and Asbjorn Eide also participated in the discussion.


A representative of Turkey spoke.

NGOs addressing the session were Minority Rights Group International; European Union of Public Relations; International Institute for Peace; Indian Council of Education; World Federation of Trade Unions; Caucasians United for Reparations and Emancipation; Interfaith International; Consultative Council of Jewish Organizations; World Evangelical Fellowship; International Federation of Free Journalists; and Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation.

The Subcommission will reconvene this afternoon at 3 to complete its discussion of the protection of minorities. After that debate, it will discuss methods of work.

Statements

ALAN PHILLIPS, of Minority Rights Group International, said that, with regard to the situation in Sri Lanka and the recent bomb attack which had killed the group's Chairman, Dr. Neelan Tiruchelvam, it had several recommendations: encourage all parties in Sri Lanka to move toward a just and democratic resolution to the conflict; consider the involvement of a neutral party; carry out constitutional and legislative reform; request the High Commissioner for Human Rights to visit Sri Lanka; and find a way to pay tribute to Dr. Tiruchelvam and a way to pay tribute to the contributions he made.

LUDOVICA VERZEGNAZZI, of European Union of Public Relations, said equality of all before the law, irrespective of faith, creed, colour or gender, was the essential principle of democracy. Where this principle was observed, minorities were protected and their rights ensured. But what happened when a nation called itself a democracy yet sought a structure designed to perpetuate discrimination and oppression? That was Pakistan of today.

The founding father of Pakistan had declared that people were free to go to their temples, their mosques or any other places of worship. But what was the contemporary reality? Pakistan had by law prevented Ahmediyas from displaying the insignia of their faith or preaching their religion. Their places of worship were attacked. They were virtually non-citizens. Zikris, a sect of Islam, were constant targets of attacks. Hindus were not given equality. There was a blasphemy law that had been used primarily against Christians. Death sentences had been passed on Christian men and even children on flimsy grounds of blasphemy.

TATIANA SHAUMIAN, of International Institute for Peace, said the problems facing minorities remained acute and had become worse over the last few years. Tolerance and pluralism were indivisible elements for the promotion and protection of human rights. Ethnic, religious and racial differences were the terminology used to define the diversity represented on the planet. Unfortunately, these very diversities were today the cause of sharp conflicts in different parts of the world. The reality was that States were culpable in denying the rights of minorities on grounds of religion, ethnicity, or language.

Constitutional frameworks that accorded a predominant position to a particular religion or group ensured that the rights of minorities could not be preserved. In a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-cultural world, the absence of tolerance created the danger of violence and infringed upon human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well as threatening democratic pluralism, and endangering peace and stability both within States and internationally.

ASHOK BHAN, of Indian Council of Education, said that there was much diversity among human beings, and this was not meant to be a source of discrimination. The structures established by nation States were often the instruments of oppression against minorities. Majority groups discriminated against minorities by using Constitutional, legal and cultural tools to integrate and change the identity of minorities.

In South Asia, minorities were treated as second-class citizens and did not have the benefits of equality and protection under the law. The new breed of terrorist violence also targeted minorities. In the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, thousands of members of the Hindu minority had fled their homes due to terrorism. These refugee now lived in appalling conditions. In May of this year, the Shia minority community had been subject to massive displacements in one district of Kashmir. This terrorist violence perpetuated the cult of intolerance and violence in Asia. Nations which sanctioned legal and Constitutional structures serving to encourage discrimination based on religion, race, caste or creed should be censured by the United Nations.

SANG YONG PARK, Subcommission Expert, said a few words should be said about the earthquake in Turkey. It was reported that it was most devastating, taking many lives, injuring many others, and destroying property and infrastructure. Fortunately, many countries were rushing to help. International associations should also help with recovery. Even in this national disaster, people were reminded of the most basic of human rights -- the right to life, to food, to water, to shelter, and to health.

AHMAD KHALIFA, Subcommission Expert, said the Working Group on Minorities was making waves. Serious work and remarkable accomplishment had taken place. Work had been submitted on the explosion and disintegration of the USSR, which had given the tasks of the working group a special importance. The number of UN member States had increased from 156 to 185 over the last few years, and there had been a similar increase in minorities.

The right to self-determination had been invoked many times, rightly or wrongly, by minorities over the last few years. The bedrock of the problem remained discrimination, with its long tail of intolerance. Given the great sensitivity of the matter, additional elements could further fan the fire. Big powers preferred to deal with divided, exhausted entities, and since Macchiavelli, there had been nothing new under the sun. Splinter countries were encouraged. This was the greatest challenge before the working group: to stop the avalanche of secession, and to enhance equality within existing borders.

The right to self-determination should be kept within reasonable boundaries. The best way to achieve this, Mr Khalifa said, was to interpret the notion of minority in a stricter sense, thus protecting minorities from making unviable attempts at Statehood. Minorities were entitled to non-discrimination. However, fascination with the concept of minorities could erase the importance of diversity. A priority in the future work of the working group should be a better definition of the concept of minority. The group should not venture to pass political judgements.

FAN GUOXIANG, Subcommission Expert, said that, regarding minority rights, the relationship between the individual, groups and the State was an important question. A holistic approach was needed. A State had the obligation to protect minorities; but, at the same time, minorities needed to actively participate in society at large. Minority groups must not be put on the same level as the State.

Minorities were not only passive recipients of protection; they should also have the right to participate actively in legislative and advisory bodies at all levels within a country. Minorities were part of a country, but they should respect the judicial authority of the State. It was not proper to resort to violence. When there were problems, minorities should negotiate or seek legal redress.

OLEG SHAMSHUR, Subcommission Alternate Expert, said the Working Group on Minorities had done an excellent job and had drafted an excellent report. The recommendation that multi-cultural education be carried out could result in the long-run in societies that respected multi-culturalism.

There was controversy about the issue of definitions. There was no specific need to define or categorize minorities. But definitions did have serious implications as far as Governments' dealings with minorities were concerned. The question of definition would inevitably pop up during working group sessions from time to time. That said, the working group should give the matter some attention.

The working group should encourage States to submit information on best practices. It was critically important to understand what worked in the field of enhancing minority rights and protections.

MIGUEL ALFONSO MARTINEZ, Subcommission Expert, said this was the first time he had taken the floor on a subject that he had not been able to submerge himself in with the dedication and concentration it deserved. He was speaking on the subject because since last May he had spent much time on the issue. The Subcommission in plenary should give attention to the report of the Working Group on Minorities, and pay attention to the declaration that was adopted last year. This document was an important one, and should receive due attention. The discussion had proved very interesting, and a number of topics had been raised.

Particular minorities deserved particular attention. Dual-citizenship and other matters should be further considered by the Subcommission, since they had great impact on the daily lives of minorities. The preservation of identity was ensured by language and education. The participation of minorities in the political life of the country in which they resided was a very thorny problem.

An important conclusion of the working group was that all questions concerning minorities should be solved by peaceful means, whilst preserving national and international peace and security. It was important to point out that the scarce resources of the Secretariat made it hard for the work of the Subcommission to be carried out as appropriate. The dissemination of certain principles of the UN and the discussion of the different traits of all minorities was an essential element in ensuring the peaceful co-existence of minority groups.

DEEPIKA UDAGAMA, Subcommission Alternate Expert, said members of civil society should be encouraged to use the Declaration on the Rights of Minorities more effectively. The nine articles of the Declaration had resulted in some confusion in terms of how they could be used as an authoritative guide for legal and other experts. A manual explaining the principles of the Declaration and a guide addressing their use in regional and international fora was also recommended. General knowledge about those mechanisms was weak; minority groups also needed more information. A worldwide data base on minorities was being assembled and should be expanded.

The working group should draft a Convention on Minority Rights, but the real challenge was to explore ways and means of setting up early warning systems. This need was well recognized today, especially considering the tragedies in Rwanda and Bosnia. Many countries could have avoided this kind of catastrophe had such a system been in place.

There was a need to emphasize the enjoyment of rights by all within the community, especially women. Often the identity politics of minorities was used to oppress women, and this should be redressed. The darker side of identity politics did not permit dissent; Dr. Neelan's death was an unbearable loss to all communities in Sri Lanka and to the international community in general.

ERICA-IRENE A. DAES, Subcommission Expert, said it had been learned from past work that a definition of minority at the global level was not an easy task. In that respect, it was proposed that the chairman or a member of the working group draft criteria to determine if a person belonged to a minority group or not. Such a paper would be of great assistance and would help avoid confusion over whether a person belonged to a minority group or was an indigenous person. There should be a one-day joint meeting of the working groups on minorities and indigenous peoples.

Condolences were offered to the observers from Turkey. It was understood that the Red Cross was already preparing to provide humanitarian aid there.

EL-HADJI GUISSE, Subcommission Expert, said a definition of "minority" was neither useful nor possible. The working group could start with a study of international instruments on the issue. A minority, as an integral part of a country, was an integral part of its population. Minorities should participate in all national events and policies. Some minorities did not always understand what was meant by autonomy or sovereignty, and went past the concept of a national identity. Autonomy and separatism should not be confused. The Working Group should examine this matter and inform minorities that their rights to participate in the overall development of a country did not open the door to independence or separatism.

Specific regulations for minorities would lead to a frittering away of domestic legislation and the concept of sovereignty as held by States. The specifics of minorities should be respected, but they should not be treated specifically by legislation. Instability could be created, and would damage the State.

The tragedy in Turkey was extremely grave, and he expressed his concern and condolences.

DAVID WEISSBRODT, Subcommission Expert, said the Roma people were scattered across many countries, especially in Europe. They maintained a distinct lifestyle which had caused them to come into conflict with the communities where they lived. They were often not recognized as a protected minority by international law and were among the most vulnerable ethnic groups in Europe. While many countries had adopted protective legislation, there was much de facto discrimination. Educational opportunities for Roma children were often inadequate, as were employment opportunities, access to social programmes and benefits.

Because the Roma tended to migrate across national borders, their situation concerned nearly all of Europe. There had not been a thorough study addressing the ways in which people of Roma ethnicity suffered discrimination. The Subcommission could make a significant contribution to this issue. A working paper should be prepared on the problems of the Roma and on ways of improving their situation.


JOSE BENGOA, Subcommission Expert, said there was not enough time to look into all subjects related to minorities. Ethnic and religious differences often became the centre of conflict. Some said the process of globalization was creating a homogeneous society. The first wave of nationalism in Europe had been interrupted by the First World War. The process of globalization at the end of the century had re-released
ethnic-nationalistic impulses.

This was probably one of the most important discussions in the world today. The public was surprised to see these new realities. A few years ago, the situation in Kosovo had been unknown to the public. The Declaration on the Rights of Minorities took an objective view -- minorities were joined by their history and ethnic characteristics. In the context of globalization, minorities looked at the past and their heritage as well as to the future and the new identities they were building.

The Working Group on Minorities must understand what minorities were today. It was difficult to agree on a single definition, but it was fundamental to work within a framework of analysis.

FRANCOISE JANE HAMPSON, Subcommission Expert, said one question concerned minorities who were mobile, as opposed to those who were settled, since special issues could arose specifically in relation to these groups, which included but were not confined to the Roma. The Roma, or Gypsies, raised particular issues, not least because they did not have their own country, and historically they had been the victims of discrimination. The concerns raised by the Roma varied in different jurisdictions. It would be useful to exchange information so that States could be encouraged to follow any examples of good practice.

One of the issues raised with regard to minorities generally was their participation in public life. One example would be where the group was denied the right to form political parties to represent their views. The question of political parties was a particularly difficult one. The only way of reconciling these tensions might be for the State to encourage, very positively, multiple identities. A space should be created in which each identity could be expressed and made meaningful. The advantages of diversity should be advocated by the State, whilst also building a collective identity. Only by maintaining a balance between all of these elements could a minority be given the space to flourish and express its identity without threatening the stability and integrity of the State.

It could be necessary to define "minority" so as to prevent a State from the ultimate form of discrimination, the denial that it had any minorities in its jurisdiction when that was patently not the case. The issue of religious minorities was also a delicate and complicated one.

ASBJORN EIDE, Subcommission Expert, said that regarding the question of minorities and the disruption of States, the promotion and protection of the rights and identities of minorities contributed to the stability of States. Minority rights did not serve as a basis for claims of secession. Claims of groups for self-determination could not be made on the basis of minority rights. Issues of secession were not part of the discussion within the working group.

GENEI SHINOJI, of World Federation of Trade Unions, said that when this issue was debated, the images that came to mind were of the mindless slaughter in Yugoslavia, where death had visited whoever happened to be in the minority. It also brought to mind Afghanistan, where the Taliban had perfected the technique of massacring ethnic and religious minorities. And of gun-toting, motorcycle-riding youth in Pakistan attacking the places of worship of minorities and of minority Islamic sects. The Taliban, indoctrinated in the camps and schools of Pakistan, had even at one time demanded that some minorities wear special colours to identify themselves, a practice reminiscent of Hitler.

If minorities had indeed been given the respect that all human beings deserved, the history of the world would have been different. There would have been no crusades, no Hitler, no jihad and no homeless. Kashmiri Pandits today were the most helpless and most ignored minority to be persecuted by fundamentalist mercenary gangs marauding across their land from Pakistan. In such an environment, inculcating respect for human rights appeared to be a hopeless task. If Pakistan could not be reformed, it was incumbent upon human-rights activists to ensure the protection of rights of the persecuted Kashmiri Pandits.

SILIIS MUHAMMAD, of Caucasians United for Reparations and Emancipation, said so-called African Americans were a people, not a minority, yet in the United States were given minority status. A kind of civil death had been inflicted. The US, with knowledge that it had denied identity to the group for over 400 years, was in violation of its international obligations. Intercultural education was an impossibility, and specific UN assistance was required.

Without knowledge of one’s mother tongue, individual identity could not be preserved. Without identity, there was no culture. Without culture, there was civil death. To destroy a people and their shared life was a crime. The UN could provide a remedy by establishing a forum for so-called African-Americans at the UN in New York. A forum was required to restore human rights, and would provide a peaceful and protected environment for the resurrection of their legal political being and status as a people.

KASHINATH PANDITA, of Interfaith International, said that further clarification of the definition of "minority" was still needed. One specific situation that needed to be considered was when a national majority became a regional minority and was faced with difficulties common to minorities. Another specific situation was a minority that was numerically small and physically thinly dispersed over a given region. Another was when external entrepreneurs instigated anti-minority sentiments among the majority community in a given region. Sometimes diasporas maligned and discredited minorities at home. Diasporas influenced, at times, elections in their countries of emigration.

The Commission should also address the question of return and resettlement of displaced or exiled minorities to their places or origin. Such minorities should be protected. At times, the establishment of autonomous regions was a solution.

GEORG R. WILKES, of Consultative Council of Jewish Organizations, said Mahatma Gandhi once said that a civilization should be judged by how it treated its minorities. The Council hoped that the UN Year of the Dialogue of Civilizations in 2001 would take the role of minorities in the process of civilization seriously. A serious examination of the integral role of minorities in the process of civilization would be of great value. The experience of minorities could highlight both negative and positive aspects of the concept of civilization. On the negative side, the persecution of minorities in countries which claimed to be guided by the most advanced civilized values had called into question the whole validity of the idea of civilization as it was understood when Gandhi wrote those lines.

The Dialogue of 2001 would be an occasion to re-examine whether the persecution of a minority reflected a simple lapse from civilized ideals or whether this persecution thoroughly subverted the claim of majorities to embody the civilization with which they identified. Scholars studying the Holocaust had showed how the persecution of the Jews of Europe had became far worse at precisely the time that the majority of Jews eagerly adopted European values and culture, adding their own contribution to all aspects of this civilization. And yet they were killed in their millions in the name of this European civilization. Since the Holocaust, the increasing frequency of massacres of members of minority groups had further underlined the ease with which civilized values could be subverted. This then was the negative reason that a UN dialogue should focus on the position of minorities in the process of civilization.

ELIZABETH BAJHA, of World Evangelical Fellowship, said religious minorities suffered persecution and discrimination. These pressures came from a variety of motives and factors, including political, religious and social forces. In many cases, minority religious groups endured discrimination and persecution from members of the majority religion. In other cases, they suffered due to a State's perceived need to eradicate or control all forms of religious expression in order to prevent possible challenges to its authority.

The need to focus on the correlation between the adoption or support of a religion or an ideology by a State and the abuse of religious minorities had been vastly overlooked. It was therefore critical to examine legal provisions relating to religion, the effects of State religion or ideology, the appropriate circumstances for possible interference by a State in private or corporate religious activity, and the existence of measures to prevent impunity and to protect religious minorities from the dangers of intolerance.

ALGIS TOMAS GENIUSAS, of International Federation of Free Journalists, said the integrity and rights of journalists should be protected, and they should be allowed to write about human-rights abuses. Belarus was one example where newspapers were closed and opposition activists targeted.

Foreign domination led to the suppression of mother tongues; this upset the demographic balance. Whereas the Latvian language had regained its status after independence, Belarus was losing its language and cultural identity because Russian had been granted the status of official language. The domination of the Russian language had ousted the native languages of numerous indigenous peoples. Estonia and Latvia were two examples. The Russian Federation should adopt unbiased, constructive cooperation with all its neighbours.

RIYAZ PUNJABI, of Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation, said the working group report provided a wide range of solutions at different levels for dealing with the problems of realizing the rights of minorities. In this context, there were recommendations that needed to be discussed. While examining possible solutions, including the promotion of understanding, the working group had underlined that the process of implementation of minority rights should, among other objectives, serve the purpose of making minorities an essential component of peaceful, democratic and pluralistic societies and ensuring harmony and stability within States.

In fact, minority rights in pluralistic societies had been the subject of perennial debate. At some levels, an apprehension still existed that an overemphasis on minority rights in a pluralistic society could pose a danger to the territorial cohesion, challenging stability within a State. This apprehension created impediments in protecting and realizing the rights of minorities. In a quest to guard pluralism and stability within States, minority rights often became a casualty. The situation became complex when rival States interfered by promoting jingoism and militancy among minority groups in order to further their strategic objectives. There, there was a great urgency to strike and emphasize a balance between the two realms. The rights of minorities could be protected and promoted in a big way once States were convinced that the processes of protection and promotion of minority rights were not directed at bringing about instability.

MURAT SUNGAR (Turkey) said the members of the Subcommission who had expressed concern for the repercussions of the earthquake were thanked, and so were the countries which had provided assistance.



CORRECTION


Paragraphs 3 through 7 of page 8 of press release HR/SC/99/15 of 16 August should be replaced by the following:


HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Subcommission Expert, said the working group on contemporary forms of slavery had received wide and fruitful participation, which had enriched its efforts. The absence of a definition of trafficking was a major reason for difficulty in taking action. The group’s recommendations were annexed to the report. Contemporary forms of slavery were perhaps not covered in international instruments and there was currently no effective way to monitor the situation. A detailed study of contemporary and customary laws as well as a look at monitoring mechanisms was called for. A report by Expert David Weissbrodt was expected.

The situation of migrant and domestic workers remained a priority concern. Regarding domestic workers, especially in France where they worked for diplmatic families, the active participation of the International Labour Office had been enlisted to advise the working group. The problems of small girls at work needed further study. The traffic in human organs was shocking and had motivated the group to keep this item on its agenda.

There were massive violations related to contemporary conflicts. The traffic of children for sexual exploitation also had been explored by the group. The question of corruption as an element in promoting sexual exploitation had been noted within the context of external debt.

The working group was regarded as a place in which to bear witness, make analogies and to reflect -- and, as such, its work was considered very important.