Introductory remarks by Mrs. Louise Arbour to the Panel Discussion "Discrimination and hate crimes: countering the violence of intolerance"

International Day for the Elimination of Racial discrimination
21 March 2005
Geneva, Palais des Nations



Distinguished dignitaries,
Ladies and gentlemen,

Good afternoon. I would like to welcome you all to this panel discussion organized on the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.

As we have done on many occasions before, we want to use the memory of the tragedy of Sharpeville, South Africa forty-five years ago to reaffirm our unequivocal rejection of all forms of racism, xenophobia, and intolerance. We also use this occasion to reflect collectively on how best to combat the discriminatory practices that spring from that doctrine of hatred.

Those responsible for the Sharpeville massacre, as has been the case with other perpetrators of grave human rights violations, did not manage to change the course of events leading to the end of the formal apartheid regime in South Africa. However, other manifestations of racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia continue to blemish our times around the world.

Resistance to discrimination goes back to the origin of the human rights concept. Largely, it was the rejection of differentiation of people on the basis of national, ethnic or social origin, religion and gender, as well as resistance against slavery that marked the history of human rights. Since the creation of the United Nations, the international community adopted a comprehensive framework for eradicating racial discrimination, from the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination to the 2001 Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. This framework expresses clearly the common agenda for the implementation of the principles of non-discrimination and equality.

In all these documents, the international community not only has rejected racism, xenophobia and discrimination but also outlined comprehensive programmes of action. Yet we must question the effectiveness of this international normative framework.
Our determination to act in the face of large-scale atrocities driven by racial, ethnic or religious intolerance must include stringent measures of law enforcement to ensure accountability of direct and indirect perpetrators. It must also encompass a larger effort to learn and understand the history of conflicts apparently caused by a pathological drive to eliminate those perceived as different.

Even aside from the manifestations of discrimination on a large scale, there is plenty of easily available information documenting that the effectiveness of international standards and international programmes leaves much to be desired. Data such as those which indicate that ethnic minorities and indigenous people are overrepresented among persons arrested or imprisoned, and in the number of deaths in custody provide some evidence of their limited impact. We note with real concern the often too slow action by the police, the prosecutors and the judiciary for investigating and punishing acts of racial discrimination, which often leads to total or partial impunity for the perpetrators of such acts. We are also alerted to the frequent lack of accessible remedies for the victims to obtain redress and restore respect for their rights.

Despite having a good legal framework and good guidance, we are clearly short of results. As the Independent Eminent Persons appointed to follow up on the implementation of the Durban recommendations stressed at their recent meeting, “the international community is […] far from reaching a real breakthrough in countering the scourges of our times - racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.”

In my statement to the Commission on Human Rights, I called for moving from the declaratory to the implementation phase in the promotion and protection of human rights. We all know that the best tools are only of value if they are put into practice. This is fully applicable to the struggle against racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia. We need to identify and address, one by one, the reasons why, in spite of good laws and programmes, we have not made substantial progress in the eradication of the practices generated by racial intolerance. For example, disturbing reports about attacks against synagogues, mosques, churches and other sacred places remind us that we have to address the complex roots of present intolerance.

It has often been remarqued that extreme poverty and the resulting exclusion may fuel extremism and –potentially- violent responses. Less often acknowledged is the link between extreme deprivation and the perpetuation of discriminatory ideas and practices. When we tolerate that entire groups of people live under conditions that prevent even the most basic fulfilment of a life with dignity, when we tolerate that they remain malnourished and uneducated, we fuel the self-fulfilling prophecy that lies at the heart of discriminatory ideologies: the idea that some people, by virtue of their race, ethnicity, national origin or religious affiliation, are less able and less deserving than others. In other words, inequalities engender further inequalities, the mere existence of unequal treatment becoming the discriminatory rationale for its continuation. This, in my view, has been apparent in the struggle for gender equality. The more women are found and kept in an inferior social and economic position, the easier it is for some to claim that their predicament is evidence of their inability, or unwillingness, to better themselves.

The same invidious perceptions lie at the root of racism and related forms of intolerance. In addition to the sheer malice that permeates overt forms of racism, the real danger rests in the unspoken assumptions about where others belong, and what they deserve. Viewed that way, the combat against racism, xenophobia and related intolerance must do much more than merely alleviate the plight of those who are directly targeted and victimized by violent discrimination. Clearly, in the face of such despicable actions, we must respond with unambiguous condemnation. We must have recourse to criminal sanctions and adequate compensation that reflect the true magnitude of the harm suffered by victims of hate crimes. Above and beyond the material or physical injuries inflicted, violent expressions of racism are meant as a rejection of the victim as a person and, as such, they call for forms of redress that reaffirm the dignity of the victim and her central place in the human race.

Just as importantly, in my view, we must combat all forms of intolerance by celebrating the diversity and the differences that enrich the human family. But we must work to reduce the differences that are imposed, rather than chosen, that speak of deprivation rather than fulfilment and that fuel the xenophobic discourse about the relative merit and desert of individuals based on stereotypical attributes attached to their race, religion or ethnicity. Above all, we must ensure that no legitimacy whatsoever is granted to public racist discourse.

We should understand violence broadly, and not only as physical attacks. When we advocate prevention, protection of victims and accountability as cornerstones of an effective strategy countering violent intolerance, we must understand violence in that broader context. We often talk about the value of education, formal and informal, as an essential preventive mechanism. By promoting tolerance and better understanding between and among communities, education is moving our minds from bias and prejudice to respect and appreciation for other cultures, religions and traditions. Yet we should not look at education only as a way of preventing or overcoming bigotry. Education is above all the greatest tool of empowerment and we should ensure that its full potential is made available to those who may be the targets of violent intolerance in part because of their powerlessness. I subscribe entirely to the view expressed by the Independent Eminent Experts who called for measures that could help victims of discrimination to overcome their disempowerment, in particular appropriately tailored educational programmes.


In addition to education, other similar measures of empowerment require considered action at the local, sometimes even grass-roots level. The protection of all minorities, particularly unpopular ones, and the rights of indigenous peoples, migrants and refugees are particularly important in this context. Access to justice is critical. The rule of law institutions, including the administration of justice, must be particularly attentive to their own stereotypical assumptions and must question some of their practices that may have discriminatory effect, even when free of discriminatory intent.

This year, we have selected for our commemorative event the topic of “Discrimination and hate crimes: countering the violence of intolerance.” Reports from and on victims of violent discrimination in different parts of the world are reaching us with terrifying regularity and often are only warning signs of other deeply rooted human rights problems. They also at times degenerate into large scale conflicts.



Ladies and Gentlemen

We are discussing today difficult problems, involving human nature, law, culture, economy, and history. These problems have been with us for a very long time. Their complexity cannot, however, be used as an excuse for inaction. Let us spare no efforts to implement our common agenda adopted at the Durban Conference that so far has raised more hopes than produced results.