NGOs address Committee on Elimination of Racial Discrimination on the Implementation of the Convention in Bolivia and Uruguay

Committee on the Elimination
of Racial Discrimination

15 February 2011

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination this morning heard statements from a series of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) on the situation of racism, racial discrimination, and related intolerance in Bolivia and Uruguay. In advance of the Committee’s review of the periodic reports of 12 countries during this session, the Committee will hold two such informal meetings with NGOs. Today’s meeting focused on Bolivia and Uruguay, two of the countries whose periodic reports will be reviewed this week; Cuba will also be presenting its periodic report this week, but there were no NGOs present to speak about the situation of racial discrimination in that country. On Monday, 21 February the Committee will hold a second meeting in which it will hear from NGOs regarding the reports of Norway, Ireland, Spain and Serbia.

Concerning Bolivia, speakers raised a number of issues, including the rights of indigenous people and women, impunity for race-based crimes, land ownership, and access to justice. One speaker said that Bolivia had historically suffered from structural racism and the Committee should bear this in mind when considering the periodic report of Bolivia. There was a dominant class in Bolivia that did not include indigenous people, who were marginalized and often poor and disenfranchised. The new constitution aimed to include those who had previously been excluded from public life so Bolivia was undergoing economic, social and cultural changes. While there were advances being made, there was still work to be done and the political elite were resistant to the change that was underway. Another speaker said that there was a problem with impunity for crimes against indigenous people and payment of reparations to victims. Reparations could not repair the damage, but they could be used to show respect toward citizens and as a fulfilment of the State’s moral duty to provide victims with justice and support. They could also help restore the confidence of victims who had lost their belief in society. In addition to reparations for victims, the Government should investigate and prosecute such race-based crimes. There was also a problem with a lack of statistical data on indigenous people so there was a need for the upcoming census to include more diverse categories to ensure everyone was counted because this census would determine a number of government policies, including proportional political representation. According to another NGO representative, there had been interference in the work of human rights defenders who worked with indigenous communities, such as limiting their financial capacity by blocking the approval of international funding of these groups.

In Bolivia, women were not affected by racism in the same way as men and this was not reflected in the State party’s report. A speaker said that an analysis of the relationship between gender and race should be included in each report presented to this Committee so as to account for the gender perspective in each country. Access for indigenous women to real opportunities was not guaranteed and special regional commissions that represented indigenous people were comprised entirely of men so women were still subjected to patriarchal, racist, colonial systems and needed access to these power structures for the full enjoyment of their political rights. The same was true of economic, social and cultural rights, with women having little access to land, water, economic and educational opportunities and community justice. Another speaker raised the issue of the building of wells which siphoned ground water away from indigenous lands, thus depriving indigenous farmers and communities of water for their crops and livestock.
In the interactive dialogue that followed the Bolivian NGO presentations, Committee members asked whether there were de jure legal obstacles to women owning land, and if this was the case legislative and political reform had to get underway to address this issue. Were there racist youth groups in the country and what was being done in terms of education and the media to combat hate speech, racism and discrimination? Were there ethics or professional standards for journalists and were there educational curriculums that were taught in schools to combat hate speech and other forms of racism? A Committee Expert asked for clarification on proportional political representation in the country and what groups this would apply to. Another Expert asked about the National Day of Shame and clarification about the activities organized surrounding this day as well as the situation of African descendents in Bolivia. Wasn’t the Government of Bolivia indigenous by virtue of the fact that President Evo Morales was of indigenous descent? Had there been no changes in the makeup in the Government since he took power? How did community justice work in indigenous communities? Was the position of indigenous women only the result of colonialism, or did it also stem from indigenous traditional attitudes and practices? Several Experts asked for a clarification on what NGO representatives meant by the term inverse racism.

In responding to some of the questions raised by the Experts, NGO representatives said that there was a law that had just been approved which ensured participation of indigenous communities in educational curricula so social organizations should work to promote multicultural curriculums. Media companies were for profit organizations so they did whatever made them money, so what was broadcast was information that was paid for or brought in profit, making them channels of disinformation. There were ethical codes for journalists, but they did not follow them. Concerning women, it was true there had been some progress in terms of the constitution and other reforms, but what was more important was the patriarchal, colonial system that had been institutionalized in areas like the judiciary. Conciliation continued to be used in community justice to address violence against women and women were often sent back to the homes where the abuse occurred. Women often did not have access to credit, housing or land. The constitution said one thing, but traditions dictated something else and often made women invisible. A gender perspective needed to be incorporated and mainstreamed into policymaking. Regarding the funding of non-governmental organizations, the Government could block external or international funding for organizations and this caused problems for non-profit organizations.

Regarding Uruguay, a speaker from an NGO focused his intervention on the situation of people of African descent. The NGO representative said that actions and omissions were taking place in Uruguay as a result of discrimination and racism against Afro descendents. His organization had been organized to combat this racial discrimination, promote equality of opportunity and to fill the vacuum left by the exclusion of Afro descendents from the political, cultural and economic life of the country. The speaker said his NGO rejected xenophobia and racism, as well as statements by the President of Uruguay that denied there was racism or racial discrimination against people of African descent in the country. For centuries, people of African descent in Uruguay had occupied the lowest rungs of society and this had led to segregation, lower life expectancy, poverty, racial and religious discrimination and other forms of exclusion. Afro descendents accounted for 11 per cent of the overall population, and in some areas and age groups this number was as high as 25 per cent, yet they were invisible in the society. Seventy five per cent of the Afro descendent population lived in poverty and 25 per cent lived in extreme poverty in what was considered a middle income county.

There was a need for greater representation, cooperation and financing to protect the rights of Afro descendents, but this had not been forthcoming. There were no agreements between the Government and civil society to address the needs of this community and there needed to be more of a focus on racial discrimination and racism in the criminal code. Also, the views of all Uruguayans should be taken into account when deciding policies and this had not been done in the past and it had led to a perpetuation of racism. There had been a failure on the part of the State to acknowledge that it had been involved in slave trafficking in the past and had derived economic benefits from that. There were also discriminatory and negative attitudes toward Black people which affected policymaking in the country and undermined the roles that Black people played in all sectors of society. This discrimination had a large impact on women, children and the elderly of African descent. The speaker said they sought the Committee’s help in having Uruguay comply with the recommendations that had been made by the Committee in the past in order to alleviate the numerous inequalities faced by Afro descendents in the country.

In the interactive dialogue following the presentation of the Uruguayan non-governmental organization, a Committee Expert asked why there was so little collaboration between civil society and the Government concerning issues related to Afro descendents. The non-governmental organization representative said that there was supposed to be more cooperation, but this had not been the case so now there was a proposal for the creation of an institute that would focus on the coordination of such efforts with the Government and awareness raising activities. Policies undertaken by the State to alleviate poverty in the Afro community had not been successful and this needed to be addressed, as well as the intersection between race and class. Another Committee member asked how the Uruguayan society perceived the issues of Afro descendents above and beyond governmental policies. Other Experts asked whether there were some people of Afro descent who were more discriminated against than others and whether there were any civil society institutions that were not exclusively focused on issues concerning Afro descendents, but who were concerned about these issues nonetheless. The NGO representative said that in terms of the perception of Uruguayan society, over the years there had been many statements by authorities on the policy and social levels regarding race and people had acknowledged that there was a need for everyone to live in peace, but the poverty and racism of the Afro descended community undercut these ideals. For example, with the census many people did not want to identify themselves as being black and census enumerators were also not trained in gathering census numbers in these communities.

The representatives of the following Bolivian NGOs took the floor: Capitulo Boliviano de Derechos Humanos, Democracia y Desarrollo; the Instituto de Terapia e Investigación sobre las secuelas de la Tortura y la Violencia (ITEI); the Centros de Estudios Jurídicos e Investigación Social (CEJIS); the Comité de America Latina y el Caribe para la Defensa de los Derechos de la Mujer (CLADEM); the Confederación Sindical Única de Trabajadores; Campesinos de Bolivia (CSUTCB); the Confederación de Pueblas Indígenas de Bolivia (CIDOB); the Consejo Nacional de Ayllus Markas del Kullasuyo (CONAMAQ); the Stria Edecotiva Departamental P.T.S.; Confederación Nacional de Mujeres; and the Parlamento del Pueblo Qollana Aymara (PPQA).

Regarding the situation in Uruguay, a representative from the Asamblea Afrodescendiente took the floor.

During its seventy eighth session the Committee will examine the situation of racial discrimination in Bolivia, Cuba, Uruguay, Norway, Ireland, Spain, Serbia, Yemen, Armenia, Moldova, Lithuania and Rwanda.

The next meeting of the Committee will be this afternoon, Tuesday, 15 February at 3 p.m. when it will begin consideration of the combined seventeenth through twentieth periodic report of Bolivia (CERD/C/BOL/17-20). The Committee is scheduled to consider the report of Bolivia for the next two meetings, concluding on Wednesday, 16 August at 1 p.m.

_________

For use of information media; not an official record