消除种族歧视委员会与非政府组织讨论巴拉圭、南非和乌克兰的状况（部分翻译）

日内瓦（2016年8月8日）——消除种族歧视委员会今天上午听取了民间社会代表们关于巴拉圭、南非和乌克兰种族歧视的状况，随后委员会将于本周审议上述国家的报告。

委员会本周也将审议黎巴嫩的报告，但非政府组织将不会出席讨论黎巴嫩的状况。

一个来自巴拉圭的民间社会组织谈及对土著人民及社区的结构性歧视，并强调在消除贫困和社会排斥方面存在的障碍植根于以大豆为主的单一种植和畜牧业为基础的经济体系中。因此，土地都集中在地主手中，这使得土著人民无法通过适当途径获得赖以生存的土地。巴拉圭是该地区内唯一一个尚未恰当定义种族歧视的国家；经过议会为期七年的讨论后，针对一切形式歧视的法律遭到了驳回，而有关自由和事先知情同意的立法仍未落实。

一个非政府组织表示，南非仍然在努力克服种族问题，但由于其扶持行动系统涉及过多，南非依然囿于种族问题却无法提供救济。政府有关种族代表的意识形态和在种族问题上着眼于数字的方针影响到了社会所有领域，但却并未谨慎处理种族分类问题。这些并没有为潜在的种族紧张情绪架起桥梁，而是助长其加剧，但南非的种族意识形态正在构建基于种族的未来。

乌克兰非政府组织对近期的变化和反歧视法的通过表示欢迎，并对缺乏对民族少数群体权利的保护机制表示担忧。仇外心理、仇恨言论及仇恨罪问题仍然存在，但当局仍然将仇恨罪视为“流氓行径”。在俄罗斯兼并的克里米亚及乌克兰东部得到俄罗斯支持的几个自称的共和国中，正发生着对族裔少数群体权利的严重侵犯，克里米亚鞑靼人（Tatar）的处境尤为悲惨。罗姆人的处境仍然艰难，他们面对着持续的传统歧视和对其广泛的陈规定型和偏见。

巴拉圭Tierra Viva组织、南非团结工会以及哈尔科夫人权保护组织、保护权利组织与乌克兰罗姆人权组织等三个乌克兰民间社会组织的代表们在讨论中发言。

国别审评将在此进行网络直播：http://www.treatybodywebcast.org。

委员会将于今天下午3点复会，开始审议巴拉圭的第四至第六次合并定期报告（CERD/C/PRY/4-6）。

Statement on Paraguay

Tierra Viva, representing 70 indigenous communities, expressed concern about structural discrimination against indigenous people and communities. The obstacles to eliminating poverty and social exclusion among indigenous people were rooted in the economic system of the country, which was based on monocultural agriculture, notably soya, and livestock, which required a huge concentration of land in the hands of latifundistas. Paraguay was one of the countries with the highest inequality in land distribution in the world. Paraguay was the only country in the region without a proper definition of racial discrimination and the law against all forms of discrimination had been rejected after seven years of discussions in the Parliament. Paraguay was also the country with the highest number of rulings by the Inter-American Court for Human Rights related to indigenous issues. The legislation on free, prior and informed consent was not yet in place, while human rights defenders defending core rights of indigenous people were actively prosecuted by the authorities.

Another representative expressed concern about the unequal distribution of land. Lack of access to land was the root cause of poverty among indigenous people and communities. Other issues raised with the Committee included the poor state of health and education among indigenous people.

Discussion on Paraguay

A Committee Expert asked about situations in which human rights defenders active on indigenous issues had been killed. The National Congress for Indigenous People had taken place in March 2016: were all indigenous people and all those who participated in social life in the country represented? Was the indigenous movement in Paraguay united or were there currents?

Other Experts asked about the status of the draft protocol on free, prior and informed consent, the role of indigenous communities in the process, and whether this would be sufficient to fully implement the provisions of the International Labour Organization Convention 169; indigenous courts and how they fit – if they existed – in the official court system; and the situation of the Ayoreo people who were still living in the forest and who were forced to change their way of life because of deforestation.

Responding to Experts’ questions, Tierra Viva said that the National Congress for Indigenous People had not included all indigenous people and communities. There was no clear and robust policy which would ensure the participation or consent of indigenous people, while the draft protocol on free, prior and informed consent had not been discussed with indigenous people and civil society organizations. It was important to stress that the International Labour Organization Convention 169 was a law in the country and in fact it was a constitutional law, but the public policies to effectively implement it were not in place. In 2015, a major concession had been given, without any attempt to hold consultations with indigenous people whatsoever. The Government was increasingly issuing concessions for livestock rearing or oil exploration in areas where Ayoreo lived, causing a major disruption to their way of life; all the concessions were being issued without any consultations with indigenous people and communities. The representative of the non-governmental organization stressed that, as far as indigenous people and indigenous issues were concerned, State statistics were not reliable.

In another round of questions, Experts asked about the relationship with the Office of the Ombudsman, whether there was an institution that protected the people from racism and racial discrimination, and the status of the Indigenous Health Bill. They also inquired about key obstacles in the implementation of the decisions by the Inter-American Court for Human Rights.

Responding, representatives of civil society organizations said that public policies seemed to be adopting a handout approach rather than empowering indigenous people to change their situation. The work of the Office of the Ombudsmen was not sufficient to protect the interests of indigenous people, and the Ombudsman had also outlived his mandate. The Criminal Code did not provide sufficient protection from racial discrimination, and the anti-discrimination legislation had been rejected in 2014 because the State refused to use the term “discrimination” and used the term “violation of the right to equality” instead. Indigenous people represented 1.9 per cent of the population in Paraguay, with 107,000 individuals grouped in five linguistic families and 19 different indigenous peoples, most of them living in the Chaco region or the so-called Western Region.

Statement on South Africa

Solidarity Trade Union said that South Africa was still grappling with race and said that its report presented an affirmative action system that had gone too far and had become so ensnared in race that redress had gotten lost. It was a system in which races were permanently institutionalized in various silos. The non-governmental organization presented two cases to illustrate the point, including the case of Renate Barnard, an employee of the South African Police Service who had been denied promotion for nine years, and who had finally lost in the Constitutional Court on the basis of what in legal terms was known as the Barnard principle which stated that if one group was overrepresented, it would not constitute unfair discrimination if an individual from that group was not promoted. The government ideology of racial representivity and its mathematical approach to race affected all spheres of society, but it did not carefully deal with racial classification. It was not building bridges between the underlying racial tensions but was rather feeding them, and its racial ideology was constructing a future based on race.

Discussion on South Africa

A Committee Expert asked whether civil society organizations in South Africa were consulted in the drafting of the State party’s report, about the contribution of the non-governmental organization to the ongoing discussion concerning hate speech, about the view on the apartheid system and what had been done to eradicate this system and build a democratic State, and about the proposals on the future of South Africa.

Another Expert asked about socio-economic gaps between various groups and whether they had narrowed or widened, and the alternatives to affirmative action in order to achieve equality, particularly in the light of huge gaps between the white minority and black majority.

Responding, the representative of Solidarity Trade Union said that it had not been consulted in the drafting of the State party’s report. South Africa was a constitutional democracy and it was important to create case law, so the non-governmental organization was active in this regard. There was still a lot of race conflict in South Africa, but also progress was being made in reaching solutions. Apartheid was a deep system which had led to pain for generations; there was still a long way to go. A concern was that democracy in South Africa was developing into majority democracy and that the room for minorities was narrowing, including for minorities which suffered under the apartheid. Huge disparities remained, despite the growing back middle class. For example, 75 per cent of schools in the country were dysfunctional and most were in previously disadvantaged areas. South Africa must look into the input-based affirmative action and empower people not only to use the system to force the figures, as the current affirmative action programme was doing.

Asked about Special Equality Tribunals, a civil society organization representative said that those had been created by legislation, including by the Labour Law, while the Human Rights Commission was tasked with looking into issues of hate speech and racism, for example. In order to really get the attention of the ruling party, it was necessary to litigate on those issues. The Government was firmly committed to special measures, but the fear was that they were going too far and the aim was to find the right balance without creating imbalances.

Statements on Ukraine

Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group welcomed the recent changes and the adoption of the anti-discrimination laws, and said that the law on ethnic minorities continued to distinguish between “ethnic Ukrainians” and “those who chose to identify themselves as Ukrainians”, which was discriminatory. The law also lacked the definition on national and cultural autonomy or other ways to identify a minority group, which indicated a lack of mechanism to protect the rights of national minorities. The problems of xenophobia, hate speech and hate crimes remained a problem, especially against African students, Jews and persons originating from the Caucasus. Corpus Azov members often expressed extreme-right ideas and demonstrated neo-Nazi symbols, but this was generally accepted by the authorities. The nationalist rhetoric was often used against minorities by the officials from parties, most cases of anti-Semitism remained unpunished and hate-crimes were mostly regarded to be “hooligan action”. The biggest challenge for human rights in general and minority rights was the Russian annexation of Crimea and Russian-backed self-proclaimed republics in the east of Ukraine, where grave violations of rights of ethnic minorities were taking place. Especially dramatic was the situation of Crimean Tatars and vulnerable non-protected groups in the areas of armed conflict. The situation of the Romani population remained difficult, with persistent traditional discrimination against them and widespread stereotypes and biases.

Right to Protection said that the protection of the rights of refugees, migrants and other persons in need of international protection were rarely conceptualized in Ukraine, which had acceded to main international human rights treaties, including those related to refugees, and stateless persons. The standards pertaining to the protection of non-nationals arising from those treaties were not being implemented, and laws were not in place, and those structural deficiencies led to human rights violations. In 2014/2015, more than 1,000 Syrians had been pushed back from Ukrainian borders.

Roma Human Rights Ukraine welcomed the adoption by Ukraine of the Roma Strategy and Plan of Action and said that almost one out of five Roma did not have the necessary education, while higher education was attained by only one per cent, which made it difficult for Roma to find official employment. Discrimination against Roma students and their parents existed, leading to a high rate of drop outs even before children completed primary education. It was important to allocate adequate resources for the education of Roma children, to ensure ease of access to identity documents for Roma and understand how many were still without such documents. The implementation of the Strategy was not effective because of lack of resources, and because of the impact of the process of decentralization that Ukraine was undergoing currently.

Discussion on Ukraine

A Committee Expert said that many laws had been passed in 2014, such as on Crimean Tatars, and had been passed with Crimea and eastern Ukraine in mind, and asked the civil society organizations about the article 161 of Criminal Code and the difficulty to have an offence under this article proved, the details about court cases and sentences in those cases, and the suggestions to alleviate predicament of Roma who had to flee occupied areas.

ANASTASIA CRICKLEY, Committee Chairperson, asked for further information about the support for Crimean Tatars, and about the designation of Roma as a national minority in the Roma Integration Strategy 2020.

Responding, the representatives of non-governmental organizations said that the meaning of “citizens” in article 161 of the Criminal Code needed to be changed and brought in conformity with international obligations. Previously, the policy towards Crimean Tatars was not to allow their concentration in one territory, in order to avoid that they became a majority in certain areas; as a result, the population was dispersed, and the objective today was to support their concentration in order to ensure their political representation. The decentralization process also did not take into account the interests of national minorities living in regions, and nothing was being done to ensure dialogue between the minority and majority. This was also a problem in Kherson region where many of the Crimean Tatars who had fled Crimea had taken refuge; the talk of some sort of autonomy for Crimean Tatars similar to what they had in Crimea was not seen favourably by the population.

Ukraine had ticked many boxes in terms of passing new legislation, but efforts to ensure their implementation were not sufficient. For example, the anti-discrimination law, passed in 2011 and amended in 2014, was a very good piece of legislation, but nothing was in place to ensure its effective implementation. People did not know about the law, the definition of discrimination or complaint mechanisms, and in fact they were using wrong mechanisms to file their complaints. Long-standing problems that Roma experienced were aggravated by the armed conflict; in some instances, because they lacked identity documents, they could not even escape the fighting as they did not have identity papers to show at checkpoints. In Ukraine, Roma were the national minority.

_________

For use of the information media; not an official record