La Lettre

FIDH Newsletter

SPECIAL SUPPLEMENT:

World Conference Against Racism
Durban 31 August - 7 September 2001

"What is your view about the position of Palestinian minors who have been imprisoned and who say they have been tortured?

This has been a problem for some time, but, it is fair to say, that it has arisen again since the second Intifada began. We are very concerned and I, personally, am leading the investigations into this matter. Although there have been no arrests of minors by the Israeli army during the Intifada in the Gaza Strip, things are quite different in the West Bank, because Israel still controls almost 80% of this territory. They have arrested many minors. The conditions under which they are being held are dreadful. Many Palestinian organisations are helping them, mainly by providing lawyers, but also by raising public awareness by reporting each case and conducting campaigns to free them. Israel, however, is ignoring all these activities and is continuing its policy of arresting young people under eighteen and putting them in prison with non-political prisoners and employing methods of coercion and torture. The sentences are very harsh and more or less the same as those for adults. It is a very serious matter, which we utterly condemn.

Is FIDH campaigning on this issue?

FIDH is describing many acts committed by Israelis as crimes. There is a willingness to kill. Since the beginning of the Intifada, more than two hundred minors have been killed, including a baby of four months. In Rafah, in the south of the Gaza Strip, a child was shot right through the head in front of an Amnesty International representative, 250 metres away from the soldiers.

Director of the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR), Raji Sourani,
who is also FIDH Vice-President.

What makes us really angry as a human rights organisation is that the Israeli position is one of organised killings. These are snipers whose instructions are to kill and who are firing on these children. The Israelis accuse the Palestinians of exploiting their children for political reasons in order to 'dance on their blood'. That is quite simply obscene. All that it does is to complicate the situation further. The bombing of civilians has also traumatised hundreds of children. They are suffering as a result of the situation. As a result of the violence, but also as a result of deprivation because of the economic disaster brought about by the blockade of the Palestinian territories. Not to mention those who have lost their homes, destroyed by Israeli bulldozers. That is going on in the Gaza Strip, as well as the West Bank so it is not just the arrest of minors. The situation of Palestinian minors is dreadful. FIDH condemns unequivocally all these acts. On different levels, we are taking action to bring the consequences of the Israeli occupation to the attention of the entire world.

Do you think Ariel Sharon should be put on trial for war crimes?

It is not a matter of passing judgement on Sharon based on political or ideological considerations. Sharon, however, was personally implicated by an Israeli Commission of Inquiry for his rôle in the massacres of Sabra and Shatila in the Lebanon. A lot of people tend to forget that he is a war criminal. We thought then that his political career was at an end. Benyamin Netanyahu, however, when he was Prime Minister, put him back in power. It is unfortunate that he was elected with such a majority in a country which describes itself as the only democracy in the Middle East. Since he has been in power, everything he has been doing verges on being a war crime.

Interview by Pierre Barbancey
published in the French daily "L'Humanité" of 19 June 2001

_________________________________________________________________________

Palestinian Centre for Human Rights

|Affiliated to FIDH in Palestine, the PCHR is an organisation based in Gaza, with consultative statute with the UN Economic and Social Committee (ECOSOC). The work of the Centre consists of documentation, conducting investigation on human rights' violations and the provision of legal aid and advice to
individual cases, as well as groups. The centre also provides commentaries on
|Palestinian bills and recommends the adoption of legislation
|incorporating international human rights' standards, as well as basic
|democratic principles.
|Contact:
|Omar El Mukhtar St., El Remal, PO Box 1328, Gaza, Gaza Strip
|Tel/Fax: (00) 972 8 2824776 - 2825893 - 2823725
|E-mail: pchr@pchrgaza.org - Web Page: www.pchrgaza.org

SPECIAL SUPPLEMENT:

World Conference Against Racism
Durban 31 August - 7 September 2001

---------------------------------------

Contents of the Supplement:

• Discussion: The Challenge of Durban
• United Nations: CERD: an instrument that's used too little )
  International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and their families
• Immigration: Migration and Human Rights. New Challenges
• China: Excluded from the Conference: China and its "unwanted people"

The challenges of Durban

Initially, then, this Conference was seen essentially as a last resort and was meant,

above all, to remotivate people on these issues. At that time, even though a few new issues were already largely understood, the Conference's great political challenges were mostly set out during the preparatory meetings. The non-governmental organisations, in particular, drew up their demands after having grasped the process. Some of these demands attracted the attention of the States and are today the subject of the most heated negotiations.

One of the first demands comes mainly from black-American NGOs. These organisations are calling for slavery, the slave trade and colonisation, as well as the resulting moral and financial restitution, to be recognised as crimes against humanity. For them, the World Conference offers an opportunity for an essential political agreement allowing both a return to the past and an in-depth consideration of the consequences of these events, which are still being felt today. It is a basic requirement of international law that any

violation of human rights be followed by restitution - remembrance of the suffering inflicted on certain peoples must be accompanied by a consideration of the ways in which they can be compensated for this suffering. Its application to slavery and colonisation is today central to the Durban agenda.

A new North-South divide is emerging on this issue. While African countries support the non-governmental demands in this instance, it is without doubt partly for deep-rooted reasons related as much to their history as to their current situation. More specifically, discussing slavery and colonisation, and putting in this new context the issue of debt cancellation as a means of compensation, also encourages a re-think of today's economic order. But, at the same time, this debate provides them with an effective way of managing many of the claims against the North and of avoiding debate on the extremely serious instances of racism which are standard practice within their own borders. The Northern countries, for their part, cite the technical difficulties of the operations as a reason for avoiding the political agreement in principle. They also refuse to examine the past on the pretext that they are dealing with current problems - a completely false argument. Above all, the North seems to want to avoid any long-lasting challenge to the system which enabled it to speed up its development and which still exists today in other forms. It is also a case of trying not to switch from the current system of aid to poor countries, based largely on voluntary aid, to a new system, based on the principle of righting wrongs.

One of the other challenges of the Conference concerns a particular type of discrimination - that based on caste or, more specifically, on descent and occupation. This issue must be included in the Conference agenda, and the fact that caste-based discrimination is a form of racial discrimination must be confirmed once and for all. This is the position of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination - a body which has, in fact, long been aware that these issues come within its remit. This position, contested by India, must be confirmed by the World Conference, for in default the Committee would be rejected as a failure on an issue which affects millions of people in the world. Basically, it is the definition of racial discrimination which is being questioned. For a long time, this definition has gone beyond discrimination based on physical characteristics, and encompasses that based on ancestry, or national or ethnic origin, nationality, or even religion, culture or language. The use of the term "race" itself poses a problem - this is an artificial term which structures thought as a result (some appeals, in the project under discussion, to celebrate "racial diversity", are puzzling). In any case, when faced with new forms of "racism", it has shown itself to be inadequate. It is difficult to find the dividing line between "racial discrimination" and other forms of discrimination because these various forms are interdependent and discrimination can be "multiple". In fact, it is impossible today to claim to want to deal with the issue of racism without including that of cultural, religious, economic and social discrimination.

In this respect, the many calls for the protection of heritage and cultural diversity confirm
a remarkable change of direction on this issue. There are also many points mentioning the effects of globalisation on cultural diversity and poverty in the world. On this issue, the Durban Conference will provide continuity with the numerous international gatherings at which civil society has demanded fairer international economic relations and a more equitable distribution of wealth - at both international and national level. The link between poverty and racism is now self-evident and it is to be hoped that the full recognition and implementation of economic, social and cultural rights will be strengthened.

There are many other important themes and sub-themes which cannot possibly be dealt with in detail here. However, it is impossible to talk about Durban without mentioning the issue of immigration and the treatment of migrants. In fact, as far as the exercise of basic rights is concerned - particularly civil, economic and social rights - there is much discrimination based on nationality. The West is again in the hot seat on this issue,

even though it is not limited to developed countries. One of the challenges of the Durban Conference will be to raise awareness of the problem among Southern countries whose practices are equally intolerable.

The Durban Conference will be difficult. The issues of compensation and castes are so controversial that they have provoked fears in some quarters that the whole Conference will collapse as a result. Then there is the Israeli-Palestinian question, which pits the Muslim States - whose remarks during the preparatory meetings have often bordered on the unacceptable - against Israel, supported by the Western countries. These countries are refusing to allow the situation to be treated separately in the final text, as it was during the last two World Conferences. (On those occasions, only South Africa and Israel were strongly condemned for their crimes). Can the system of institutionalised discrimination in place in Israel and the occupied territories, or the worrying situation in other countries, such as Afghanistan, continue to be passed over in silence?

Mylene Bidault

Useful Internet Sites
For further details on the current process and the results accomplished to date:

- www.fidh.org: has a special site devoted to the World Conference in the "news" section
-www.unhchr.ch: site of the UN High Commission for Human Rights. A special site devoted to the World Conference, with all the official documents.
- www.racism.org.za: you'll find the positions of the many NGOs on the challenges of the Conference.
- www.icare.to: site of I Cares, an NGO which has set up many discussion forums, and which is handling the follow-up of the discussions.

>>156 states have ratified the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Such a large number makes this convention one of the most ratified international instruments for fundamental human rights in the world.

To ensure that each participating state fulfils its obligations properly, the convention requires them to periodically produce a report on what measures they have adopted of a legislative, judiciary, administrative nature or anything else which put into effect the clauses of the convention. This report is then examined by a committee of independent experts - the Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (C.E.R.D.).

This system is far from being perfect. In fact it is difficult for a state to evaluate itself especially when it knows that it may be criticised afterwards. It is important to be aware that this involves the risk that a state will not play fairly, by covering up the truth, omitting certain things and even just by focussing on positive issues alone. In addition to this the Committee is not permanent. It meets for several weeks a year and has to learn about the situation in countries very different from one another and about which it does not have any particular information. Finally, too big a delay elapses between being given the report and its subsequent scrutiny which may then render it obsolete.

In spite of these weaknesses the main problem of the C.E.R.D is under-use. In other words, it is important for human rights defenders to learn how to use the C.E.R.D. to their advantage. Large-scale lobbying campaigns should be organised both before and after the submission of each state's report 1 as well during its scrutiny so as to try and influence the report's contents and its ensuing recommendations as much as possible before their release into general circulation. These limited commitments must then be stretched further; the depositing of the report with the C.E.R.D can be used as a pretext ;for the Press to start a wide public debate and hand the fight against racial discrimination over to the people.

As Régis de Gouttes, C.E.R.D member, emphasises, "there is no doubt that this weapon is essentially of a political and psychological nature (but) it should not be under-estimated for all that." 2 No state appreciates seeing itself put in the stocks when it delivers its annual report to the C.E.R.D. or to the United Nations General Assembly or when it gets recommendations on its own situation. We need to be sufficiently resourceful to play on these fears and C.E.R.D members are waiting for us to do just that.

Notes:
1. For example during the Strasbourg European Conference preparatory to the World Conference in October 2000, one of the reporters made the request during a plenary session that the parliaments should be involved in the compilation of these periodic reports.

2. R. de Gouttes, "the role of the United Nations Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination", Revue trimestrielle des droits de l'Homme, no. 46, 2001, p.579.

International Convention for the Protection of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families.

The International Convention for the Protection of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 18th December 1990 is no longer in force. However, the threshold of the 20 ratifications needed has almost been reached as 16 states are now parties. Amongst them only two European countries, Bosnia-Herzegovenia and Azerbaijan, and one Asian country, the Philippines, have lodged their instrument of ratification. It goes without saying that acceptance of the norms included in this convention by developed countries is the main demand made by the NGOs.

This Convention is particularly important in as much as it is the only international instrument to take into account all the fundamental rights of migrant workers. It thus supplements the International Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination significantly as the latter does not apply where distinctions are made by states between Nationals and Non-Nationals, in spite of the particularly interesting attempts made by the Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to this end. Furthermore the Convention for the Protection of Rights for all Migrant Workers attempts to recognise the rights not only of those workers who regularly find themselves in the host country but also those without the right to remain - that is the most vulnerable. It demand that fair and impartial conditions be established in the area of international migrations.

As with the most important conventions on human rights issues, the International Convention for the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and the Members of their Families makes provision for a supervisory body. This consists of a committee of independent experts fairly representing the various regions of the world - the Committee for the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and the Members of their Families.

The FIDH, convinced of the need to promote the universal and rapid ratification of this convention, has decided to support the world campaign for the Convention on Migrants' Rights. For more information: Migrants Rights International, 15 route des Morillons, 1211 Geneva 20. Tel. 0041 22 9177817. E-mail. migrantwatch@vtx.ch.

In less than twenty years, the reality of migration has changed profoundly. The traditional flow away from

poor countries towards the prosperous areas of the planet (the United States and North-West Europe in particular) has continued in spite of increasingly drastic policies for controlling border crossings. However new immigration countries have emerged, for example the Northern Mediterranean, while new conflicts (the Lebanon wars then the Gulf war, the conflict in the Great Lakes region, the Balkans wars, the interminable Afghanistan conflict…) have forced millions of new refugees onto the path of exile to join those populations displaced by even older wars such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The sudden wealth of the oil-producing countries since the mid-1970s unleashed the "black gold migrations " while transit countries or rebound countries, for example Turkey, Jordan, Morocco or Algeria, traditionally areas of emigration, gradually turned into settlement countries for foreign populations. For tens of millions of people, now better educated than previous migrants, the world has become, in spite of all constraints, ever closer and cheaper thanks both to a more accessible media and better transport. The areas attracting migrants and refugees today, like recruitment countries, are increasingly varied. Globalisation is no longer solely financial.

International migration poses new challenges to both governing authorities and societies alike. In traditional immigration countries who have become prosperous thanks to immigration, colonisation by immigrant populations raises new issues - not simply issues concerning equal rights and the recurrent problem of xenophobia but increasingly that of discrimination, often indirect and under-hand, and that of cultural diversity.

Furthermore, the fate of migrants and asylum seekers is more dramatic. In authoritarian societies, which are more often than not poor, foreign status does not carry with it a respect for human liberties and the civilian population is not strong enough to promote a general respect for the rights of non-indigenous nationals. The situation could become even more tragic if the politicians make the presence of foreigners a political issue - as no society is naturally immune to racism and xenophobia. Such campaigns - as recently seen in Africa or in the Middle East - can be deadly.

Finally nowhere in the world can national policies alone deal with the new realities of immigration. In addition to a new international vision of foreigner's rights, there is obviously an increasing need for a regional approach that respects rights.

Driss El Yazami
General Secretary of the FIDH

>>Every country has called for broad NGO participation in the Conference against Racism. Several however took advantage of the opportunity to try and exclude six organisations. Strangely all operate in Asia and out of the six, three saw their presence contested by China.

With one exception, the exclusion tactics employed by Beijing ended in failure. This is to be welcomed - particularly as the two successful organisations targeted work in Tibet. For the Tibetan Centre for Human Rights and Democracy (TCHR) and The International Campaign for Tibet (ICT) this is a big first. Human Rights in China (HRIC) were not so lucky and saw itself excluded from the Conference after a vote by the second preparatory commission (PrepCom) at the end of May 2001 in Geneva - 45 votes for, 50 against and 17 abstentions. This vote presented some surprises - the fact that the Ukraine, India and Morocco all abstained and that all of the Eastern European countries were strongly in favour. Among the disappointments was Romania's abstention as it is a candidate for EU membership and thus obliged to align its position with that of the Fifteen.

Nevertheless the most absurd behaviour was that of South Africa. As the country hosting the Conference it was to be hoped that it would have declared itself in favour of the accreditation of the organisations concerned. At worst its desire for neutrality motivated by its concern not to offend Beijing could have been understood - South Africa abstained in the case of both the ICT and the TCHRD - but that it was opposed to the HRIC's participation, thus yielding to Chinese pressure - this is what is really unacceptable. The NGOs involved in the fight against Apartheid have done a great deal to denounce this iniquitous regime within the realm of international public opinion. How can South Africa have such a short memory and refuse to other organisations what she herself benefited from until Apartheid was finally abolished?

During PrepCom, the Chinese argument regarding the HRIC depicted the organisation as a subversive group whose aim was to overthrow the Chinese government. We will pass over the absurdity of such a statement. These arguments repeat word for word those given by the Chinese delegation when the UN NGO Committee was examining the HRIC's request for advisory status on 4th June 1999 - such a status allows NGOs to participate in UN meetings. The Committee, comprising 19 member states was overwhelmingly against the granting of this status in the vote. According to customary procedure the Social and Economic Committee (Ecosoc,) which oversees the NGO Committee, then endorsed this decision. Let us go back to the 2nd PrepCom - the eve of the vote on NGO matters - rumours were coming from the Cuban delegation advancing the idea that Ecosoc (the UN Social and Economic Committee) had decided by consensus not to grant advisory status to the HRIC. The Sino-Cuban battle plan was thus built on unsubstantiated rumours - it is actually extremely rare that Ecosoc decides to review a decision taken by the NGO Committee. In short this tactic succeeded in convincing all of the Latin-American countries they should not oppose the Ecosoc consensus. Statements that the Latin American states opposed to the HRIC's accreditation confessed to having "forgotten" that the NGO Committee had taken a vote in which both Chile and Cuba participated. Governments certainly have short memories.

China - Discrimination against Internal Migrants

In the Teheran/Katmandu Declaration, the Asia-Pacific NGOs acknowledge that in China internal migrants meet with the same kinds of problems as cross-border migrants. Since the beginning of the economic reforms at the end of the seventies, millions of people from the poorest rural regions have flocked to the towns in search of work.

Nevertheless the hukou (resident permit) that each Chinese citizen receives at birth continues to restrict freedom of movement by imposing a system of internal passport control. Due to administrative complexities it is rare for internal migrants to obtain all of the necessary permits for a new domicile in due form. No resident permit, no social life.

As scapegoats of the repression caused by the explosion in criminality, internal migrants have been deprived of their access to public services (health, education), and have no means to appeal against the treatment they are subjected to such as torture, "cleansing" of towns by police, arbitrary detention under the system of "detention and renewal" and violations of working rights. The HRIC calls on all participants in the Conference to do everything possible to ensure that discrimination against internal migrants is included in the final document.

The Issue of GONGOs

One of the most worrying obstacles to NGOs participating in the world conference is the ever stronger presence of GONGOs (Governmental Non-Governmental Organisations). The Tehran conference in particular was the opportunity for many governments to send and support these associations that are often not genuine and always subject to their government. These GONGOs, intended to counter any action by genuine associations are trying to monopolise the place allotted to non-governmental voices. They oppose demands that are embarrassing for their government and slow down as much as possible any vague desire to condemn any of the States for any violations they have committed.

For more information on the Tehran conference, please see:-
www.fidh.org
"Le bilan de Téhéran sous le signe de l'intolérance."