Search Results

Like Plato's Republic, the ICERD is founded on a noble lie: that racial discrimination, as defined in its opening article, can be eliminated. Events leading up to the unanimous adoption of the Convention in 1965 are described. The preambular paragraphs represent racial discrimination as resembling a sickness; the operative paragraphs conceive of it as resembling a crime. Without the rhetoric promising elimination, the Convention would not have been adopted. Without the obligation upon all states parties to introduce legislation, the Convention would have had no practical effect.

In 1965, many governments associated racial discrimination with a particular phase of European thought, with the imperialism of European powers, and with practices in the USA. Yet the Convention represented it as a universal problem. From its first meeting in 1970, CERD, the body established to examine state reports, had to work out the implications for states in different regions of their acceptance of its obligations. The relations between relevant groups in Europe, Africa, America, and Asia at this time are described.

Most states saw accession to the Convention as a matter of foreign policy. Many perceived it as a way of demonstrating their anti‐apartheid credentials, with but few implications for their internal affairs. In its first eight years, CERD had to concentrate upon establishing the novel reporting regime, upon tutoring state delegations as to the nature of their new obligations, and on agreeing some boundaries to the Committee's mandate.

During the ten years from 1978, the conflict between the Eastern and Western blocs formed the political framework within which CERD had to operate. It was argued, on the one hand, that CERD could not examine a report properly unless it could compare the information within it to information from other sources. On the other hand, it was maintained that the Convention referred only to ‘the examination of the reports and information received from the States Parties’. In 1986, at a time when the press was reporting on a campaign forcibly to assimilate the Turkish‐speaking minority in Bulgaria, the Committee was unable to confirm that the campaign was contrary to the Convention.

With the election of new members in 1988 and with changes in external circumstances, CERD was able to take positive steps to improve its working methods and to agree that it would issue ‘concluding observations’ expressing a collective view. It introduced procedures for reviewing the implementation of the Convention in states that had not submitted reports and for taking urgent action in emergencies. Its procedure for issuing opinions on communications (or petitions) from individuals came into effect. Figures are provided on the use of CERD's time.

There appears to have been more genuine idealism in the approach of American states than in other regions. CERD has questioned states in this region concerning the implications of the Convention for the protection of indigenous peoples. The USA's ratification of the Convention in 1994 was subject to reservations that are controversial in international law.

The collection of census data on the ethnic origin of the population poses political problems for many black African states. The discrimination that led towards genocide in Rwanda and Burundi was of particular concern from 1989. South Africa had not ratified the ICERD at the time of writing.

The implementation of the Convention in states in the Pacific, East Asia, South Asia, South‐East Asia, and the Middle East is summarily reviewed. CERD has disagreed with some governments about whether the Convention prohibits discrimination based on caste, and, for example, about the claim that Bangladesh constitutes a ‘post‐racial society’.

The adoption and implementation of the ICERD has been an attempt to expand the rule of law, constraining the sovereignty of individual states. Further action to develop the Convention's potential will require a greater commitment from states parties, individually and collectively, than they have hitherto shown. The UN system for the protection of human rights has been built up on the basis of decisions that were expedient at the time. States are reluctant to rationalize it because they do not wish to be subject to closer oversight.

The chapter opens the collection with a tour d’horizon of the origins, lifetime and experience of implementing the treaty from the perspective of a CERD member. It argues that the treaty ought to be considered a significant step forward in the extension of the rule of law.

Through the issue of disaggregated data collection, the chapter tracks the changes in CERD’s approach from its early days to contemporary questions, capturing shifts in the Committee’s priorities and engagement with States parties.

The chapter represents a discussion of racial discrimination and gender justice, or the link between the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination and the furtherance of gender justice via the UN treaty system.

The chapter reviews CERD's contribution to the development of the rights of indigenous peoples under international law, as inter alia the first human rights treaty monitoring body to adopt a specific general recommendation on the rights of indigenous peoples.

The chapter provides a chronological account of CERD’s engagement with discrimination against Roma and its central contribution to developments which have brought about a fundamentally changed understanding of the Roma as a heterodox set of ethnic groups.

The chapter examines the emergence of the issue of caste-discrimination under ICERD in the 1990s, its consolidation in General Recommenaiton 29, and State opposition, in particular from India, which contests the categorisation of caste as a form of descent-based discrimination and therefore a form of racial discrimination.

The chapter analyses the role of CERD in highlighting and addressing the discrimination suffered by Afro-descendants in Latin America. CERD General Recommendation 34 (on people of African descent is detailed, including its potential as a stepping-stone towards an International Declaration on the Rights of Afro-descendants.

The chapter explores the common thread linking ICERD and genoide, including CERD’s 2005 Declaration on the Prevention of Genocide, and list of indicators relevant to the prevention of genocide, termed ‘indicators of patterns of systematic and massive racial discrimination’.

The chapter offers a compelling case study on the operationalization of CERD’s early warning and urgent action procedure in the case of the Subanon community located at the foot of Mt Canatuan in the Phillippines, and provides a close-up of the relevance of the treaty on the ground.