UN Geneva - Multimedia Newsroom : OHCHR Treaty Bodies Press conference: Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD)

[Other language spoken]

Welcome to the press conference hosted by the Committee on the Elimination on Racial Discrimination.

Today, the Committee is going to present its findings on four countries, including Finland, Honduras, India and Kuwait.

Being with us today on the podium on my left hand side, we have Miss Sabianaki, members of the Committee and we have Mr Kuch, Chairperson of the Committee, we have Mr Belsasat, Vice Chairperson and Mr Vincente Vacas.

Without further delay, I will let them to first of all present the findings first and then we'll open the floor for questions.

Mr Coote, over to you.

Thank you very much, Vivian.

[Other language spoken]

I'll just very briefly summarise what we have done in the 118 session of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.

We have done 4 country reviews under Article 9 of Convention examining state party reports of Kuwait, India, Honduras and Finland.

Under the simplified reporting procedure, the Committee adopted a list of issues prior to reporting for one state party Eritrea.

The follow up procedure where the Committee considers the interim report submitted after one year on few selected recommendations of the Committee.

We consider the reports, the interim follow up reports submitted by Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Ecuador, Kenya, Monaco, Saudi Arabia and the United Kingdom.

The Committee will in this session today actually adopt A general recommendation, the general recommendation #40 on reparatory justice for the harms and continuing consequences of colonialism, the trafficking in enslaved Africans across the Atlantic and other routes, and racialized chattel slavery.

This will be an important step for the committee.

We have been working on this for some time.

Then, on early warning and urgent action procedure of the Committee, 2 decisions were adopted, one on the civilian harm caused by the Israeli military operations in Lebanon and the second concerning South Africa and the reported recent wave of xenophobia, racial discrimination, racist hate speech and racist hate crime.

Also, a statement was adopted concerning reported violations of the right of the Maasai indigenous peoples in Tanzania.

In addition to these decisions and statements, Statement 7 letters were adopted to be sent to the relevant parties, the Mauritius, the Russian Federation, the United States of America, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Zimbabwe and Brazil.

The individual communications procedure was also on the agenda and the Committee adopted one individual communication under Article 14.

So this is the gist of our main activities in this session, and I will now turn the floor over to my colleagues to report on the findings on the four States Parties and the reports of which we have considered.

[Other language spoken]

Chair, and then we will go to Mr Belsa for Finland.

Thank you, Vivian, and good morning.

So as regards the dialogue with Finland, let me first observe that the committee noted a lot of positive developments since the last dialogue with the State Party.

That was nine years ago when the last dialogue took place and in terms of institutions and procedures as well as national reports and national programmes to combat racial discrimination in various forms, we have noted that the State party takes its obligations seriously.

However, the Committee remained concerned that effective participation in decision making is not yet fully guaranteed for the Sami people and that they traditional lands and resources are not adequately protected, particularly from wind power and lands and mining projects carried out without sufficient free prior and informed consent.

It also noted that Sami traditional livelihoods, including reindeer husbandry, fishing and hunting, remain under increasing pressure from competing land use restrictions and climate change.

The committee called on Finland to ensure that decisions and projects affecting the Sami are not approved without their free, prior and informed consent and to strengthen protection of the lands and traditional livelihoods.

The Committee also recommended improving access to Sami language, education, healthcare and social services.

Further, the Committee noted with concern that racist hate speech had reached alarming levels in public discourse, particularly online and in the political sphere, including speech by public figures and members of parliament targeting migrants, Muslims and other groups.

It also noted that prosecutions and convictions for hate crimes remained low and that gaps persisted in the criminal law framework.

The Committee called on Finland to reform the Criminal Code, effectively investigate and prosecute racist hate speech, incitement to racial hatred and racially motivated violence, and ensure that a racial motivation is properly identified and recorded.

It also recommended that racist hate speech by public officials and members of Parliament be promptly and unequivocally condemned.

[Other language spoken]

Now may we have Mr Vicente Vacas on Honduras.

[Other language spoken]

The Committee expressed concern about forced victions of Indigenous and Afro Honduran peoples, including allegations of excessive use of force by law enforcement.

It particularly underscored that usurpation and aggravated usurpation charges are being used to criminalise members of these communities for occupying or defending their lands.

It recommended a moratorium on evictions until the recognition, regularizations and collective titling of Indigenous and Afro Honduran lands, territories and natural resources are completed.

It also called for laws on usurpation, aggravated usurpation and preventive evictions to be repelled or aligned with international obligations so that they are not used to criminalise these communities or violate their rights.

The Community further recommended revising the Law for the Strengthening and Protection of the Agro Industrial Sector to prevent its use as a basis of evictions.

It also urged Honduras to develop and adopt, in consultation with these communities, A legislative framework to ensure the free prior informed consent regarding any measures affecting the right land, secret places and traditional ways of life, particularly regarding extractive agro, industrial, infrastructure or Environmental Conservation projects.

The Committee remained concerned about the high number of killings, reprisals, threats and acts of intimidations against human rights defenders, including indigenous and Afro Honduran leaders and community members, by both state and non state actors, including organised crime groups and individuals linked to combine to companies involved in disputes with these communities.

It called for torok impartial and effective investigations, prosecutions and punishment of those responsible and adequate reparation of victims and their families.

It also recommended strengthening the national protection mechanisms and the Special Prosecutor's Office for the protection of Human rights Defenders and ensuring timely implementation for of precautionary measures issued by Inter American Commission on Human Rights.

[Other language spoken]

Now we shall go to Mr Tafinlaki for India.

Thank you, Good morning and thank you, Vivian.

So let me start by the very positive fact that India returned to the dialogue with the third after 19 years.

So the last time we had the dialogue, it was two O 7.

And this of course, is very much welcoming a positive development.

India is a state with a constitutional framework and institutional framework on Scheduled castes and tribes following the terminology of India.

However, this framework does not fully align with the Convention framework and the obligations and does not ensure the fulfilment fully the fulfilment of obligations undertaken by India.

So among the concerns that the committee has identified, there was a few that I will now report on.

So first, the committee was gravely concerned about reports of large scale violations perpetrated by law enforcement officials against ethnic, techno, religious groups, indigenous and tribal peoples, including scheduled tribes, scheduled castes, particularly Dalits and non citizens.

This included racially motivated violence, excessive use of force, extrajudicial killings, arbitrary and prolonged detention without due process, torture, ill treatment and sexual violence.

The committee called on India to conduct prompt, thorough and impartial investigations into all such allegations and ensure accountability for those responsible.

The committee also highlighted the increase in law enforcement operations target in the Rohingya, Bengali spinking migrants and migrants and asylum seekers of Muslim faith, particularly following the 2017 Home Affairs Order and the April 2025 Pahalgam attack in Kashmir.

The committee also noted that police stops at identity cheques involving racial profiling have reportedly resulted in arbitrary arrest and detention without due process, as well as torture and I'll treatment.

It was also concerned about deportations and forcible returns of people in need of international protection in violation of the principle of nano fulmo.

The Committee called on India to urgently address discrimination, hate speech and hate crimes against Rohingya, Vigali speaking migrants and asylum seekers of Muslim faith, protect the rights, refrain from collective expulsions and ensure access to international protection in line with the principle of non reform law.

Thank you, thank you, Mr Renaki, last but not least, may we have to check to walk us through Kuwait, please.

[Other language spoken]

The rapporteur for Kuwait, Mr Lamsani could not be with us.

So I will report on the Committee's concluding observations on Kuwait.

The committee welcomed Kuwait.

So presence on time, submission of reports were on time.

The interim report was submitted on time and this is something to be, of course, from our perspective, commended.

The Committee also noted a number of improvements on certain issues that the previous concluding observations had touched upon and came with recommendations.

But at the same time, the Committee draw the State party's attention to the persistence of discrimination against migrant workers, particularly domestic workers, urged the authorities of Kuwait to abolish the kafala system or anything that comes close to that system.

Also, serious concerns were expressed that Bidoon stateless persons who continue to be classified as illegal residents and face discrimination in law and practise.

The Committee also expressed concern about reports that Kuwaiti nationality had been revoked from a significant number of individuals without adequate transparent and due process.

The Committee called for effective measures to end this discrimination.

It also recommended that Kuwait ensure prompt and non discriminatory access to civil documentation and remove barriers to employment, social protection, adequate housing, healthcare and education.

The above findings not only for Kuwait, for all the states parties that we have reported today.

Completing observations, in other words, are to be found in our web page.

If you go to the session page, you will see the documents in detail.

With that, thank you, that will complete the our report.

Thank you for the presentation of the experts.

And now we shall open the floor for question.

[Other language spoken]

Good morning to all the members of the committee.

[Other language spoken]

I work for the Spanish news agency.

[Other language spoken]

First Honduras about the the allegations.

There are a lot of allegations about the the situation of the the Afro descent Garifuna community and these allegations say that there is a plan of disposition and cultural genocide against this community.

I would like to to to have the comment on this of the of the members of the committee and also about Honduras.

What is your position on the lack of compliance by the state for rulings by the Inter American Court of Human Rights concerning different situations of their violations of territorial rights of different communities, for example, *** for the La Cruz Point, Punta Pedra, San Juan and Carlos Cocinos?

This is my two questions for Honduras and for India.

I would like to know if the situation concerning racial discrimination is worse now in India is worsening than to be part of member of a minority.

[Other language spoken]

I I mentioned 20 years because you said that India has been has not been in in this process since 2019 years.

So is is what is, how could you describe over the time the, the situation in in India and if you think that this is this has been driven by a state policy or a strategy?

[Other language spoken]

Maybe we answer the question on Honduras first.

Thank you very much for your questions regarding this.

I must say that the Committee is concerned about fourth evictions of Indigenous and Afro Honduran peoples and the allegation of excessive use of force by law enforcement agents as well as by private security companies and other non state actors linked to company with long standing disputes over the ancestral territories of indigenous and Afro Honduran peoples.

For these reasons, the Committee recommended that the State Party repeal the provisions of Decree and Number 93 Script 2021 relating to usurpation, aggravated usurpation as in preventive evictions or alignment with the State Party's international human rights obligations.

And on the other hand, the Committee.

The Committee recommended that the State Park developed and adopt, in consultation with Indigenous and Afro Honduran peoples, appropriate measures to guarantee the protections on their rights to own, use, develop and control their lands, territories and resources in full security, including the right of Indigenous and Afro Honduran women's to hold title to community lands on their own name.

In accordance with international standards, including ILO Convention 169 and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Also, the Committee urged the state party to comply with the resolutions of the Inter American Court of Human Rights.

Thank you very much.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you for for your question on India.

You know, one of the main problems when a state does not return to the committee for the dialogue is that, and especially for such a long time, is that it deprives itself and also, of course, the persons under its jurisdiction to benefit from this dialogue and from this, you know, progressive implementation of the convention.

That is always the core, let's say, objective of the Convention to to improve the lives of persons and good communities protected under the Convention.

So in this case, India has returned with numbers, but based on its constitutional and legislative framework on how many members, for instance, benefited from affirmative action belonging to castes and Scheduled tribes.

However, it's very difficult to assess in in this abstract way because for the committee it's very important to have very concrete indicators that show, you know, that, for instance, these measures are not only absolute figures, they are we welcome figures, but we mostly welcome statistics and also indicators that show that in each case the special measures had in effect a positive outcome which is measurable and proportionate to the time that they have been applied.

And it's important in this case, for instance, to give you an example, for instance, for Dalits, it's important to have indicators that show that the segregation was effectively and substantively reduced based on our previous concluding observations.

On the other hand, you know the, the framework, sometimes it's lacking, for instance, for migrants and refugees.

And also, you know, the, the general, let's say situation effects their protection.

In practise, one of the major concerns is what we see as lack of accountability.

So lack of accountability for law enforcement, for instance, official act, which plays an important role because even if you have a law, when the law is not implemented and there is no and there is impunity and lack of accountability, then of course you know the hate speech and hate crimes cannot be effectively combated.

So, you know, the, the situation, India is a very big country, a vast country with vast population.

So it's very important that the measures are very carefully designed to also show that they have a positive effect in practise.

And this requires not only refraining, you know, from applying policies that either segregate or, you know, impose, inflict abuses, human rights violations or for or they require concrete measures to combat impunity.

One of the major gaps is also the fact that racial discrimination in the private sphere is not prohibited by law, clearly.

And so also this effects how hate crimes by vigilante groups as well, you know, are investigated, prosecuted, etcetera.

So it's again, you know, that's why I think I hope that India will take this concluding observations and our recommendations in a constructive and will apply them in a constructive way.

And so next time we will have, you know, more information and more, you know, clear indicators on the progress.

[Other language spoken]

Let's Isabel have the follow up question and then we'll go to you.

Discrimination is not prohibited in the in the private sphere.

I mean in most of countries I understand that the discrimination is widely prohibited.

And how important is the discrimination happening in the private sphere?

Compare with what we can.

I mean, compare with the general situation.

[Other language spoken]

I don't know if you understand my questions.

Yeah, I hope that I can answer this question.

It's very important.

And, you know, both, of course, the there is a complementarity between, you know, the prohibition in public and private spheres.

And this is also the case for India because also, but you know, in the private sphere, you know, that it's sometimes we need also other kind of remedies, not only criminal legislation, but also in terms of, you know, act, the violence of fact, hate crimes, for instance.

We need also this decisiveness by the law enforcement and you know, also facilitation of reporting channels to report this violence by private individuals.

But also, you know, other kind of remedies that they can, they can, you know, remedy the violation by for instance, in employment by private employers or in in housing, etcetera.

So, and of course, as always, the committee recommends that awareness measures are taken and education measures.

Without that, we cannot just expect that law is enforced and implemented without explaining why this is wrong, why racial discrimination is prohibited and why it does not.

It's it, it, you know, lies on false assumptions and stereotypes.

[Other language spoken]

Yes, we can have the next question.

Yes, again a follow up on India Alexandro Boy FP just to to, to figure out exactly how things are are organised between 2007 and now.

Has the committee kept on assessing, evaluating India?

And I understand you cannot really identify a general trend, but how have you been working during those 19 years to, to assess things in India?

Yes, thank you for this question.

First of all, the committee has at its disposal the, you know, the procedures under the convention and you know, as drafted and adopted by and ratified by states.

So of course we cannot assess India in absence, we haven't assessed India in absence of a report.

So this is something that couldn't be done.

However, we had other opportunities especially under the early warning urgent action procedures.

And this is also we had also recent, you know, submissions that fully align and fed also our dialogue with India such as recently, you know, the issue of as we as mentioned earlier, the issue of mass deportations, hate spit and hate crimes against Rohingya and other and Begali speaking migrants and refugees.

So indeed, as you probably imply, a state by not returning, by not submitting a report, of course deprives as I said, people under its jurisdiction from this protection.

However, the committee has taken measures to try to address this issue of non reporting.

And I'll, you know, I cannot go into many details.

I think I'm not, I don't have the time now.

But as you know, we're also severely affected by underfunding by the budget cuts.

And this means that also it affects our work despite our best efforts to do our job under this very difficult times and constraints.

[Other language spoken]

Do we have any follow up question from the room?

If not, I also have one question for India.

During the dialogue, India explicitly rejected committee's position that cast based discrimination falls within the convention and the state parties also argue that religious issues and and indigenous peoples are outside the committee's mandate.

What's your reaction and response to this accusation?

[Other language spoken]

Yes, indeed, the Indian India reiterated it's position and for us it's very clear as we the committee has clarified in general recommendation at 29.

It's the racial discrimination also includes discrimination based on social stratification based on inherited status such as caste and other forms of inherited status.

This is something that of course informed the whole dialogue.

The same goes for indigenous peoples.

The problem is that how we identify this population.

However, you know, India wasn't the dialogue submitted information and the the dialogue despite, you know these difficulties, we exchange views and I think this is a, you know mistake in the dialogue is a very positive development.

However, the position of the committee has not changed.

Of course, task based discrimination is a form of racial discrimination and the committee identified it as an issue of social certification based on this inherited status.

And thank you.

And also, yes, the ethno religions.

So what we see as well is that you know, this when it's when it's about migrants and refugees speaking Bengali or being of Muslim faith.

We see as well that it's a form of racial discrimination based on ethno religious because it's a marker do sometimes that it's a marker.

Religion is a marker that cannot be, you know, disconnected from the ethnic or from the ethnic dimension.

And also we can see how they are discriminated based on this combination of factors.

So being migrant or being and being of this religion, it's the same thing I'll we see with gender.

So it's important to understand how racial discrimination impacts people based on the combination of factors that cannot be disconnected.

[Other language spoken]

And I can see a hand online.

Iman, you have the floor and please identify yourself and your agency.

Iman Keriji from the Kuwait News Agency.

[Other language spoken]

In Kuwait, you said that the committees have also noted a number of improvement in on the airport of Kuwait.

If you could elaborate a little bit better at this point.

[Other language spoken]

I'm sorry, could you please repeat your question?

[Other language spoken]

Thank you for the question.

If you go to the concluding observations that the committee has adopted, there is a section on positive aspects.

First of all, we begin all our concluding observations for the positive developments that have occurred since the last time the committee considered the state's party's report.

So there are a number of issues there that I don't have time to go in detail as to another aspect of committees considering positive developments.

For every recommendations that we have made in the previous concluding observations, we compare the situation as it stands currently today.

So whenever there is some kind of an improvement, we underline this.

Now our if you look at the concluding observations, again, the text is structured in such a way that first it underlines the concern, defines the situation, notes the positive and negative trends and then the next paragraph comes a recommendation to the state party to address the issues that, that, that, that that was raised.

So again, there are in every issue, there are a number of positive developments in different dimensions, but also concerns remain.

Therefore, we have the recommendations and we'll see the next time how things have evolved.

I hope this was an answer to your question.

[Other language spoken]

And we have two questions on Finland.

[Other language spoken]

The first one is earlier this month a political party.

Members of the parliament asked whether Finland wants an African Muslim as interior or foreign minister and suggested the opposition party will appoint 1/4 Muslim minister.

The remarks were widely condemned as racist in the country.

But do does the committee think that it is a condemnation is enough or is it necessary to have a mechanism to fix the problem?

And the second question is about migrants push back.

Finland is now seeking to extend, it's so-called push back law until the end of 2028, allowing asylum application to be restricted at the Russian border, Russian border.

So the committee raised concern during the dialogue about this policy.

Do you think that this is the risk of this push back law would lead to racial discrimination and the denial of protection of people who have the right for asylum claims?

[Other language spoken]

Thank you for these questions.

[Other language spoken]

The first one, the race is rhetoric by politicians.

This issue indeed was also discussed and examples were mentioned, both the one you have referred to and also some relatively recent incidents with politicians mocking persons of Asian descent.

And it is the firm belief and opinion of the Committee that such incidents are hateful, hurtful, also illegal under the Convention.

We indeed encouraged officials, elected representatives, members of Parliament to condemn such incidents.

We should note that they were condemned, but it's a good question whether that's enough.

We believe that some codes of good practise and practises should also be considered and and encouraged.

Political parties should also consider some sort of disciplinary measures if if need be.

And for sure this is not an issue that should be just considered lightly.

[Other language spoken]

It is serious where public figures use racist rhetoric.

It is very hurtful and also both individually but also socially.

Now, as regards to the second issue and migration pushback law, indeed that was also part of the dialogue and these issues were raised.

It is true that some concerns exist in this regard, but also let me note that the committee acknowledged the difficulty and security concerns that are the reality on the ground.

It is not a secret that is unfortunately migrants and migration is indeed instrumentalised by some parties or or some States and the the committee cannot just well avoid this reality.

But of course, the committee is very sensitive and vigilant as regards the situation of migrants and specific recommendations were also delivered and are part of the concluding observations.

[Other language spoken]

Mr Belsasat, I don't see any more hands and question on lines.

And OK, you have the last question.

[Other language spoken]

Yeah, on India again, can you tell us a little bit more about the situation of the of the Sikh community and specifically of its activist, which some of them are threatened even abroad in early August?

In fact, UN experts call on Canada to step up protection for a frightened sick activist.

Is that a preoccupation for the committee?

And can you tell us a little bit more about the situation of sick activist in the country, please?

[Other language spoken]

This particular case was not discussed in the dialogue, but in general, the human rights defenders and the civic space was one of the items of the the dialogue with India.

There are there are several concerns this the the civic space is shrinking as we see everywhere.

However, what what we see also as well reportedly is that the, the, the way the, the, the framework of the uncivil on human rights defenders also finally makes it more difficult for human rights defenders to work.

They have to work on specific states.

They cannot work outside the state.

So it's very narrowly framed and of course, we have also reports that they are threatened and they are, you know, also, let's say, marginalised by also private actors.

So what we asked India during the dialogue is to make a clear statement about human rights defenders and how they see their role in the implementation of the convention.

During the dialogue, India made a clear statement that they of course respect human rights defenders.

However, what we see in practise again is, is that this pattern that there is a framework which is not fully complying with international human rights law legal framework.

I mean, and that in practise threats, hate crimes or hate speech or this negative environment for human rights defenders is not fully prevented or or you know, held accountable by the authorities.

So we hope that again, our recommendations will guide India in a better framework and in a better practise.

[Other language spoken]

So now we can have Mr Kutu close the press conference.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you for the questions, thank you for the interest.

The next time the committee will meet in it's 119 session will be in April next year.

The reason is simply because our next session in November, December was cancelled and as a result of the liquidity crisis that the UN is facing, our meeting time is drastically reduced, which means that we have difficulty in performing our duties under the Convention to monitor the States party's performance in relation to their obligations under ISERT.

This is an important element preventing us from working properly.

In order for us to work properly also we depend on the secretariat provided by the OHCHR staff and they are under severe constraints of time staff and being divided between all other human rights treaty bodies.

So the whole I have to underline we work on the basis of the assumption that whatever we do serves the protection of vulnerable groups whose rights are either violated or have been under constant threat of being violated.

So when we cannot do our work properly, it is people who suffer.

I think this is we always work focusing on the victim and we're trying to make sure that nobody is victimised.

But for that we have to be able to do our monitoring.

That's the closing statement that I would and also, OK, let me have my closing statement.

The financial crisis or a liquidity crisis of the UN is a misnomer.

It's not really a crisis that occurred like COVID was a crisis.

It it is with us because some states parties do not pay their dues or they are very late in paying their dues.

So they must be encouraged to act according to their commitments.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you, Mr Coot.

Thank you all, the expert on the podium and thank you for the press for joining us today.

The press conference has come to an end.

[Other language spoken]

OHCHR Treaty Bodies - Press conference: Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination