UUI, Alm.del - 2009-10 - Bilag 200: Orientering om FN's Racediskriminationskommitees konklusioner vedr. Danmarks 18. og 19. periodiske rapport om gennemførelsen af FN-konventionen om afsdkaffelse af alle former for racediskrimination, fra udenrigsministeren

Introduction2.The Committee welcomes the submission of the combined eighteenth and nineteenthperiodic reports of the State party, which included responses to the concerns raised in theCommittee’s previous concluding observations (CERD/DNK/CO/17), and the opportunitythus offered to resume the dialogue with the State party. It commends the State party for itspunctuality and consistency in the submission of periodic reports since it became a party tothe Convention, and the quality of the reports which are in strict conformity with theCommittee’s guidelines. It also expresses appreciation for the frank and sincere dialogueheld with the delegation as well as the oral responses provided to the list of themes and thewide range of questions posed by the Committee members. On this point, the Committeewishes to acknowledge the gender balance in the composition of the delegation and noteswith appreciation the inclusion in the delegation of a representative from the Governmentof Greenland following the recent referendum that led to self-government of theGreenlandic people.3.The Committee notes with appreciation the input to its proceedings by the HumanRights Institution in Denmark, namely, the Danish Institute of Human Rights (DHIR) andvarious non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

Positive aspects4.The Committee welcomes the establishment of a Division for Democratic Cohesionand Prevention of Radicalisation under the Ministry of Refugee, Immigration andIntegration Affairs which is mandated to coordinate the implementation of the initiatives ofthe action plan titled ‘A Common and Safe Future’ for the prevention of radicalisation andextremist views among young people.5.The Committee welcomes the publication of the ‘Action Plan on Ethnic EqualTreatment and Respect for the Individual’ in July 2010, which is a revision of the ‘ActionPlan to Promote Equal Treatment and Diversity and Combat Racism’ of 2003. TheCommittee notes that the revised action plan seeks to engage a multi-faceted effort incombating racial discrimination, promoting diversity and equal opportunities.6.The Committee also welcomes the publication of a Guide based on the Act on theProhibition of Discrimination on the Labour Market, which seeks to help organisations,employers, employees and others to understand rules of the labour market in this field.7.The Committee notes with appreciation that the State party consulted with civilsociety organisations working in the area of human rights protection in connection with thepreparation of its period report.

Concerns and recommendations8.The Committee notes with regret that notwithstanding its previous concludingobservations recommending the incorporation of the International Convention of theElimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, the State party finds it unnecessary to doso, arguably, because the Convention is already a source of law in Danish courts. However,the non-incorporation of international treaties results in reluctance by lawyers and judges toinvoke such treaties in Danish courts. (art. 2)The Committee reiterates its position that the State party should incorporatethe Convention into its legal system to ensure its direct application before DanishCourts in order to afford all individuals its full protection.9.The Committee while taking note of the State party’s efforts to encourage reportingof hate crimes through the preparation of guidelines on the handling of cases under section266B of the Criminal Code, it is concerned with the broad powers of the Director of PublicProsecutions to stop investigations, withdrawal of charges or discontinue cases. TheCommittee is also concerned with the large number of cases that have been discontinued bythe Director of Public Prosecution which would discourage reporting by victims. TheCommittee is also concerned with the current proposals by various politicians to repealsection 266B but welcomes the assurances by the State party that the provision will not berepealed. The Committee is also concerned with the large number of complaints it receivesunder its Communications procedure that is provided for under article 14 of theConvention, that mainly focus on hate crimes (art. 4 (a) and (6))

The Committee recommends that the State party should limit the powers of theDirector of Public Prosecutions by establishing an independent and multiculturaloversight body to assess and oversee the decisions taken by the Director of PublicProsecutions with regard to cases under section 266B to ensure that discontinuance ofcases does not discourage victims from lodging complaints or promote impunity byperpetrators of hate crimes. In line with General Recommendation 31 (2005), theCommittee urges the State party to resist calls to repeal section 266B which willcompromise the efforts and gains that the State party has achieved in combatingracial discrimination and hate crimes.10.The Committee regrets that the State party has neither provided satisfactory data onthe numbers and legal status of the Roma generally nor accounted for the Roma that settledin the State party during the post-1990 period from other European Union countries (arts. 2and 5).The Committee recommends to the State party to take appropriate measures toestablish the numerical and legal status of the Roma people that exist in the country.The State party should also provide shelter to the Roma and travellers in the countryand afford them full protection from discrimination, racial profiling, hate crimes, andfacilitate their access to public facilities.11.The Committee notes with concern that applicants to the Police Service from ethnicbackgrounds other than Danes, fail the police recruitment test in disproportionate numbers,and also account for the high drop out rates from police colleges. The Committee is alsoconcerned with the higher rates of unemployment among immigrants and descendants fromcountries other than the European Union, North America and Nordic countries (art. 2, 5 and6)The Committee urges the State party to adopt specific measures to establish themain reasons why applicants with other ethnic backgrounds other than Danish fail thepolice recruitment test and drop out of police colleges. The State party shouldstrengthen its efforts in promoting people from other ethnic backgrounds other thanDanish to serve as police officers in order to have a racially balanced police service.The State party must also strengthen its efforts to remove all impediments formigrants in the labour market such as racial prejudices and stereotypes, bypromoting change of mind set amongst employers through awareness raisingcampaigns.12.The Committee notes the recent amendments to the Aliens Act that introduce a new100 point-based system for obtaining a permanent residence permit, which system, on theone hand, aims at establishing a direct link between integration and obtaining a residencepermit, and, on the other hand, seeks to encourage migrants to make an effort in order toobtain a residence permit. The Committee, however, regrets that this point based systemintroduces onerous and stringent requirements that would virtually exclude beneficiaries ofinternational protection (art. 2, 5 and 6).

The Committee recommends that the State party should take specific measuresto assess the implementation of this new system to ensure that it does not excludepeople solely on the basis of poverty, dependence on State resources, level ofeducation, failure to penetrate the labour market and passing the Danish languagetest. Furthermore, the State party must ensure that the new system does not excludebeneficiaries of international protection who due to age, trauma or othervulnerabilities do not meet the criteria and, therefore, cannot complete the integrationtargets set out in the law.13.The Committee notes with concern the legal requirement that foreign women whoare victims of domestic violence must have continuously lived in the State party for at leasttwo (2) years before cessation of cohabitation due to their spouse’s abuse in order to beeligible for a permanent residence (art. 5(b)).The Committee recommends that the State party should take measures tocontinuously and closely monitor the application of this legal requirement to ensurethat women who are victims of domestic violence are not forced to cohabit with theirabusive spouses so that they can complete the two (2) year period in order to beeligible for a residence permit. The State party should adopt concrete measures topromote other options for eligibility to a residence permit after cessation ofcohabitation for women who fall short of the two (2) year requirement.14.The Committee reiterates its concern regarding the restrictive conditions underDanish law with regard to family reunification. This relates to the requirements that bothspouses must have attained the age of 24, and that their aggregate ties with Denmark mustbe stronger than their ties with any other country unless the spouse living in Denmark hasbeen a Danish national or has been residing in Denmark for more than 28 years. TheCommittee reiterates its concern that this may lead to a situation where persons belongingto other ethnic and national backgrounds other than Danish are discriminated against in theenjoyment of their right to family life, marriage and choice of spouse (art. 5 (d)(iv))The Committee urges the State party to adopt concrete measures to assess theracial impact of this legislation in the enjoyment the right to family life, marriage andchoice of spouse. Furthermore, the study must assess whether this law unduly restrictsentry into marriage and, whether this limitation on the rights affected outweighs themischief it seeks to prevent, namely, forced and early marriages. The State partyshould also evaluate whether this requirement unduly restricts those people whosatisfy the minimum age for contracting a lawful marriage in Denmark.15.The Committee while it appreciates that the State party’s objective under the ‘anti-ghettoization’ law is to prevent marginalised grouping and not ethnic grouping, it regretslack of data on the impact that the implementation of this law has on the affected people’srights to freedom of residence, the practice of the culture and preservation of their culturalidentities (arts. 5 (d) (i) and (e) (iii) and (vi))The Committee recommends that the State party should assess the impact thatthe implementation of the anti-ghettoization law has on the rights of various ethnicgroups to practice their culture, and ensure that it does not have an assimilationisteffect that leads to the loss of cultural identities by those affected by this law.16.The Committee while noting that the government has conferred autonomy anddiscretion to municipalities and private institutions to offer mother tongue tuition, it regretsthat it has failed to provide general policy direction on this matter to municipalities andother actors in the field. The Committee notes that mother tongue teaching is only offeredto children from European Union, European Economic Area countries and those from FaroeIslands and Greenland in order to maintain their language proficiency in case they later4

return to these places. However, there is no explanation as to why people of other ethnicgroups that seek to benefit from mother tongue tuition have not been included in theprogramme (art. 5 (e) (v) and (vi))The Committee recommends that the State party provides a generaleducational policy on this matter, which will carry all people on board, and takeappropriate measures to assess whether people of other ethnic groups require mothertongue teaching so that this is extended to their children who can then benefit on anequal footing with children from the EU, EEA countries, Faroe Islands andGreenland.17.The Committee reiterates its concern with regard to the decision of Supreme Courtthat was handed down on 28 November 2003 relating to the Thule Tribe of Greenland,which decision failed to follow established international norms in the conceptualisation ofindigenous people. As a result, the Supreme Court rendered a decision which found that theThule Tribe are not a distinct indigenous people notwithstanding their own perception assuch. The Committee further notes the case of Greenlandic people that are considered to be‘legally fatherless’ because they were born out of wedlock to Danish men who were inGreenland in the 1950s and 1960s, which status has an impact in matters of family law,land ownership and inheritance (art. 5 (d) (vi))The Committee reiterates that pursuant to General Recommendation 8 (1990)and other United Nations instruments, the State party is urged to pay particularattention to self identification as a critical factor in the identification andconceptualisation of a people as indigenous. The Committee, therefore, recommendsthat notwithstanding the decision of the Supreme Court, the State party should adoptmeasures to ensure that self identification is primarily used in determining whether apeople are indigenous or not. In this regard, the Committee recommends that theState party should adopt concrete measures to ensure that the status of the ThuleTribe reflects established international norms on indigenous peoples’ identification.The Committee urges the State party to take measures to address the problemsfaced by the legally fatherless who, by virtue of having been born out of wedlock, arenegatively affected by various laws including the laws governing family life, landownership and inheritance.18.The Committee while welcoming the establishment of the Board of Equal Treatmentto consider complaints alleging discrimination in all fields, it notes that the prescribedprocedure is very impersonal in that individuals can only lodge complaints in writing eventhrough letters. The Committee further notes that the Board is not in a position to obtainevidence such as party explanations or testimonies, and that the secretariat of the Board candismiss complaints if found to be unsuitable for consideration by the Board (art. 6).The Committee recommends that the State party should strengthen the Board’scomplaint-lodging-procedure to enable complainants to provide oral testimony whichwill also assist the panel of the Board to assess and appreciate the demeanour of theparties to the complaint. The Committee urges the State party to revise the procedureof the Board to ensure that the Secretariat does not usurp the powers of the Board byrejecting complaints before they are considered by the Board’s panel.19.The Committee notes with concern the lack of data on the ethnic composition ofprison populations which would assist it in understanding the nature of crimes perpetratedby various ethnic groups or nationals.

The Committee recalls its General Recommendation No. 31 and urges the State partyto compile data disaggregated by nationality and/or ethnic origin and nature of theoffence for all prisons in the State party.20.Bearing in mind the indivisibility of all human rights, the Committee encourages theState party to consider ratifying those international human rights treaties which it has notyet ratified, in particular treaties the provisions of which have a direct bearing on thesubject of racial discrimination, such as the International Convention on the Protection ofthe Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (1990).21.In light of its general recommendation No. 33 (2009) on follow-up to the DurbanReview Conference, the Committee recommends that the State party give effect to theDurban Declaration and Programme of Action, adopted in September 2001 by the WorldConference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance,taking into account the Outcome Document of the Durban Review Conference, held inGeneva in April 2009, when implementing the Convention in its domestic legal order. TheCommittee requests that the State party include in its next periodic report specificinformation on action plans and other measures taken to implement the Durban Declarationand Programme of Action at the national level.22.The Committee recommends that the State party continue consulting and expandingits dialogue with organizations of civil society working in the area of human rightsprotection, in particular in combating racial discrimination, in connection with thepreparation of the next periodic report.23.The Committee recommends that the State party ratify the amendments to article 8,paragraph 6, of the Convention, adopted on 15 January 1992 at the fourteenth meeting ofStates parties to the Convention and endorsed by the General Assembly in its resolution47/111 of 16 December 1992. In this connection, the Committee cites General Assemblyresolution 61/148 and 63/243, in which the Assembly General strongly urged States partiesto accelerate their domestic ratification procedures with regard to the amendment to theConvention concerning the financing of the Committee and to notify the Secretary-Generalexpeditiously in writing of their agreement to the amendment.24.The Committee recommends that the State party’s reports be made readily availableand accessible to the public at the time of their submission, and that the observations of theCommittee with respect to these reports be similarly publicized in the official and othercommonly used languages, as appropriate.25.Noting that the State Party submitted its Core Document in 1995, the Committeeencourages the State Party to submit an updated version in accordance with the harmonizedguidelines on reporting under the international human rights treaties, in particular those onthe common core document, as adopted by the fifth inter-Committee meeting of the humanrights treaty bodies held in June 2006 (HRI/MC/2006/3).26.In accordance with article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention and rule 65 of itsamended rules of procedure, the Committee requests the State party to provide information,within one year of the adoption of the present conclusions, on its follow-up to therecommendations contained in paragraphs 13,, 15, 18 and 19 above.27.The Committee also wishes to draw the attention of the State party to the particularimportance of recommendations 8, 9, 10, and 11, and request the State party to providedetailed information in its next periodic report on concrete measures taken to implementthese recommendations.28.The Committee recommends that the State party submit its 20th and 21st periodicreports in a single document, due on 8th January, 2013, taking into account the guidelinesfor the CERD-specific document adopted by the Committee during its seventy-first session6