32/29 Panel discussion on the incompatibility between democracy and racism

GE.16-07567(E)



Human Rights Council Thirty-second session

Agenda item 2 and 9

Annual report of the United Nations High Commissioner

for Human Rights and reports of the Office of

the High Commissioner and the Secretary-General

Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related

forms of intolerance, follow-up to and implementation

of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action

Panel discussion on the incompatibility between democracy and racism

Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights

Summary

The present report is submitted pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution 29/20.

It provides a summary of the panel discussion on the incompatibility between democracy

and racism, held on 18 March 2016, during the thirty-first session of the Council.

United Nations A/HRC/32/29

General Assembly

I. Introduction

1. Pursuant to its resolution 29/20 entitled “The incompatibility between democracy

and racism”, the Human Rights Council convened a panel discussion on the 18 March 2016

to identify challenges and good practices in relation to human rights and challenges to

democratic values posed by extremist political parties, movements and groups; the role of

governments, public authorities and political leaders in the effective prevention and

elimination of racism and racial discrimination and in the protection of vulnerable groups;

and transparent and accountable governance for the prevention and elimination of racism

and racial discrimination.1

2. In its resolution 29/20, the Human Rights Council requested the United Nations

High Commissioner for Human Rights to prepare a report on the panel discussion in the

form of a summary and to submit it to the Council at its thirty-second session. The present

report was prepared pursuant to that request.

3. The panel discussion was chaired by the Vice-President of the Human Rights

Council, Negash Kebret Botora. The United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for

Human Rights, Kate Gilmore, delivered the opening address. The panel discussion was

moderated by Yvette Stevens, Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone to the United

Nations Office and other international organizations in Geneva. The panellists were

Ronaldo Crispim Sena Barros, Special Secretary for the Promotion of Racial Equality

Policies of Brazil; Jerome Jamin, Professor at the Law Faculty of Liège University,

Belgium, and Emine Bozkurt, Member of the Board of Advisers of the International

Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance and former Member of the European

Parliament (2004-2014).

II. Opening statement

4. In her opening statement, the United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for

Human Rights noted that, in many parts of the world, we have witnessed a resurgence of

movements expressing racial, religious, national or ethnic hatred. She expressed concern

about some political leaders who actively and publicly advocated xenophobia and

scapegoated the most vulnerable communities. Some national newspapers as well as

members of Parliament and political campaigners had indulged in the stigmatization of

refugees and migrants, referring to them as “organized invaders”, blogged about alleged

negative characteristics and disproportionate influence of specific minority groups and

devised political posters depicting the need to kick immigrants out of their countries.

5. While the current scale of migration represented a challenge, some leaders have

declared, for instance, that only people of a certain religion can apply for residency in their

countries.

6. For women and girls, gender discrimination compounded the pernicious impact of

these forms of discrimination.

7. The Deputy High Commissioner affirmed that racism conflicted fundamentally with

the central principles and values of democracy. A society that did not fully respect and

protect the equal rights of all individuals to participate in public life and decision-making

was not fundamentally a democratic society. The respectful accommodation of ethnic,

1 All written contributions to the discussion are available at https://extranet.ohchr.org/sites/hrc/

HRCSessions/RegularSessions/31stSession/Pages/OralStatement.aspx?MeetingNumber=48&Meeting

Date=Friday%2c%2018%20March%202016.

racial, religious and political differences was among the objectives of democratic societies,

thus individuals had to be provided with full and equal protection.

8. The Deputy High Commissioner also underlined that education had a fundamental

role in eliminating racial and other negative stereotypes and encouraged States to use all

opportunities, including those provided by the Internet and social media, to counter the

dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred and to promote the values of

equality, non-discrimination, diversity and democracy.

9. Effective judicial protection and remedies for victims of racial discrimination were

also fundamental. States had the obligation to duly prosecute and sanction those responsible

for racist and xenophobic violence. They should also introduce provisions that indicated

that the commission of an offence with a racist or xenophobic motivation or aim constituted

an aggravating circumstance would result in heavier sanctions. Moreover, all racial,

national and ethnic groups should be represented in all local and national institutions.

10. The Deputy High Commissioner highlighted the responsibility of political parties,

platforms and organizations to take decisive action against racist discourse and encouraged

them to develop internal disciplinary measures against public statements and actions that

encouraged or incited racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

11. Lastly, the Deputy High Commissioner urged all States to demonstrate both political

and moral leadership in fighting racial discrimination and xenophobia more vigorously.

States should promote diversity as the greatest force for the enrichment of humanity as a

whole that enabled the foundation for freedom and co-existence.

III. Statements by panellists

12. The panellists emphasized that racism and racial discrimination were serious

obstacles to the full enjoyment of human right for minorities and vulnerable groups and

stressed that preserving and consolidating democracy was essential in order to prevent and

combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

13. Mr. Barros focused on Brazil’s experiences and challenges in combating

discrimination. He highlighted that racism was an ideological structure and that any form of

discrimination was incompatible with democracy.

14. Mr. Barros underscored the importance of the black movement in Brazil. He gave an

historical overview of how Brazilian racist practices were addressed over the last 80 years

in the country. He noted a number of achievements included in the new Constitution that

was adopted in 1988, exactly 100 years after slavery had been abolished in Brazil.

According to the new Constitution, every citizen was equal before the law and entitled to

security, property and freedom of every sort. Article 68 of the Constitution also granted

ownership of the lands to the remnants of quilombo communities. More than 50 per cent of

the Brazilian population was made up of people of African descent and they were the main

beneficiaries of public policies to reduce poverty. He further noted that poverty was

reduced by 86 per cent in 10 years. He stressed that the Brazilian Government also strived

to ensure a greater rate of participation of people of African descent in public offices and in

schools. So far, 1.3 million black citizens had attended public colleges, mainly owing to the

system of quotas.

15. Mr. Barros concluded by highlighting achievements made over the last 13 years in

promoting racial equality policies, not just for the black population, but also for other

minorities, youth and women. This had led to the creation of the Secretariat for the

Promotion of Racial Equality on 21 March 2003, whose policies were aimed at reversing

the negative representation of black people, promoting equal opportunities and combating

prejudice and racism.

16. Mr. Jamin focused on racist parties, noting that they were usually described as “far-

right” parties. He specified that this did not mean that religious extremist parties did not

constitute a problem for democracy. But, in general, parties advocating racism, xenophobia,

islamophobia, anti-Semitism and incitement to discrimination put themselves on the

extreme right. He referred to the definition of democracy and to the different battles for

democratic legitimacy between traditional, or so-called democratic, parties and extreme-

right parties.

17. With regard to the definition of democracy and the incompatibility between far-right

parties and democracy, he stated that far-right parties defined democracy as the legitimation

that resulted from elections and believed that, in order to be a democratic party, it had to

abide by existing rules and procedures and needed to obtain enough votes to be legitimate

and able to represent voters. For far-right parties, these criteria were sufficient for

legitimacy. For traditional parties, on the other hand, this was indispensable, but not

sufficient. Traditional parties also looked for the respect of some values and principles

having their foundation in core international human rights instruments. For traditional

parties, the pillar of “respecting electoral procedure” went hand in hand with the pillar of

“fundamental human rights and values”, so that the second pillar would monitor the first

and prevent abuses.

18. Mr. Jamin stressed that the difference between the definition of democracy by far-

right parties and by traditional parties was fundamental. It was not possible to organize a

political system with popular parties, democratic procedures and regular elections while at

the same time tolerate torture, arbitrary arrest, State-sponsored racism or other forms of

discrimination and human rights violations.

19. He noted that, in practice, many traditional parties promoted public policies that

directly or indirectly violated fundamental rights. An example of the way traditional parties

violated human rights was the European policy toward migrants, which was adopted by

traditional parties and governments, and which sometimes forced the expulsion of asylum

seekers to their countries of origin. He recommended more discussion on the second pillar

in State policies and in documents promoting democracy and providing information on

acquiring citizenship or residence. He concluded that the second pillar was just as important

as the first

20. Ms. Bozkurt referred to the current refugee crisis, which has deepened and rather

normalized the racist discourse within the public debate and was helping the extreme right

to become the voice for a large group of frightened and angry citizens. She underlined how

the refugee crisis was initially considered a problem of only a few countries. But this

changed drastically in 2015 owing to the increased influx of refugees, especially in Europe.

Extreme-right leaders called for protests against asylum-seeker centres, describing male

refugees as possible radical jihadists or potential rapists. The incidents that took place on

New Year’s Eve in Cologne, Germany, did not help either. It caused massive anger and a

more racist attitude towards refugees. Even though it later turned out that hardly any

refugees were involved, the damage had already been done.

21. Extreme-right parties always availed themselves of the right to freedom of

expression and framed opposition to immigration in a way that was acceptable to a large

number of people who were turned off by straightforward racism. They covered up their

discourse as defending domestic traditions and values. While a Constitution or other

legislation could not stand up, political leaders who respected it could, and silence would

only help racism to increase. However, the rhetoric of mainstream parties came close to that

of extreme-right parties in order to attract voters. It was not easy to define the borderline

between expressing oneself and insulting someone based on race, ethnicity or nationality

and incitement to hatred. The European Union had the moral responsibility to sound the

alarm when major social changes for the worse occurred within the borders of its member

States, to adopt a strong position on emerging extremism and to create a holistic approach

to safeguarding fundamental human rights in the European Union, otherwise democracy

would be under serious threat.

22. Ms. Bozkurt described existing practices in combating racial discrimination through

and in sports and underscored that the fight against racism needed more heroes speaking

out loud, including football players, clubs, politicians, leaders and people in the streets.

IV. Summary of the discussion

23. During the ensuing discussion, contributions were made by representatives of

Algeria, Belgium, Chile, China, Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, France, Georgia, Germany,

Greece, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Italy, Mexico, Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan (on its own

behalf and on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation), Panama, Paraguay,

Portugal, the Russian Federation, South Africa (on behalf of the African Group), Spain, the

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Uruguay (on behalf of the Southern

Common Market (MERCOSUR)) and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), as well as the

Council of Europe and the European Union.

24. Representatives of the following national human rights institutions and civil society

organizations also took the floor: Friends World Committee for Consultation, International

Movement against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism, Maarij Foundation for Peace

and Development, UN Watch, Arab Commission for Human Rights, Iraqi Development

Organization, and International Youth and Student Movement for the United Nations.

Statements by the World Jewish Congress and the International Organization for the

Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination were not delivered owing to lack of

time. Copies of their statements are, however, posted on the Human Rights Council

extranet.

25. Many delegates began their statements by condemning political organizations based

on racism, xenophobia, racial discrimination as well as any kind of legislation based on

those ideas, which are incompatible with democracy.

26. One delegate, speaking on behalf of a group of States, noted that, 16 years after the

first resolution on the incompatibility between democracy and racism had been adopted,

racism, xenophobia and intolerance in public opinion and society seemed on the rise.

Vulnerable groups, such as migrants, refugees, asylum seekers, indigenous peoples,

minorities and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons continued to be victims of

violence and attacks.

27. There was general agreement among the delegates that, even in the greatest

democracies in the world, individuals belonging to vulnerable groups, such as migrants,

refugees and minorities, continued to be victims of violence. Many delegates pointed out

that the large-scale migration and terrorist acts had led to a proliferation of hatred and

xenophobia that targeted some groups and stigmatized them on the grounds of culture or

religion. The situation of vulnerable groups — mainly migrants — had worsened in recent

months, which impeded the exercise of their rights to fully enjoy human rights.

28. Another delegate noted that, in some cases, xenophobic acts were justified on the

basis of democratic values, which created a conceptual confusion that must be clarified.

29. Several Member States highlighted that democracy, transparency, participation,

responsibility and respect for human rights were essential to preventing and eliminating

racism. Moreover, impunity for crimes committed with racist or xenophobic attitudes

remained an impediment to strengthening democracy and the rule of law, as well as to the

eradication of poverty and underdevelopment.

30. The representative of a non-governmental organization (NGO) stated that the non-

implementation of United Nations resolutions was incompatible with democracy.

31. During the discussion, attention was also drawn to the role of education. It was

agreed that universal, free and quality education represented a fundamental opportunity for

eradicating poverty, promoting sustainable development and eliminating racism. Inclusive

education measures were key instruments to neutralize the upsurge of extremist political

groups, movements and parties and the best way to fight against racism, sexism and

exclusion. The importance of fighting against all kinds of stereotypes through general

awareness programmes was also highlighted. As long as school books depicted minorities

in a pejorative way, racist attitudes would continue to flourish. Furthermore, the need to

ensure access to culturally appropriate education for ethnic groups was underscored, in

order to ensure the preservation of their traditional knowledge and to reaffirm the cultural

diversity of countries.

32. Some delegates reaffirmed the commitment of their governments to the fight against

racism and other forms of discrimination and to the strengthening of democracy, in line

with the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action and the commitments under the

International Decade for People of African Descent.

33. One delegate, speaking on behalf of a group of States, stressed that equality was

contrary to any doctrine of superiority based on racial differentiation. The International

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination rightly terms such

doctrines as scientifically false, morally condemnable and socially unjust and dangerous.

Democracy and racism were intrinsically incompatible. In a democracy, responsibility to

counter racial and religious intolerance rested with the majority that was controlling the

State apparatus. The current increase in religious and racial profiling constituted a threat to

the democratic order of societies.

34. Another delegate, speaking on behalf of a group of States, noted that, since political

leaders and parties had a role to play in combating racism and relating intolerance, States

should ensure that their political and legal systems actively promoted the multicultural

diversity within their societies. They should improve democratic institutions to make them

more participatory and inclusive, and avoid marginalization and exclusion of specific

sectors of society.

35. Another delegate, speaking on behalf of a group of States, expressed concern about

the current trend of increasing incidences of racist and xenophobic acts throughout all

regions of the world and recognized that a vigorous approach was needed to combat it. Not

only effective legal responses were needed, but also preventive measures that promoted

social inclusion, acceptance and equality for all members of society. Legislation was not

enough and there was a real need to look at practical ways to combat racism, racial

discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

36. Several delegates highlighted that respect for human rights, democracy and the rule

of law were essential to prevent and combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and

related intolerance. Recalling the Rabat Plan of Action on the prohibition of advocacy of

national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostililty or

violence and its recommendations aimed at preventing racism and intolerance, some

participants urged States to criminalize, prevent, discourage and combat discriminatory

acts, as well as implement preventive measures in response to the threats posed by racism.

They noted that combating and preventing racial discrimination was not the job of

governments alone. Civil society and the private sector had key roles to play and were

important partners in tackling racism and other forms of discrimination.

37. Participants pointed out that in many places racism has become institutionalized and

officialized at the expense of society, with certain politicians voicing extremist views that

targeted Muslims, Arabs and people of African descent, despite the fact that they had

integrated into the society. To counteract this trend, participants called for social harmony,

cohesion and civil stability, as well as for the implementation of justice, tolerance and

dialogue in the fight against racism and related intolerance.

38. Several delegates expressed concern at the fact that, 15 years after the adoption of

the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, racism still represented a reality in our

daily life. Incidences of racial discrimination and even violence had been witnessed over

the past months in all continents and under different political environments. Beyond

legislation and regulation, effective institutions, both to enforce the law and to strengthen

awareness of the need to fight racial discrimination, were needed. The reality required

collective solutions at the local, national, regional and international levels.

39. One delegate affirmed that a democratic system was inclusive by definition and that

a system in which democratic values were only granted for a part of the population could

not be recognized as a democratic system. Participants also called on the moral

responsibility of the international community to take urgent action against those who were

undermining democratic values and propagating extremist ideology and violent extremism.

Owing to its incompatibility with democracy, all manifestations of racism must be punished

through both legislation and practice.

40. The representative of an NGO echoed the concerns expressed by the Committee on

the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and the Human Rights Committee about the

disproportionate impact that disenfranchisement legislation had on minorities.

41. One delegate urged States to take note of the more fundamental needs, like

economic, cultural and collective rights, and their role in combating extremism and racism.

42. The representative of an NGO noted that the full implementation of the International

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination was an essential step

to combating racism and promoting democracy, and expressed concern about the large

number of States that had not yet submitted their initial or periodic reports by the due dates,

which showed a lack of political will to combat racial discrimination.

43. In the same vein, some delegates urged States to fully and in good faith fulfil their

obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial

Discrimination, including by withdrawing their reservations and adopting legislation

prohibiting any public statement inciting national or religious hatred. They called on all

States to reinforce their activities against racism through both national policies and dialogue

with the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, as well as with other

international bodies.

44. Participants urged political leaders and parties to refrain from public statements and

actions that incited racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

45. Several delegates referred to new formats for the dissemination of hate speech, for

example, through social networks, and pointed out that this phenomenon was difficult to

control. However, technology should not be used for criminal aim but rather to promote

mutual respect, equality, equity, diversity and democracy.

46. One delegate pointed to the need to prosecute those who promoted hate speech,

including through the Internet. The Internet is the reflection of the real world. If States were

strict with their legislation, they should be able to apply the same standards with regard to

crimes committed through online platforms. Some delegates stated that governments ought

to show solidarity with victims of racial discrimination and protect them efficiently. They

felt that the rise in hate speech, especially online, required specific attention and enhanced

measures.

47. One delegate offered that fighting racism meant creating new social models. Racism,

xenophobia and hatred based on ethnic and religious grounds were major threats in the

current global situation that was characterized by economic instability, which brought

significant challenges to the full enjoyment of human rights by all. The current global

situation also posed a threat to democracy, particularly by extremist parties and groups,

including neo-Nazis that were now gaining alarming popularity. There was a great danger

of falling into historical revisionism and misrepresenting historical accounts to achieve

political interests, which was a characteristic feature of extremist parties and movements.

48. Another delegate said that everyone was entitled to a democratic international order.

States must respect international principles and implement the Durban Declaration and

Programme of Action and the outcome of the Durban Review Conference, as well as

actively respect diversity and safeguard the rights of people to their path to development.

Reducing inequalities and poverty for all must be a priority for all States.

49. Several delegations shared information about the different measures that had been

taken at regional and national levels to combat racism and racial discrimination. These

measures included legislative initiatives, the adoption and implementation of national and

regional action plans against racial discrimination and on human rights and democracy, as

well as tools and programmes on anti-discrimination aimed at a better implementation of

policies against racism. Specific measures to protect vulnerable groups against racism were

also mentioned, including the establishment of telephone hotlines and sending email

messages to provide information around the clock to migrants and refugees in different

languages.

50. One delegate noted that democracy was not expected to confer certain privileges and

attributes to one race over another, given the racial mix of any State. Rather, democracy

was expected to be an attribute that complemented racial unity, rather than segregation, and

provided the basis for the unity of a State, furthering the cause of racial harmony and unity

on the basis of equal rights and equal vote. Universal suffrage, the underlying principle in

any democracy, grants the right to vote and is not restricted by race, sex, belief, wealth or

social status.

51. One delegate mentioned that democracy expressed diversity and should

accommodate diversity of ideology, opinion and religion of both minorities and majorities.

At the same time, democracy must protect certain groups at risk from discrimination or

intolerance and find the right balance between freedom of expression and mechanisms for

the prevention of discrimination, intolerance and xenophobia. When xenophobic political

parties, anti-immigrant policies and intolerance were justified by the right to freedom of

speech, it was not possible to talk about real democracy.

52. Another delegate expressed support for the drafting of a United Nations declaration

on the promotion of and respect for the human rights of people of African descent.

53. Delegations also urged States to renew their efforts in the fight against racism.

Promoting tolerance and fighting against racism was a human rights obligation, but also an

absolute necessity to maintain democratic and pluralistic societies.

V. Conclusions

54. In their concluding remarks, the panellists highlighted the essential role that

education plays in addressing racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related

intolerance. States were encouraged to support safe and inclusive school

environments, where universal values were at the foreground. The panellists

underlined the importance of coming to terms with each country’s history, for

instance by teaching the history of slavery, so that students could learn from the past.

It was also important to ensure that the diversity of society was duly reflected in the

personnel of school, as well as in public institutions such as national parliaments, the

civil service sector, the police and the judiciary. The panellists further underlined the

importance of combating racism and discrimination within public institutions.

55. With regard to leaders of political groups and parties who propagated hatred

and promoted extremist ideologies for popularity and political legitimacy, the

panellists noted that, in some countries, there were mechanisms to prohibit political

parties if they were found to incite racial hatred or xenophobia. Another practice

consisted in stopping the funds available to political parties, since in some countries

official bodies could decide on the maintenance of public finance for political parties.

At the same time, democratic parties could come together to oppose extremist parties.

Finally, anti-racism legislation was the best means for breaking the political career of

an extremist leader. When politicians could be banned from participating in elections,

they might think twice before propagating racist speech.

56. The panellists also mentioned promoting anti-racial discrimination campaigns

through and in sports, particularly football. Expressing great concern about new

emerging forms of racism, particularly against vulnerable groups, including migrants,

refugees and asylum seekers, the panellists underlined that more vigorous efforts were

needed and that everyone had a role to play, including at the national, regional and

international levels.

57. Finally, the panellists stated that the adoption and the full and effective

implementation of national, regional and international legal frameworks, in line with

the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial

Discrimination, the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, the Rabat Plan of

Action on the prohibition of advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that

constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence and the Programme of

Activities for the Implementation of the International Decade for People of African

Descent provided a strong basis for eliminating the conditions which caused or

perpetuated racial discrimination.