U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

63–895 PDF 2012

RACISM IN THE 21ST CENTURY: UNDERSTANDING

GLOBAL CHALLENGES AND IMPLEMENTING SOLUTIONS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND 

COOPERATION IN EUROPE

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

JULY 16, 2008

Printed for the use of the

Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe

[CSCE 110–2–17]

(

Available via http://www.csce.gov 

COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE 

LEGISLATIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS

HOUSE SENATE

ALCEE L. HASTINGS, Florida,

Chairman 

LOUISE McINTOSH SLAUGHTER,

New York 

MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina 

HILDA L. SOLIS, California 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland,

Co-Chairman 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin 

CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut 

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

GORDON SMITH, Oregon 

SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina

EXECUTIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS

David J. Kramer, Department of State 

Mary Beth Long, Department of Defense 

David Bohigian, Department of Commerce 

(II) 

RACISM IN THE 21ST CENTURY: UNDERSTANDING GLOBAL CHALLENGES AND IMPLEMENTING SOLUTIONS 

JULY 16, 2008

COMMISSIONERS 

Page 

Hon. Alcee L. Hastings, Chairman, Commission on Security 

and Cooperation in Europe ..................................................... 1

WITNESSES 

Anastasia Crickley, OSCE Chair-in-Office, Personal Representative on Combating Racism .......................................... 2

Gay J. McDougall, U.N. Independent Expert on Minority 

Issues ........................................................................................ 8

John Payton, President and Director-Counsel, NAACP Legal 

Defense and Educational Fund .............................................. 10

APPENDICES 

Prepared statement of Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin .................... 28

Prepared statement of Anastasia Crickley ............................... 30

Prepared statement of Gay J. McDougall ................................. 34

Prepared statement of John Payton .......................................... 38

Material submitted for the record by Hon. Alcee L. Hastings: 

Mission to Hungary ................................................................. 57

Mission to France .................................................................... 82

(III) 

(1)

RACISM IN THE 21ST CENTURY: UNDERSTANDING GLOBAL CHALLENGES AND IMPLEMENTING SOLUTIONS 

July 16, 2008

COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE

WASHINGTON, DC

The hearing was held at 11 a.m. in room B–318 of the Rayburn 

House Office Building, Washington, DC, Hon. Alcee L. Hastings, 

Chairman, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, 

presiding. 

Commissioner present: Hon. Alcee L. Hastings, Chairman, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe. 

Witnesses present: Anastasia Crickley, OSCE Chair-in-Office, 

Personal Representative on Combating Racism; Gay McDougall, 

U.N. Independent Expert on Minority Issues; and John Payton, 

President and Director-Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. 

HON. ALCEE L. HASTINGS, CHAIRMAN, COMMISSION ON 

SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE 

Mr. HASTINGS. [Inaudible] being on the floor managing on a rule 

on a rather substantial matter dealing with intelligence authorization, and so I was a bit tardy getting here. 

I’d like to welcome you, though, and particularly emphasize the 

title of this particular hearing, and that is ‘‘Racism in the 21st Century: Understanding Global Challenges and Implementing Solutions.’’

This hearing is one in a series we are holding on efforts to combat intolerance in the OSCE region. An issue near and dear to my 

own heart was a recent hearing we held on Black Europeans where 

I was saddened to learn that negative treatment I’d experienced in 

Europe was also a common experience for others. 

Racism is alive and well, not only here in North America, but 

also in Europe and I daresay in other places of the world. And despite positive initiatives—and there have been many—there are 

some worrying developments that warrant an increased focus on 

the issue. 

This includes efforts to redefine racism, its consequences, who it 

affects, and whose responsibility it is to address it. 

Currently, there is an attempt to shift the debate on racism and 

xenophobia to one on migration and integration. While migrants 

are often the targets of violent and nonviolent forms of discriminaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
2

tion, a focus solely on migrants negates the reality that many European countries are also diverse, heterogeneous societies with citizens that differ in race, ethnicity, language and in other ways. 

Policies geared toward addressing racism and xenophobia must 

therefore have the ability to address the experience of both citizens 

and non-citizens. 

Second, as I recently noted at the OSCE’s May 29th Supplementary Human Dimension Meeting on Minorities and Migrants, 

increasingly we are receiving reports that minority communities 

are not being adequately consulted and/or hired as part of the formulation and implementation of anti-racism initiatives, which 

hurts both credibility and effectiveness. 

Third, we must be ever mindful that this is not a new issue. I 

and our witnesses have been fighting this problem for decades on 

the domestic and international level. 

I introduced legislation on the United States’s recent review before the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial 

Discrimination to highlight some of the international commitments 

that the United States and other nations have made to combat racism. 

But the problem remains that the United States and other OSCE 

countries are not adequately implementing domestic or international solutions. 

A major reason I called this hearing was to discuss solutions to 

this problem of implementation, as well as discuss new developments such as increased discrimination experienced by migrants. 

I was very recently in Italy, and I was amazed at the tone in that 

country with reference to migrants. The television and the news reports were rife with concerns. 

I’d like to thank the persons joining me today, Anastasia 

Crickley, Ms. Gay McDougall and John Payton. I have the good fortune of having worked with all three of them, two of them—John 

and Ms. Crickley, especially John and I—more years than we want 

to remember that we have worked together. But I have had the 

good fortune of being with them, and I know them to be very insightful on this topic and able to offer advice to us all. 

At this point I’d like to enter into the record the two mission reports from Ms. McDougall, and I’d also like to thank my fellow 

Commissioners, who will likely be joining us. And when they do, 

I would allow for them to make appropriate interventions as they 

arrive. 

But let’s begin with Ms. Crickley, who came the farthest, I believe, this morning, although that’s not always the case. 

But, Anastasia, it’s good to see you, and I welcome you. And your 

full remarks can be entered into the record, and you can summarize or go forward in any manner you see fit. 

ANASTASIA CRICKLEY, OSCE CHAIR-IN-OFFICE, PERSONAL 

REPRESENTATIVE ON COMBATING RACISM 

Ms. CRICKLEY. Thank you, Chair, and thank you for your welcome. It’s indeed an honor and a privilege for me to be here this 

morning and to have this opportunity to share with you and your 

colleagues and all of the people who are here present with us some 

3

of my concerns and confusion with regard to racism in the 21st century. 

And 31⁄2 years ago, I was appointed by the Chair-in-Office of the 

OSCE as his personal representative on racism and discrimination, 

including also a focus on discrimination against Christians and 

members of other religions. It’s a long title, and it’s an honorary 

part-time post. 

I say that not by way of making excuses for what I have or have 

not done, but just by way of being clear and explaining. It’s been 

a privilege to be able to serve the OSCE through this post, and it 

also does provide a number of opportunities throughout what is, as 

you will know, a very, very diverse region, stretching all the way, 

as they say in the OSCE, from Vladivostok to Vancouver. 

You’ve already had the opportunity here to discuss with my esteemed friend and colleague, Gert Weisskirchen. His concerns as 

Personal Representative of the Chair-in-Office on anti-Semitism. 

And the third person who forms part of this trio is Ambassador 

Omur Orhun, who is the Personal Representative of the Chair-inOffice on discrimination against Muslims. 

As I said, this is a diverse region. In some parts of the region, 

there is legislation on these issues, which is implemented or not 

implemented, as the case may be, and there are diverse voices in 

civil society who are perfectly able to critique it. 

In other parts of the region, there is no legislation or inadequate 

legislation, and there are no opportunities for civil society voices to 

critique. 

There are also different administrative cultures, which I think 

are important to acknowledge, as we struggle across such a diverse 

region to come up with suggestions and proposals that could hold 

some water in all of it. 

First of all, there are the differences between emerging and established democracies. There are the differences between ways of 

thinking about citizenship—and to take a European context, the 

difference between the French approach and the British approach. 

And then, more recently, there has been the discourse which has 

developed between understandings of freedom of expression, often 

expressed by your colleagues and friends on this side of the Atlantic, and the need to address racism as a crime and finding ways 

and methods to do that. 

I’d just like to pick very briefly, though, in this intervention on 

four dimensions or four trends which, as far as I can see, hold 

across the whole region. First is to talk about racism; second, to 

talk about religion; third, to talk about Roma and Travellers, which 

is a very persistent and difficult issue, and also a group which is 

persistently discriminated against; and last, to talk about migration in that context. 

As regards racism, I’m also conscious from my work in the E.U., 

where I have the honor to Chair the European Union Fundamental 

Rights Agency, but from the records we’ve been able to put together—and it is difficult across this region to have an adequate 

record of what’s happened—racism has become more virulent in 

this decade in particular. 

4

The records are inadequate, but inasfar as one can tell, hate 

crime and associated incidents are on the increase. Particular 

groups are singled out. 

One part of the region, for example, the Russian Federation’s 

racism may be just on the basis of difference, of coming from a different region or coming from another country in that region. In 

other parts of the OSCE region, it’s on the basis of being perceived 

to be from a Muslim background. 

Single identifiers are used inadequately to both identify victims 

and also to address some of the questions associated with racism. 

Speaking as an Irish person, I’m conscious that if I was only identified as a Catholic in the U.S.A., it would not have adequately described me as an immigrant to this country 100 years ago or even 

50 years ago, nor would it adequately have described my experiences and the issues associated with it. 

To address racism throughout this region, we need data. We need 

to put a focus on adequate data collection and put resources into 

it. And we also need laws. But as well as laws, we need the political will to implement them. 

In the European Union, for example, there is already quite adequate legislation—relatively adequate legislation, shall we say—to 

address racism. However, there are big differentials in the extent 

to which the 27 member states of the European Union have actively implemented that legislation to date. 

As regards religion, there is an increasing debate about religion 

entering where some people feel it should not, and on the other 

hand, a contrasting concern that secular intolerance across the religion is marginalizing religious believers. 

Both sides of that fence are of concern to me with regards to the 

forms of discrimination that can result in terms of freedom of religion and belief. State-faith dialogue is very important in this instance. But state-faith dialogue can only take place where states 

are prepared to acknowledge the right of more than one religion or 

the right of people to freedom of religion and belief. 

Inter-faith dialogue is also particularly useful. And I would like 

to commend to you in this regard the Toledo guiding principles on 

teaching about religion, which has been produced by the ODIHR, 

the Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, of the 

OSCE, and to say to you that these are not in any way concerned 

to replace the teaching of religion. 

They’re not concerned in any way to lay down regulations about 

how religion should be taught, but they’re merely what I consider 

to be a very positive set of suggestions about how young people, in 

whatever part of the region they are, to be taught about the religions of others, whether they hold any religion themselves or none. 

This increased focus on religion has not meant a diminishing of 

discrimination on the basis of religion. And in parts of the region, 

there continue to be particular concerns about small Christian denominations in the East, continuing concerns about what happens 

to Christian denominations in Turkey, for example, and about the 

position of the established Orthodox Church there, as well as continuing concerns about registration processes in some countries. 

Coming myself from Ireland, where indeed for many years we did 

give a particular position to one religion, I’m very conscious of the 

5

extent to which according particular positions to one faith over another doesn’t serve that faith well sometimes, doesn’t serve the 

state in which it’s integrated very well. I’m also very conscious that 

freedom of religion and belief should not demand very stringent 

registration processes. 

Third, as regards Roma and Travellers—and I prefer to think 

about this family as Roma, Sinti, and Travellers—people from a variety of cultures with great similarities between them, some of 

whom at one time may have been nomadic, most of whom by this 

point in time, when they are nomadic, are nomadic because they 

are forced to move from one place to another, not because they 

want to continue to move on an ongoing basis. 

But I think my good colleague and friend, Doudou Diene, who up 

until now was the Special Rapporteur on Racism at the United Nations, described very well the situation of Roma, Sinti, and Travellers when we spoke about the democratization of discrimination. 

What’s experienced by these groups, in my view, and what was 

very much epitomized and continues to be epitomized by what’s 

happening in Italy at the moment is the democratization of discrimination. Not only are Roma and Sinti and Travellers discriminated against, but the discrimination they experience and the racism they experience is justified as being their own fault. 

It’s not useful in terms of looking at what’s happening in Italy, 

in my view, to inappropriately use language of the Holocaust to describe what’s happening there, but it is perhaps useful to remember that Roma and Sinti also suffered in that Holocaust during the 

Second World War. 

We don’t serve any cause well by inappropriately applying terms 

which need to be respected in their own context and in their own 

light. 

This is a regional issue, though. It’s an issue for the Europeans. 

It’s an issue for the Italian state at the moment. It’s a broader 

issue for the European Union in terms of policies with regard to 

mobility and employment. But it’s also an issue for the whole of the 

OSCE. 

I believe very strongly, in terms of addressing you as chairperson, that it comes back to the comment you have made about 

the need for active participation by the people concerned, active 

participation by Roma, Sinti, and Traveller groups in the design 

and implementation of solutions to the experiences that they have. 

It also requires active participation that goes well beyond the 

boundaries of one nation. In effect, I’m saying to you that for the 

OSCE it could be a major priority. It’s one which the OSCE already 

has a particular interest in and where the OSCE’s contact point in 

Roma and Sinti is doing good work. 

And indeed, I hope to be part of a high-level delegation with that 

contact point next week to Italy in order to develop a perspective 

on the situation and draw some conclusions with regard to the situation there. 

Last, I want to move to migration. And indeed you’re right to 

draw differences between racism and migration overall. But having 

said that, I’m very sorry to have to say also there are at the moment pretty clear connections between issues associated with migration processes and racism and discrimination. 

6

The way in which migration is regulated throughout the region 

tends to structurally disadvantage migrants and create a context 

within which they are deliberately and directly discriminated 

against. And migration into the OSCE region is probably part of 

the biggest global movement overall of people at the moment, from 

South to North America to your country, from Africa to Europe, 

and from the East to the West. 

Participation is denied to migrants, not in the same way in all 

parts of the region. But the fear that’s associated with being in 

that position is certainly synonymous throughout the region, and 

the discrimination and racism especially experienced by lower paid 

and by undocumented and unemployed migrants is of major concern. 

Addressing these migration issues is difficult. There’s no country 

in the OSCE region or beyond which is prepared to just open its 

borders and say everybody can come. 

But addressing them also requires political leadership from very 

senior levels, leadership that creates a welcoming context, acknowledges the economic, social and cultural contribution of migrants, 

acknowledges that all of our states change—none of them stay the 

same; even my own has changed very significantly in the last 200 

years—and creates a context that’s about integration, and not just 

integration economically, but integration with respect and integration with inclusion, because integration on its own creates a climate for discrimination and racism. 

In fact, integration on its own is probably more like an attempt 

at assimilation and pretending that people don’t exist and can be 

part of an under tap. 

In looking at all of these issues, I’m also conscious that one size 

doesn’t fit all, and there are also internal differences between the 

groups who experience racism, whether it’s on the basis of religion, 

on the basis of being migrants, or on the basis of being Roma, 

Sinti, or Travellers. 

And one of the biggest and most obvious differences is that people who experience racism and discrimination are men and women. 

And from that point of view, I would like to point to the necessity, which has become very obvious in the OSCE region, to look 

to this difficult edge of where discrimination and racism can be experienced by women. And by the difficult edge, I mean the edge 

that’s associated with trafficking and with the exploitation and the 

discrimination that can be involved in that. 

By way of conclusion, acknowledging that you asked me to speak 

only for 7 minutes, and probably I’ve already done double that 

much, let me say that as the OSCE moves forward, nothing will 

happen unless participating states, including your own, are prepared to acknowledge the struggle to address racism as work in 

progress, rather than continuing to absolve inadequacies by reflecting on the initiatives that have been taken. 

I would like to say that virtually all participating States are taking some initiative, some more than others. Some progress is being 

made in all, and I would like to commend the officials, including 

in your own country, who have been involved in creating the conditions for that progress and in moving it along. 

7

But if participating States, including your own, continue to confuse work in progress—and I’m conscious from meeting here with 

the NGOs; I’ve had the opportunity to [inaudible] that here as everywhere else; it is work in progress—continue to confuse work in 

progress with having achieved outcomes, and there is no possibility 

for actually achieving those outcomes. 

The OSCE provides a very useful forum for awareness raising 

about issues, a forum which, because it happens at a legislative 

framework and is a consensus-based entity, a forum which I believe 

can be used to great benefit, a forum which can also create a space 

for dialogue. 

And I would like to commend the support that you have given 

in the United States to the participation of NGOs fully in the discussions in the OSCE, which is not something that happens in the 

same way in other regional or global forums. 

Finally, I would like to thank you for your support for the role 

of myself and of my two colleagues. Our contribution is small, but 

I do believe it has created an opportunity to pinpoint some issues 

in a way that can be reflected on as we move forward. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. HASTINGS. I can say to you I am expecting that there will 

be votes shortly, and I would recess the hearing and try to spend 

a minimum time when I go to vote. 

I’d also like to take cognizance of the fact that there are a significant number of young people that are visiting with us today. And 

I am particularly pleased. 

And the biographies of these outstanding witnesses, particularly 

for those of you that are younger, might be encouraging to you as 

you progress in your lives, not only on this subject, but to show the 

commitment of individuals that have impacted our lives. Many 

times we don’t know them or see them or hear them. Or even when 

we see them, we don’t know the work that they’ve done. 

I think a point of special privilege to highlight, just one part of 

Gay McDougall’s resume that I think would be of interest to all of 

you. In 1994 she was appointed the only American member of the 

16-member 1994 Electoral Commission of South Africa, which organized the process that resulted in the election of Nelson Mandela. 

For 14 years prior to those elections, she worked with the South 

African lawyers to gain the release of thousands of political prisoners. She also founded the Commission on Independent Elections 

in Namibia that monitored that country’s transition to democracy. 

And Ms. Crickley, who just spoke, in addition to official responsibilities in the European Union and in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe as a special representative appointed by the Chair-in-Office, she has also with her late husband 

founded organizations that have dealt with Travellers, and specifically the Travellers Women’s Forum. 

So you’re looking at people that have really impacted our lives 

in significant ways. And I point out Gay’s curriculum vitae to highlight the fact that just recently, and probably for all of the remainder of this year, we are celebrating 90 years of Nelson Mandela’s 

having been on Earth. And in London very recently they had a tremendous celebration there. 

8

Gay, I’ve taken up your time, but I’d appreciate it very much if 

you would go forward at this time. 

GAY J. MCDOUGALL, U.N. INDEPENDENT EXPERT ON 

MINORITY ISSUES 

Ms. MCDOUGALL. Thank you very much, Chairperson. 

I would say that I’ve been fortunate to be able to now take forward the work that I did on behalf of South Africa to a global level. 

And in 2005 I was appointed to serve as the first United Nations 

Independent Expert on Minority Issues. 

My terms of reference include promoting the implementation of 

the Declaration on the Rights of Persons belonging to national or 

ethnic religious and linguistic minorities. 

Additionally, a central part of my mandate is the enforcement of 

the right to nondiscrimination based on race as protected by the 

International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and other forms of intolerance. 

My methods of work include diplomatic engagement with governments through country visits to assess general situations in the 

country and written communications on specific concerns, consultations with civil society non-governmental organizations and victims 

groups, in-depth studies on thematic issues like the denial of citizenship to targeted minority groups in countries around the world. 

I do reports and recommendations to the U.N. Human Rights 

Council. And I provide technical assistance to facilitate reform efforts in governments around the world. 

I work closely with the special rapporteur on racism, and I have 

also worked with the OSCE high commissioner on national minorities. 

One of the lessons that I have learned over the period that I 

have carried out this mandate is that racism is ubiquitous. It’s a 

global phenomenon. The victims differ in language and culture, but 

the experiences of exclusion, subordination, violence and discrimination are remarkably similar in every region of the world. This 

observation is as true in OSCE countries as well. 

I have also learned that it is difficult to fully appreciate how racial discrimination manifests in a country without taking that 

measure from the ground. 

So what I’ve done in my written testimony is to, as requested, 

give a list, if you will, of general characteristics, manifestations of 

racial discrimination in the 21st century that I do see in OSCE 

countries. I won’t go over that orally. It’s in the written submission. 

But what I do want to focus on in my oral testimony is what I 

found when I went just a few months ago on mission to France, 

which is a very prominent OSCE country. And so that’s what I’ll 

talk about today. 

Last September I carried out a country mission to France in pursuance of my mandate. During my visit I traveled to Paris, Marseilles, Strasbourg, and the environs, where I held consultations 

with civil society groups, religious groups, academics and others 

working in the field of minority issues and anti-discrimination matters. 

9

I visited communities living in suburbs around Paris and Marseilles that are truly urban ghettos. In France they describe them 

as sensitive suburbs, including Bobigny and La Courneuve, which 

were those communities that were affected by the urban riots in 

2005 and by the way, also rioted shortly after the end of my mission. 

I talked directly to community members about their lives, issues, 

and concerns, and I was also given broad access to senior government officials. 

So while there are other minorities in France that face discrimination, I chose to focus primary attention on the experiences of 

French citizens and long-term residents of immigrant heritage, particularly those of North African and sub-Saharan African origins, 

Muslims, and those from overseas departments who live in France. 

Overseas departments are the Caribbean islands. 

Persons belonging to these groups are primarily people of color, 

and they’re referred to as visible minorities in France. And they’re 

the ones that typically experience serious discrimination in such 

areas as allocation of housing, access to employment, quality education. And they are grossly under represented in state and political institutions. 

Racism—and I include Islamophobia—alienation and lack of social mobility for persons belonging in these groups were contributing factors for the riots without a doubt. 

My visits to minority communities revealed very high levels of 

frustration. I found young people from minority groups, who feel 

that their hopes and dreams are being denied. They see no possibility of upward mobility because of the color of their skin, their 

religion, their surname, or their address in the ghettos. 

People who have worked hard and played by all the rules and 

truly believe in the principles of the French republic are trapped 

in socially and geographically isolated urban ghettos, with unemployment over 40 percent in some areas. 

They feel discriminated against and rejected by rigid notions of 

French national identity, with which they do not and cannot ever 

conform to. In fact, issues of identity are central in the course and 

mindset about exclusion. 

Members of minority communities describe the extreme pressure 

they feel to alter their cultural and religious identities as a precondition for full inclusion and acceptance in French society. 

There is a widespread feeling within the communities of physical 

minorities, many of whom are second and third generation 

French—second and third generation French—that to become a citizen of France is not sufficient for full acceptance, that acceptance 

will be granted only with total assimilation that forces them to reject major factors of their identity. 

Only when they find a way to shed the color of their skin, hide 

the manifestations of their religion or the traditions of their ancestors will they be accepted as truly French. 

I found there is a general requirement of suspicion and negativity against those believed to be of immigrant origin, not necessarily immigrants—those who look as if they’re immigrants—

generated in part by widespread public debates over immigration 

policy. 

10

When I was there, there was a debate about the quotas. The government announced quotas for deportations for each year. And also 

there was great debate going on about DNA testing. 

The message is that there is a real sense of fear and rejection 

in France of cultural diversity. I won’t comment about the situation 

for minority women. It is very important to look separately at that. 

I will say, however, that France is a country that does have a 

good law against discrimination, but it has some weaknesses. 

But France is also a country that believes that once you become 

a French citizen, they dispense with their obligations or matters of 

nondiscrimination and equality. They don’t officially recognize people of color as a group within their society that might be facing discrimination or need special measures or robust affirmative action 

policies to generate equality. 

And this has really been a stumbling block. It doesn’t allow them 

to take data on socioeconomic issues that can be just aggregated 

along ethnic lines. They believe that to do so is a violation of their 

vision of liberte, egalite and fraternite. And that is absolutely not 

the case in fact. 

But I think that France represents—and I can go into further detail in the question and answer period—but I think that France 

represents a very interesting picture of the problems for people of 

color in Europe. 

I’ll stop there. Thank you very much. 

Mr. HASTINGS. [Inaudible] young lady. John and I go way back. 

And again, just to take a moment of personal liberty, the gentleman that’s about to testify, for purposes of the young people, has 

handled numerous cases in appellate courts, as well as before the 

U.S. Supreme Court. 

And if you have one case that you would want to look at regarding civil rights, you might wish to look at the case of Richmond v. 

Croson. And this gentleman argued that case before the U.S. Supreme Court, including any other number of instances along those 

lines, teaching at Harvard and at Georgetown and at Howard University. 

And he has been corporate counsel for the District of Columbia, 

as well as President of the District of Columbia Bar Association. 

And I’m pleased and privileged to have an opportunity to listen to 

his testimony, if I would shut up. [Laughter.] 

JOHN PAYTON, PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR-COUNSEL, NAACP 

LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND 

Mr. PAYTON. Well, thank you very much. This is a great opportunity, and thank you for inviting all of us. I think this is an important hearing that you have called. 

I’m the head of the Legal Defense Fund, and I guess I should say 

a little bit about where we are in this struggle. We were founded 

in 1940 by Thurgood Marshall, and I believe we are the finest civil 

rights, human rights law firm in American history. 

I think that it is fair to describe us a having been the civil rights 

division before there was a Civil Rights Division at the U.S. Department of Justice. 

In many ways we are counsel for African-Americans on all sorts 

of issues in this country. Our mission is to see that African-AmeriVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
11

cans become full, equal, and thriving participants in our democracy. 

Now, I have submitted, I think, a quite detailed testimony, because it was very hard to do anything less than that, given what 

you asked me to address. But I’m going to be quite brief in my 

summary of that here this morning. 

When we were founded in 1940, African-Americans and other minorities in this country were oppressed by means of law, a comprehensive set of laws and customs administered by courts and enforced by violence. We’ve made truly remarkable progress since 

then. 

The legal apparatus of racial segregation is largely dismantled, 

and in its place we now have a series of laws that many Americans 

act as though they have always been with us, but they haven’t—

the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the 1965 Voting Rights Act, the 1968 

Fair Housing Act, the rediscovery of civil rights statutes passed 

right after the Civil War, as well as decisions from courts expanding and announcing new rules. 

These changes came about only through pressure and leadership 

from civil society. And the regime of White supremacy, the regime 

of segregation, lest we forget, included governmental entities. So 

the pressure only came from outside. 

Today, some would like to declare the era of serious issues of 

race as being simply behind us. And they point to visible examples 

of African-Americans in positions of serious authority—like you, 

Mr. Chairman, like other Members of Congress, like African-American members of the Cabinet, like African-American CEOs, like 

prominent persons in our media, in our military, throughout our 

society. 

And they especially point to the presumptive Democratic Presidential nominee, Senator Barack Obama, as evidence that we no 

longer have race as a salient factor in our society. I think we all 

know better. 

Racism is dynamic. It is not static. And you only have to look at 

the state of our schools in our inner cities to see the enormity of 

today’s remaining challenges that relate to race. 

And I’m just going to go over just two or three quick things. 

About half of the kids in the public schools in our inner city communities drop out. In some cities the dropout rate is far higher 

than that. In Baltimore the dropout rate—the dropout rate—is 65.4 

percent. In Columbus, OH, it is 59.1 percent. 

Mr. HASTINGS. John, could I highlight something right there? In 

Palm Beach County, not only that same dropout—and I highlight 

Palm Beach County for the reason that it is not one of the poorer 

counties in this country. 

All children—all children—in this statistic that I’m about reflect 

to or one-half of children that graduate in the Palm Beach County 

North school system are not reading at their grade level. 

It’s extraordinary to me. I thought that that would play out for 

Black and Latino children at higher numbers than it does, but 

more than 45 percent of White children graduated—1 through 12—

are not reading at their grade level. Something astoundingly wrong 

is going on in this society. 

I apologize for interrupting. 

12

Mr. PAYTON. Actually, that is the larger point. Schools are failing 

all of our kids, but they are really failing our African-American and 

Latino kids. And it’s not that they are being failed alone, but we 

are being failed in numbers that are unbelievably disproportionate. 

So the kids that in fact get out of high school—many of them 

have difficulty with proficiency. 

But I’m saying in Baltimore 65 percent drop out. In Columbus 

59 percent drop out. In Cleveland 57 percent drop out. In Miami—

in Miami, Dade County—15 percent of the kids drop out. The remainder still have some deficiencies in their education. 

But those are simply frightening numbers. They are catastrophic 

numbers. You only have to look at the 2.2 million people imprisoned in this country, the highest number and the highest percentage incarceration rate in the world, and you see that 40 percent are 

African-American. One in nine African-American males, 25 to 29, 

is in jail or prison. 

These two are simply catastrophic numbers. And there is a powerful correlation with race with both of these catastrophic numbers. 

The overwhelming number of the students who drop out—the 

overwhelming number of the students who drop out—who are 

failed by our schools, are African-American and Latino. And 60 percent of those imprisoned are African-American and Latino. 

And I think there is little doubt that if we solved the dropout 

problem, if we solved you described in our schools, Mr. Chairman, 

if we solved that, I would think there is little doubt that it would 

have an almost direct effect on dramatically reducing our prison 

population. We all know that. 

In short, we’ve defaulted in our responsibility to educate our children, and we’ve instead imprisoned them. The political will seems 

to be lacking to address this core problem that is directly related 

to race. 

The consequences of these failures are simply profound. Education, as we all know, is the gateway to opportunity in our society. 

In today’s economy the lack of proficiency in reading and writing, 

not to mention computer skills, is simply devastating. 

There are very few jobs in our country, very few jobs, for people 

who don’t have some proficiency in reading and writing. And without a role in our economic life, they are treated as virtual exiles 

from our society, and they know that they are treated that way. 

They know they have no future. 

This creates not just economic justice issues, along with the continuing educational issues and voting issues, political participation 

issues, but it also simply unleashes our criminal justice system to 

assert a disproportionate and I’d say inappropriate role in these 

distressed communities. 

The vortex of the failures of our schools, especially in our inner 

cities, is spinning out problems across our society—serious catastrophic problems. 

In my written testimony I review in some considerable detail just 

how those problems are presenting themselves across our country. 

I just want to highlight one I’d say emblematic and well-known instance, and I’ll leave the rest to my written testimony, and that’s 

Katrina. 

13

The devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina was watched by 

I’d say virtually everybody in this country. It was watched around 

the world. We saw it in real time. 

People initially reacted to the images of residents of New Orleans 

lower ninth ward and other areas of concentrated poverty, stranded 

on their rooftops, crowded into inhumane conditions inside the Superdome or the New Orleans Convention Center, and wondered 

why those resident simply didn’t get in their cars and drive to safety. 

The reality was harsh. These were, for the most part, very poor 

people. They didn’t have cars that they could jump into and drive 

away with. Some were forced to stay behind, because there were 

huge extended families that they were responsible for, and they 

just couldn’t leave them behind. 

They didn’t make a living wage. Their schools had failed them. 

Many of them had not graduated from high school. There were inadequate employment opportunities, and the entire community was 

poorly served by all branches of government. 

Every one of these problems—every one of these problems—is 

correlated with race. I’d say what Hurricane Katrina revealed was 

dramatic evidence of our failure to address profound issues related 

to race. The residents of the lower ninth ward were living in a crisis long before Hurricane Katrina. 

And it reminds us—and all of us know—there are lower ninth 

wards all across our country. There’s one right here in DC. There’s 

one right across the river. They’re all across our country, and 

they’re all plagued by problems related to race. 

The progress that we have achieved is real. It’s important. It has 

not enabled those citizens to be full, equal and thriving participants in our democracy, in our economy. 

LDF’s mission—where I started out, I’m going to end—LDF’s 

mission is to see that African-Americans, and as a result, all Americans, become full, equal and thriving participants in our democracy. 

And in order to achieve this goal, we have to ensure that policies 

at every level of government are designed to directly address these 

problems, and not simply chalk them up to the misfortune of a minority. 

There is a tendency to blame victims for their own plight. That 

is simply not fair. When your schools fail you and you don’t get 

educated, you are literally doomed to exile in our economy. That is 

not the fault of the kids who are being failed. 

I can link the results of the things I just said very directly to 

policies that exacerbate and prey on our history of racism in this 

country. I think that I used Katrina because it is an example that 

everybody ought to be able to relate to, and it is an example that 

has aspects all across our country. 

If we don’t fix the catastrophe in the center of our communities—

that is, educate our kids and make them full, thriving participants 

in our economy and in our democracy—it can undermine our entire 

democracy. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you all for your poignant and very clear remarks on the subject at hand. 

14

A couple of announcements. The full testimony of our witnesses 

will be on our Web site, for those of you that are interested. 

And I have a battery of questions, but I would ask the witnesses, 

in light of my time constraints, if I could submit them in writing 

and ask if they submit in due time their answers, which will also 

be carried on our Web site. 

Additionally, regarding the diaspora of African-Americans particularly living in the OSCE region, we’ve begun empirical data 

gathering regarding that and have had a hearing here. 

And we intend—and I think Ms. McDougall, after listening to 

you, Dr. Thompson and I have been debating whether to hold such 

a hearing. I had initially suggested Hamburg. She thought that we 

might look at London and Paris. And I think now, listening to you, 

we will select France, which seems to be deserving of at least 

bringing some additional attention to this problem. 

I want to ask you all—and I know the bell is going to go off, and 

I’ll have to leave you—but I want to ask you all just in a rather 

general way what you think, as I’m ruminating here, what you 

think might be some real solutions. We already know the problem. 

John, I’m sure you’ve had this experience in your lifetime of 

being over-subscribed to a number of organizations. 

And, Anastasia, you the same, and Gay, I’m sure. 

You become a person that has some expertise and so everybody 

in the community wants you on their board, and you become the 

one, one, one, one all the way down the line. 

And I used to say, when I got tired of it, that if you want to know 

what the problems are, then I can mail them in. You don’t have 

to have me come to the meeting. I’m an expert Negro. I know exactly what the issues are. 

And it’s the inseparable triumvirate of inadequate jobs, inadequate housing and inadequate educational opportunity. Any way 

you cut it, slice it, dice it, that’s what it boils down to. And that 

would be true here, as well as in the OSCE sphere. 

I agonize immensely about what to do about it, but I can give 

you a classic example, with no offense meant to my predecessors 

as Chair of this Commission. This Commission came into existence 

in 1976, and until last year no African-American had been hired 

to do a damn thing. You understand. That speaks for itself. 

And so, when I became the Chair, I made it a very significant 

point to those of my colleagues that are Commissioners that we 

would change. And among the things that we did was bring on the 

lady who both of you have gotten to know, Dr. Mischa Thompson, 

as well as two other African-Americans. 

Now, there are some extraordinary White people and Jewish people that work on this Commission—immensely endowed professionals. But it’s not their responsibility to do the hiring. It was the 

responsibility of the Commission members, who consist of leadership both among Republicans and Democrats, that had not seen fit 

to hire anybody in the first place. 

You heard me say when I came in here that I came from handling the intelligence authorization measure. 

I’m very proud of the fact that a part of that measure deals with 

the subject of diversity that began with former Congressman Lou 

Stokes, continued under the efforts of departed Congressman JuVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
15

lian Dixon, and then myself and now Chair Silvestre Reyes, hammering these people to understand there is no way on Earth that 

we are going to be able to gather intelligence unless we have an 

intelligence community that looks like America and looks like the 

world. 

You’re not going to be able to send a White guy with [inaudible] 

into an Arab community and expect to gather intelligence. And I 

also say to them you don’t have to have more degrees than a thermometer in order to be a spy. 

There are some kids—I could pick up one right in Anacostia right 

now and send him off to France and sit him up in a bar. Nobody 

would expect that he was a spy. And I assure you that I could get 

just as much information as somebody that graduated with all the 

degrees that seem to go with the accoutrements of that particular 

office. 

So if we want to solve these things, and you all have been in the 

business of doing something about it, but what I believe what 

you’re experiencing in all of your organizations is a diminution of 

funds, a diminution of will from the political body to ensure, 

whether we are talking France or Italy or America or anywhere 

else, that the moneys are placed there in order to be able to address the problems in a significant way. 

I was in Colombia with Secretary Rice, and I’m at a flower place 

where they grow flowers, and we do. Seventy-five percent of all of 

the cut flowers that you buy in a grocery store come from Colombia. And we were there at the instance of the Colombia Free Trade 

Agreement. 

Those of you that have traveled in South America know that in 

virtually all of the Central and South American countries, there 

are barrios just like in Anacostia. There are areas where people 

have been gathered over into Black pockets. 

And in Colombia the area in the mining, where immense 

amounts of gold and other minerals come from, that area is a place 

where a significant number of people are dying and there are people of color that are being killed. 

So I’m talking to all of the flower people, the big guys, and I’m 

saying, ‘‘What happens here? Why do the Black people in Colombia, 

when they are displaced, not seem to receive the same assurances?’’

And we are sitting at a sumptuous lunch, and I’m looking at at 

least 300 employees, and this guy says to me unabashedly—and I 

don’t know whether they’re just blind to it—he said, ‘‘We don’t have 

a race problem in Colombia.’’

I said, ‘‘What the hell are you talking about?’’ [Laughter.] 

I’m looking at all these young, displaced people that are White 

that are working, and I go down the street, and I did that, I walked 

down the street from my hotel, and here the Black ones are on the 

streets, begging. I mean, cut me some slack. Somewhere along the 

line we need to change this. 

This hearing would be a good striation. We would publicize real 

prolifically as to the nature of this hearing. To the credit of every 

one of these young people that are here—and I guess that’s where 

the change will come—they have taken the time to come and at 

least know that something like this is going on on the Hill. 

16

And it may very well redound to their thinking, changing a little 

bit in some of their attitudes. 

You all are faced this way. I’m looking at them. With the exception of my old self and a handful of other people that maybe 40 or 

older, all of the people here are younger. You know what that 

evinces? The people 40 or older on the Hill who saw this—it just 

went past them. 

It doesn’t mean that they are racist, but they don’t have the 

basic attitudinal framework. Right here in Congress too many offices do not hire people from a variety of our area. 

Some of you youngsters that are interning or working here on 

the Hill are working in offices where there ain’t nothing but White 

people in the offices. And there’s nothing wrong with White people. 

Let me make that very clear. 

But is something wrong with a White Congressman who decides 

that I don’t want to have anything but White people working with 

me? Something is wrong with that Congressman’s attitude when he 

comes down to talk about policy as it pertains to the significant 

number of people that are in minority stations in our society. 

It’s a Congressman that has all men, has women that are doing 

menial chores, and the men getting all of the salaries. That Congressman has a problem. And if you see any of them, tell them I 

said so. 

You understand. And I’m talking Democratic and Republican, liberal and conservative, rich and poor. They come here, and then 

they act just like this society looks, and many of them don’t even 

understand that mask that they are wearing is the one that is perpetuating racism in this society and holding this country up from 

taking the steps forward that we likely could take with the immense amount of resources that we have, those that are that draining, as John Payton pointed out. There’s no real excuse for our system to be askew like it is now. 

Let me ask you all in addition to me carrying on—and I apologize to you—but we’re getting ready to move to a new Durban conference, and since the focus at that conference is going to be on racism, I’ll shut up. 

And if my bell doesn’t ring, Gay, why don’t I start with you and 

the two things. What do you see as impacting solutions? And what 

do you think of the impending refocus on the Durban Conference? 

Ms. MCDOUGALL. Well, thank you, Congressman. 

Well, I say that I agree with everything you said. I just can’t say 

it that well. 

But I think that if I had to say one thing, it’s that we need political will. We need to end denial, particularly around government. 

And we’ve history here that has presented this picture to us—we 

couldn’t get away from it—of racism and racial discrimination. 

But most other countries in the world, as you found in Colombia, 

are in denial. France is in denial. Hungary is in denial. And being 

in denial means that there is absolutely no political will to make 

a change. 

I think we all have the tools to make a change. We know. I can 

give you five things that anti-discrimination law must have in it 

to be able to transform the society. But the problem is without the 

political will that law never gets in place. 

17

So I think that it’s interesting to watch what the E.U. accession 

process has been able to generate. They’ve been able to go into 

countries and say this is a long list of changes that we want you 

to make before you can become a member country of the E.U. And 

that created an incentive for making some changes—not necessarily quite the implementation. 

But you can see incentives playing out in Colombia. The United 

States has a great deal of influence in Colombia, and it’s certainly 

not being used with respect to the issues that you see around. So 

I would say that there are many other things that I have put in 

my papers. 

On Durban, Congressman, you might know that I played quite 

a major role in the original Durban Conference. In 2009 there will 

be a Durban Review. It is simply to determine whether or not and 

to what extent countries who make commitments in Durban have 

been faithful to those commitments. 

I will say in all candor that I think that the as now, if we look 

at the planning now, we’ll see that it’s going to be a very disappointing review conference, mainly because it has been starved 

of the money, the resources, the political backing that it needs to 

be successful. 

It’s critically important. And actually I think if you look at the 

document that came out of Durban, the program of action, it is the 

best document on how you end racism in countries and worldwide 

that I think I’ve seen. 

But because of some objections to the things that happened—perceived to have happened—at Durban, it has been buried as a document. And I think that that is an issue that needs to be taken up 

by your commission. 

We’ve got to make Durban Review a success. 

Mr. HASTINGS. I hear you. 

Ms. Crickley? 

Ms. CRICKLEY. To start with Durban at this time, I mean I absolutely agree, as someone who was very involved in Durban, on one 

side Mary Robinson, my countrywoman was the chair of the proceedings. 

And the document that came out of Durban, if you look to the 

language about Roma and Sinti and Travellers, for example, it’s extremely helpful if you looked at the language about migration, if 

you looked at the language about women. 

And if you also look to the language about participating states 

putting in place national action plans to combat racism and discrimination, it’s the sort of things that actually lead into the answer to your first question, you know. I think there are very important things there. 

And my concern, certainly, and I would echo what Gay has said 

about the process being starved of resources. But I think it’s very 

important that those markers are not lost and that they are focused into the future. 

The countries which have actually implemented national action 

plans in this area, including the Canadians and ourselves in Ireland and some other countries, have actually made—I wouldn’t say 

monumental progress—but have made a little bit of progress in the 

process of addressing this. 

18

To go back to your question, and I think you’ve answered it yourself to a large extent as well, about what’s needed, what’s needed 

is certainly, as Gay has already pointed out, political will. 

And the capacity, as I said earlier, not to—to acknowledge that 

what we have at the moment is work in progress, hopefully—to 

stop the pretense that because some things are in place in some 

part of the world, that everything is resolved there, or to stop the 

pretense that allows for political sort of compliance to replace good 

results. 

And what I mean by that to some extent is also about member 

states of the European Union, where there’s a confusion. Even with 

the French, there’s a confusion between compliance with legislation 

that countries are supposed to comply with. 

There’s a confusion between compliance with the international 

law norms of the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the OSCE, 

that people have agreed to comply with. There’s a confusion between that compliance and good practice and actually achieving 

something. 

The last thing I’d say, then, is I think sometimes making focus 

requires brave stand by brave people and by brave leaders. 

And, for example, one of the small things that we did in the 

north of Ireland a number of years ago was that the administration 

there put in place a positive duty to take steps to actually do something about equality out of a very difficult situation that I’m sure 

you’re well aware of that we have there, where one section of the 

population had all of the jobs and right across the board and the 

other section of the population had very few of these jobs and were 

very much represented in the unemployed. 

But a positive duty to demonstrate what you were doing to bring 

about equality was put in place for a period of time, and it did have 

effects. I know there can be concerns about positive discrimination. 

I don’t believe in something called positive discrimination, but I 

do believe that action taken to level the playing pitch is essential, 

if you’re going to make a difference. 

And I absolutely agree with you. People don’t always need bits 

of paper to do jobs, and there are loads of examples where political 

will has been able to jump over those bits of papers when the requirement was there and the people who were able to meet the requirements of the job very, very adequately and very well. I believe 

we need to take some brave steps. 

Mr. HASTINGS. I hear you. 

John? 

Mr. PAYTON. I actually think we have a great opportunity right 

now. This is sort of a magical year where we see people energized 

and committed in ways that we haven’t seen for a long time. It’s 

very exciting. 

We see young people who are willing to try to do things to make 

this a better society, a truer democracy, and I think that’s where 

we need to use the political will, and it’s where leadership really, 

really matters. 

Gay described Europe as in denial about issues of race. That’s 

certainly true. We’re capable of the denial of the most fundamental 

things in this country, though. It’s quite unbelievable. We in 1 day 

can acknowledge things, and then the next day—didn’t we fix that? 

19

And if we have learned something about issues of race that we 

have not fully incorporated, it is this. You can’t fix issues of race 

by simply saying, ‘‘Oh, just stop discriminating. We passed a law. 

It made discrimination unlawful. Didn’t we just fix that?’’

We have broken communities and destroyed the spirit inside 

those communities. And you can’t just say we passed a law. Aren’t 

you better now? OK? But we in fact look away, hoping that if we 

just don’t look at the lower ninth ward, when we look back, they’ll 

all be better. OK? We know better than that. 

You said everybody knows what the diagnosis is. We do know 

what the diagnosis is. But I think we also know what the prescription is. We just haven’t, I’d say, marshaled the resources, harnessed the enthusiasm and commitment with the leadership that 

we need in order to bring it about. 

And I think that’s the key thing. The reason I focused on kids 

is that when you talk about kids, no one’s going to say, ‘‘Well, you 

know, they brought it on themselves. If they were really tough, 

they would have gotten educated in that seventh grade dilapidated 

school.’’

No one’s going to say that. These are just kids. If you make 

healthy communities, if you provide a tax base and social infrastructure, good schools and attention, you can turn some of these 

things around quite dramatically. 

But that’s what we have to do. It’s not a little problem where you 

say, ‘‘Got a new law. We passed it.’’ Whatever this is. ‘‘Got a new 

law; we passed it’’ is not the fix. It is much deeper, a much larger 

commitment. But I think we’re ready to do it. And these things can 

be solved. 

It’s not like these are problems that are incapable of solutions. 

That’s not these problems. Poor schools? We know how to fix poor 

schools. Healthy communities? We know how to make a healthy 

community. We know how to do these things. We just need the will 

to do it. 

I think we have enormous enthusiasm today, and we ought to 

take advantage of it with the right leadership. 

Mr. HASTINGS. All right. I thank you all. I’m going to do something totally out of the ordinary, and I’d ask if you would bear with 

me. Unfortunately, the bell didn’t go off, and I have the good fortune of visiting with three of you a little bit later on, so we can 

continue our discussion. 

But we do have young people here. I began a tradition earlier in 

my Chair of passing out to the audience that came to our hearings 

a piece of paper and let them put a question on it. 

But today, because we’ve had a particularly patient crowd, and 

with your forbearance, my fine colleagues and our witnesses, I’d 

open—and I know that things like this can get out of hand, so I’d 

just be interested in two or three reflections from some of you who 

are in the audience. 

And if you could more or less come to the microphone that the 

young man over here has worked on and give us your reflections. 

That’s something that doesn’t happen here. 

You see, I’m just tired of the staid old way of doing things. So 

what winds up happening is people come—brilliant ideas out there 

that we never get a chance to hear from at all, because it’s someVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
20

body sitting up here, somebody sitting down there, the hearing is 

over, everybody leaves, and all the brain leaves. 

Now, I’ve given you the opportunity. Come on, somebody, and say 

something—whatever is on your mind. In an unusual fashion, you 

have this opportunity. And you won’t see this very much anymore. 

So rather than look around, just stand up and ask your question. 

You—yes—young man right here. OK. Come on over there. 

QUESTIONER. How are you doing? I have a question for Mr. 

Payton. 

Well, first I want to say that——

Mr. HASTINGS. Give us your name, please. 

QUESTIONER. Sure. Josh Xavier. I’m interning with Congressman 

Andrews from New Jersey. 

Mr. HASTINGS. OK. 

QUESTIONER. A quick statement. Believe it or not, you’ve kind of 

inspired me to be a lawyer. Now, I didn’t know lawyers could actually do great things like this, so [Laughter.] 

Mr. HASTINGS. Well, it was worth it, then, wasn’t it, John? 

Mr. PAYTON. Yes. 

Mr. HASTINGS. I’m a lawyer, too. 

QUESTIONER. Oh, great. [Laughter.] 

I have a question for Mr. Payton, actually. You mentioned that 

there are some policies in our American structure that actually perpetuate these unhealthy communities, unhealthy schools. What are 

some of these policies? 

Because I feel like there are a lot of people, especially in the African-American community, such as yourselves, leaders, that throw 

out that word ‘‘policy,’’ but it’s just so vague. Can you mention 

some of the specific policies in America that are leading to poor 

schools and these dropout rates that you mentioned like in Baltimore and Cleveland. 

Mr. PAYTON. Let me just give you one real quick example. The 

way No Child Left Behind works is that schools have to report on 

how they raise average test scores and their graduation rates. 

And the way that is implemented, the policy that applies to implementing that, says that if a student drops out in the ninth 

grade, right, they actually don’t count in your data base when you 

report on what happened in the 12th grade. OK? 

And since someone who is, you think, not likely to test very well, 

will lower your average test scores, that creates the following perverse incentive. OK? I look at you and I say, ‘‘You know, you’d 

probably be better off if you just repeated the 10th grade.’’ OK? ‘‘I 

really think you—so we’re just going to keep you for the 10th grade 

another year.’’

Now, here’s what I know. There’s no Black male who takes me 

up on that. You drop out tomorrow, OK? You disappear from my 

data base, OK? There’s no longer any responsibility I have for you. 

That is a perverse incentive to create what I’m going to call a push 

out. I’ve pushed you out. You show up as a dropout, OK? 

That policy ought to change. We ought to have a policy that says 

the school is responsible for educating every single kid that comes 

in, unless you transferred to Houston or somewhere, OK? Every 

single kid. 

21

The policies right now create incentives to in fact increase your 

test scores, actually increase your, I’d say, fake graduate rate. If in 

fact the dropout in the tenth grade doesn’t count in your data base, 

it creates a perverse incentive. That’s a policy we ought to change. 

QUESTIONER. Thank you. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you. 

Young lady? 

QUESTIONER. Hi. My name is Angela Ibrahim. I’m an intern for 

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. I would first like to thank you for coming and 

speaking. You’re very inspiring. 

I actually have a thought that racism and classism sort of come 

from the community as well and how they perceive themselves and 

the way they speak to each other and the way that they downgrade 

themselves. If you could give me—any of you would give me your 

thoughts on that? 

Mr. PAYTON. Well, I mean, I think everybody’s going to want to 

say something about this. It is true that communities change their 

own aspirations for themselves, depending on how they view their 

own possibilities. 

So when you have a completely oppressed community, one of the 

things you will notice is that people don’t aspire to do many things 

outside of those sets of really limited circumstances, OK? 

And if you—you know, actually if you go to what I am calling the 

lower ninth wards, you will find that a lot of people have never 

traveled outside of them, OK? They don’t think that they have possibilities out there, and so what you’ll see on the ground is people 

saying things exactly like you just described. 

You will hear it, and it will sound like, you know, the community 

is itself responsible for where it is, because it seems to be quite acclimated to it. That’s evident of our failure to make those the thriving communities that they ought to be. 

But it’s a dynamic we have to break, OK? We have to—you 

know, we have to break the dynamic so that in fact those kids have 

aspirations beyond their community. 

Ms. CRICKLEY. Yes, I think—I think you’re raising a very important point. But marginalized communities, whether they’re here in 

the United States or in my country or in Europe, often get blamed 

for actually being more racist than any other group. 

And it seems to me that it would be almost inevitable that they 

would be feel marginalized and that they would feel that need to 

look out from where they are as other people in the way that they 

do, sometimes in a prejudiced way. 

I’m not convinced that they’re actually racist, because I think to 

be racist they’d need to have the power to do something about it, 

and they don’t actually have the power to do something about it. 

But you are raising a very important point, and for me it’s about 

a—it’s—it’s also about a couple of things. I mean, those perceptions 

don’t come off the ground, you know, so there is a need for education and awareness raising processes within communities that 

create opportunities for people to think outside the narrow confines 

into which they have been forced at a very early age. 

And by that mean pre-school and early childhood education and 

development, and right through the whole education process so the 

22

people have an opportunity to engage with others and to think 

about others. 

Second, it seems to me that those sorts of perceptions in 

marginalized communities are also reinforced by images presented 

for purpose from all of the media. And again, there’s a very important sense of responsibility that needs to be in both there. 

And third, there’s the overall question, which I think John has 

really answered. It’s about putting sufficient resources into communities to create opportunities for people so they can see outside and 

so they can actually go and develop in a way that doesn’t see other 

people as a threat. 

But I’d say I’m not convinced they’re able to be racist toward 

them, because I think they are stuck in a bind where they can be 

as prejudiced as they like—like people often say about Roma and 

Travellers being prejudiced against the population. There’s not 

much they can do about it, because they’re not actually in Alcee’s 

position, and they’re not in anybody else’s position. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Right. 

Ms. CRICKLEY. Thank you very much. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Right. 

Well, let’s get one more question if we can. 

QUESTIONER. Thank you so much for coming today. My name’s 

Cassandra, and I’m interning at the State Department. 

My question is this past year I recently studied abroad in the 

U.K. And the university I ended up studying at had a huge proportion of international students from Asia, Africa and the Middle 

East. And most of these students were studying medicine, science 

or economics. 

And I just—I’m not sure if anyone’s been bringing this up, but 

while studying there, I was a little worried about the state of 

America, because a lot of our minority students are not having access to a great education. 

And I’m wondering how this will affect our economy in the future 

and our placement in the world, because as we continue to ignore 

minority students, I’m wondering how, you know, in the future, 

how would this affect us, because I don’t know how much longer 

we can keep following this pattern without us going down a downward spiral. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Before—before you answer, I would prevail upon 

you to stay. Staff will keep things going and listen to the other two 

youngsters as well. But I wanted to wade in on—on this particular 

subject. 

When I came to Congress, I was on the Science Committee, and 

I was astounded that there were people on that committee that 

were advocating the elimination of the Fulbright Scholarship. 

I was just—it—it just blew me away that that would even be a 

thought. I recently was in Kazakhstan for the Parliamentary Assembly’s annual meeting and talking with interlocutors there. 

The Kazakh Government is sending students all over the world. 

And one of the things that they are doing that’s interesting, and 

the students they are sending to the United States, is they’re not 

sending them to New York and to Washington, DC, and to Los Angeles. 

23

They’re sending them to Tallahassee and to Orangeburg, SC, and 

to historically Black colleges and to other universities, religious institutions. I was amazed at their vision about how to go about that. 

One other footnote. Five years ago, when I did some empirical 

gathering on students abroad in the Asian sphere, dealing specifically with China at that time, and I might add it was a year before 

9/11, at that time China had 42,000 people studying in the United 

States. The United States had 1,850 people studying in China. 

Need I say more? 

But continue on, if you all would. And I have to go and vote, and 

then I’ll see you in a little bit. Thank you. I’ll leave. 

Mr. PAYTON. I—I’m going to pass the question. I—I think your 

comment was absolutely on the money, and I think you have the 

answer in your question. You made a comment there, so I—I agree 

with you. That’s—that’s—that’s my response. I agree with you. 

QUESTIONER. Well, I keep on wondering why there’s no one else 

making such a big noise about it, making it a big—a big issue is 

because you’ve seen how they’re counting on the laws changing and 

how it’s different, but we’re not keeping up and lie still. 

Ms. MCDOUGALL. Well, there are some voices that are—are—

are—are speaking to this point in the United States. Clearly, the 

statistics show that the United States is lagging behind in math 

and technology and science, it says. So there—there’s some voices 

saying that. 

But I—I would say that, you know, if you’re looking at the country, the attitude of the country toward education, especially developing countries, is that they’re trying to develop a work force to 

move the whole country forward. 

And, you know, the best of the country—developing countries—

realize that they’ve got to use every possible person in their population to move forward. 

I think that our country is—a highly developed country—has lost 

the sense of going forward in that respect, and that’s why I think 

we’ve, you know, there is a sense that education is not—an education of everyone—is not necessarily a national or Federal concern. 

You know, I think that we are in a society right now that may 

be changing very quickly, considering the issues that we’re dealing 

with in the economy, but I think that for quite a period of time, 

the national ethos here has been that there are some surplus people here, that we can get along fine without and move into the future without using the human resources that they could bring to 

the table. 

And that’s where you get your inner city school to prison pipeline, because they’re warehousing people that they don’t think are 

necessary for the country’s future. 

I think it’s very important for developing countries and developed 

countries to see the education of young people as an issue of critical 

concern for the advancement of the country as a whole. 

Ms. CRICKLEY. I agree with you. I think rejecting the minority 

populations and the discriminations against populations, specifically at college level and higher education, is absolutely crucial. 

And—but it’s not easy. 

24

And sometimes there’s also demand that I talked about earlier, 

and it’s a bit unpopular around here I know—positive action. 

For example, in the university I teach in, I happen to have the 

good fortune to head up a small department, and we had—we—we 

teach—we run professional programs as well for community workers and youth workers, so I decided that we would take positive action to have Roma and Travellers on those courses and included in 

them. 

Coming in as mature students, and most mature students can go 

to university without the specific grades as—as—as you—as is the 

case in most countries. But it met with such you might call considerable opposition, to begin with. 

But it’s been very successful, you know, and what—what happened as a consequence was that a number of the people who came 

and did those—did those programs then went on and did other 

things as well. And one of them has become a barrister. Another 

has become a solicitor, and things have—have moved along. 

But it demands leadership to do it. It demands trusting in people. It demands believing that people can do things. And it also demands going beyond just the confines of the existing process of people going through first level, second level and into third level, in 

my view, because there is—there are generations of people both 

here and in Europe who have been left out of the education system. 

Second thing I’d have to say to you, though, is you saw a lot of 

people at whatever university you were at in the U.K. from all over 

the world. You have to understand that there’s also been a 

commodification of third level education in Europe by now so that 

people coming from outside of the European Union into the European Union for third level education are part of that 

commodification, and they pay rather large fees, you know. 

QUESTIONER. Yes. 

Ms. CRICKLEY. And it’s part of a process of getting rather large 

fees—again, something which a number of us in Europe would be 

struggling against and making demands that if universities get 

students in from outside for large fees, they also take a quota of 

students who can’t afford fees at all, representing minority communities from the country in question. 

QUESTIONER. Hi. My name is Julie Steinberg, and I’m an intern 

for the State Department as well. And I’d like to thank the panel 

of witnesses for coming. It’s been really inspiring to hear your testimony. 

Ms. McDougall, you touched upon the notion of conditional reform in your testimony, or the idea of having—countries have to 

change before they can enter into a certain organization. And we’ve 

seen that recently with Turkish Accession Talk. 

But what do you do with a country like France, where national 

identifies seem to supersede that of historical rights? As you pointed out the Ministry of National Identity and Migration sends a 

very wrong message. 

So I was wondering—this is for all the panelists—to what extent 

can political will actually alter the circle of consciousness? And can 

we change a country’s national identity and history? I mean, I hope 

we can. And how do we put those—how do we put those ideas into 

being when you have countries like stick very rigidly to their hisVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
25

torical consciousness, their notion of egalitarian thought, where minority rights don’t seem to be an issue? 

Ms. MCDOUGALL. Well, I would say first of all the deeper political identity that the country has taken on at a specific time in its 

history and has done so in a way to take a mythology and create 

a reality—that’s the intention. 

So that’s No. 1. It’s not something that was born in individuals 

in France. It’s a political ideology that no longer fits to all the circumstances in the country. 

All countries are changing all the time. And I would say that 

that is increasingly so. You know, I think the UNHCR has a statistic that might be a little bit old now, but 1 in every 5 people in 

the world are living in a place where they were not born, where 

they have—a country where they have entered as an asylum seeker, refugee, or an immigrant, even economic migrants. 

So there are now, you know—if national—if notions of national 

identity are to be reflective of reality, they have to be open and always changing. And that is part of the problem in France. 

I actually have no objection to the ideals of liberte, egalite, and 

fraternite. It’s just that it’s got to now be broadened to deal with 

the reality. 

And they got to take a position now—and this is, I think, what 

Anastasia Crickley was saying—you know, there is a sense that 

nondiscrimination is the end of the obligation, that you can just 

say, OK, we will make sure now, especially we will make sure that 

government engages in no discriminatory behavior, and then everything is going to be fine. 

Well, my first point is that France has not actually achieved that 

No. 1 goal of, you know, eliminating discriminatory procedures in 

government hiring or advancement or anything. 

But the second thing is that in societies where there has been 

longstanding discrimination, what they have got to do is focus on 

creating equality. And that takes another step, and a very affirmative or, as Anastasia says, a positive step. You got to do something 

to make a right where there’s been a wrong. 

And I—I—I think that you’ve got to have a national identity that 

serves, you know, that purpose as well. 

Ms. CRICKLEY [continuing]. That the French are actually. I think 

what you’ve got to—what I know doesn’t work, because I Chaired 

the Fundamental Rights Agency when we were just—in the European Union where we were attempting to collect data, you know, 

and to move things. 

What I know doesn’t work is to tell the culture in one part of Europe, you know, that it’s a lesser culture than the culture in another part of Europe, and that it’s got it wrong. And so that’s—if 

we start with the reality that that won’t work. 

But the second thing is that the French by now would acknowledge that, having their—within their understanding of themselves 

just these principles at the same time that they are a diverse country and that in order to manage that diversity and in order to 

make sense out of it, that they need to know something about it, 

that they need to quantify it, which means basically that in—in—

in one way or another they have to acknowledge its—its existence. 

26

And to be fair, the French are doing that now. They are doing 

some just aggregated collection of data—not a lot, but they’re beginning to acknowledge that in order to live in a diverse society, 

they have to know something about that diversity, and in one way 

or another that you have to acknowledge. 

The other thing that they’re doing, which again is interesting, is 

under the HALDE, which is their anti-discrimination authority, 

they’re also proactively informing people about their rights. And to 

do this, they’re targeting minority communities, who will—will be 

the ones that would be their victims. [Inaudible] will be the ones 

who will have discrimination experienced in the workplace and 

things like that. 

So it’s a—there’s an interesting thing going on actually, which 

I—I—I—I consider to be quite awful, where on one hand there’s a 

clear perception by the French of the principles that they hold 

dear, but at the same time they’re acknowledging the need to find 

other ways to inform those principles. And for me what they’re 

doing actually is informing by an understanding of the diversity. 

Mr. PAYTON. I just—I’m not sure this is going to add more to the 

general point, but think about what we did as a country—and, you 

know, clearly imperfectly, and there were a lot of false starts. 

But if we were in 1830, you would not be able to recognize the 

aspirations of that country as being this country, that, you know, 

the completeness of the national identity, including slavery, is so 

complete, and we have moved so far away from it, we would not 

recognize the lack of any claim about equality, liberty for all, our 

women in this. 

You know, when Chief Justice Taney says in Dred Scott that the 

Negro has no rights that a White man need respect, he was not 

talking about slaves. And if you don’t believe it, go read it. He was 

talking about free Negroes had no rights that a White man need 

respect. It is a culture and a national identity that has dramatically changed even in its imperfection and incompleteness today. 

So I hear the challenge, but that’s just the challenge. 

QUESTIONER. Thank you. 

QUESTIONER. My name is Sean Poyage, and I’m a legal intern at 

the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Human Rights. 

I had a more specific question. What concrete action can participating governments and private NGOs take between now and the 

Durban Review next summer to help the adoption of the proposals 

that came out of the last conference? 

I—I’m sorry. What concrete action can participating governments 

and private NGOs take between now and the Durban Review next 

year to help with the adoption of the proposals that came out of 

the last conference? 

Ms. MCDOUGALL. Well, I think there’s a lot that can happen. 

First of all, you know our government—U.S. Government—has not 

supported the Durban Review process. That’s a very important 

thing, and I think that that’s perhaps the most important thing 

that we could all try to take care of. 

We need—this country particularly needs to be in there, supporting the process politically and in terms of resources and making sure that EU countries and Canada, et cetera, also become part 

of—fully part of the process and supporting it. 

27

That, frankly, is, I think, the most important thing that we can 

do. 

Ms. CRICKLEY. I agree. And to be honest, for a lot of us, working 

through Durban was one of the hardest things we ever did in terms 

of participating in a conference in our lives, I would say, to be quite 

honest about it. 

And maybe that has not encouraged people to follow through on 

those as—as they should. But I think that we would be losing an 

opportunity. And although you say the United States has an ambivalent position, European Union member states also have ambivalent positions. 

And in a way we need to just forget about our own tiredness and 

get in there and encourage states to look at what was useful out 

of that process and to begin to articulate it, because most countries 

will ignore things, if they can, unless there’s a certain amount of 

pressure or lobbying or pushing, especially things that are often 

perceived to be terribly important that are not getting very positive 

focus in the media. And I—I do feel there needs to be a push from 

civil society. 

Dr. THOMPSON [Commission Policy Advisor]. Thank you very 

much. We would actually like to conclude with that. I just wanted 

to let people know that the unofficial transcript will be available 

on our Web site in about a day and a half, so 2 days. 

And then additionally, there will actually be a—a public discussion with Ms. Crickley this afternoon in the same room at 2:30 for 

anyone that’s interested. 

Mr. PAYTON. Thanks a lot. 

[Whereupon, at 12:43 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

28

APPENDICES

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, COCHAIRMAN, COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION 

IN EUROPE 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding today’s hearing on Racism 

in the 21st century. We are witnessing an increase in hate crimes 

in Ukraine and Russia and efforts to institutionalize racial 

profiling in Italy by fingerprinting Roma. The European Union 

cites continuing discrimination in the areas of employment, housing, education, healthcare, and even sports for a number of minority populations. My statement from the Commission hearing on 

‘‘Black Europe’’ further details these problems. These ongoing 

issues dictate the necessity of this hearing and the implementation 

of solutions. 

Some years ago, Chairman Hastings and I, along with our former 

chairman, Mr. Smith, and other members of this Commission 

called for an OSCE response to anti-Semitic violence and other 

forms of intolerance. I am proud to note that in 2004, the OSCE 

established three Personal Representatives whose sole purpose is 

to combat racism, anti-Semitism, discrimination against Muslims, 

and religious intolerance. I am pleased that Ms. Anastasia 

Crickley, the Personal Representative on Racism, Xenophobia, and 

religious intolerance is able to be here with us today. 

In 2004, the OSCE also established the Tolerance and Non-Discrimination Unit within its Office of Democracy and Human Rights 

or ODIHR. Since that time, ODIHR has: 

• Published 3 annual reports on Hate Crimes in the OSCE region 

• held 8 major conferences and meetings on the issue of combating racism and other forms of intolerance 

• provided educational, legislative assistance and capacity-building programs to a number of OSCE participating States to combat 

intolerance 

• initiated the Tolerance and Non-Discrimination Information 

System, which provides information on countries’ efforts to combat 

intolerance and inequality 

Despite the efforts of ODIHR and other international organizations, many OSCE countries are failing to meet their international 

commitments to combat racism and inequality. To date, 15 OSCE 

countries have failed to provide ODIHR with data on hate crimes 

and 23 do not have adequate hate crimes laws. 14 countries within 

the European Union have failed to fully implement the 2000 Racial 

Equality Directive, which prohibits racial discrimination in employment, education, housing, and other sectors. And there have been 

numerous shortcomings in our own system. 

I hope that today our esteemed witnesses can offer insight on 

what more we might do to encourage OSCE government compliance with these commitments with the aim of countering inequalities, lessoning intergroup tensions, and upholding the principle of

29

equal rights and self-determination enshrined in the 1975 Helsinki 

Final Act. 

Thank you.

30

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ANASTASIA CRICKLEY, OSCE 

CHAIR-IN-OFFICE, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE ON COMBATING RACISM 

First of all, I would like to thank you for your invitation to participate today. It is an honour to be speaking with you, particularly 

at this time. The USA has played a central and very significant 

role in the struggle against racism. The subject of today’s hearing 

points to the continuing commitment and priority given to the 

issue. 

As Personal Representative (PR) of the Chairman-in-Office (CiO) 

of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe 

(OSCE) on Combating Racism and Xenophobia and Discrimination, 

also focussing on Intolerance and Discrimination against Christians and members of other religions, my mandate is to: 

• Promote better coordination of OSCE participating States’ efforts aimed at the effective implementation of their OSCE commitments and relevant OSCE Ministerial and Permanent Council Decisions in the field of tolerance and non-discrimination. 

• Promote, cooperate and coordinate with the other two Personal 

Representatives of the OSCE CiO in the implementation of their 

respective mandates, and while maintaining the distinct focus and 

avoiding duplication, ensure that the activities are complementary. 

• Cooperate and coordinate with ODIHR and other OSCE institutions including with the Representative of the Freedom of the 

Media, the High Commissioner on National Minorities. 

In keeping with the topic of today’s hearing, I will focus today 

on my mandate to combat racism and xenophobia. While I have developed a plan of work and named specific actions to be undertaken 

by the end of this year, I am mindful of the need to remain flexible. 

It is clear that emerging circumstances in the region may also lead 

to modifications and the introduction of new areas. I set out to welcome information and support from all partners concerned with 

combating racism and discrimination. 

TERRITORY AND PROGRAMMES

The OSCE with its transatlantic community of participating 

States presents a unique space within which to address racism and 

various forms of discrimination, support initiatives and responses, 

and promote communication and interculturalism. Without the important normative, legislative and geographic boundaries of the 

Council of Europe or European Union, and in view of significant regional changes over the past two decades, it is important that 

space can be left for open dialogue and exchange of work and programmes, naming shortcomings and learning from the experience 

of others. This has been evident at OSCE meetings and seminars 

dedicated to the discussion of combating intolerance. 

The OSCE already has in place a number of decisions, missions 

and instruments contributing to its work. However, awareness regarding the space and the instruments can be low or patchy, and 

implementation of some agreed programmes and decisions has 

been slow. For example, few of the civil society organisations, with 

the exception of Jewish NGOs, are engaged, and the 2003 Action 

Plan on Roma and Sinti largely awaits implementation. 

31

Raising awareness and working to ensure engagement of a range 

of institutions and NGOs with the OSCE can significantly contribute to realising the full potential of current OSCE decisions and 

instruments. In my role as PR I seek to raise awareness to this end 

and encourage engagement. 

COOPERATION AND COORDINATION

In various parts of the OSCE region, a number of other agencies 

and organisations share responsibility for responding in various 

ways to racism and discrimination. These include the European 

Monitoring Centre on racism and Xenophobia (EUMC), the European Commission on racism and Intolerance (ECRI), the Council of 

Europe’s Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for 

the Protection of National Minorities, the UN Special Rapporteur 

on racism and the UN Convention on Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) Committee. There is plenty of work for all but 

awareness of others’ remit can help avoid duplication. Developing 

the cooperation and coordination required to maximise the efforts 

of all in responding to racism and discrimination needs more than 

avoiding duplication. Ongoing communication, information-sharing, 

and high-level joint initiatives where appropriate, are required so 

as to ensure that value is added, rather than competing to be the 

agency/organisation which gets named as the best at developing an 

open intercultural society in the region. 

In this work, account needs to be taken not only of different 

organisational remits and politics but also of the cultures and processes which have developed in each. Policy discourse, responses to 

and experiences of racism and discrimination have also developed 

differently and manifest themselves in various ways at different 

times throughout the region. For example, a link is increasingly 

being made between statelessness and racism. 

There is also a growing challenge for States to en-sure that the 

fight against terrorism does not undermine the struggle against 

racism particularly in Europe after the Madrid and London bombings. 

The various agencies including the EUFRA, which has built direct links with the OSCE, are increasingly committed to working 

together. Over the past period there have been a number of joint 

agency meetings that have facilitated such communication and 

sharing of information. A number of agencies including EUFRA, 

OSCE/ODIHR, ECRI, UNHCHR and CERD are have developed 

joint initiatives. 

THEMES ACROSS THE REGION AND CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES

Migration and integration and the experiences of migrants are 

all matters of concern across the region. Even countries like the 

United Kingdom, which has longstanding policies and legislation in 

these areas, are facing new challenges with new debates emerging 

about the limits of multiculturalism. Migrants—sometimes without 

appropriate documents-contribute to economies from Boston to 

Moscow. In fact the contribution of migrants overall is little acknowledged as an essential feature in a region of falling birth rates 

and greying populations. The constant evolution of identities and 

32

societies across the region is forgotten in the face of migrants’ perceived threat to collective identities, and discriminations are made 

between ‘‘old’’ and ‘‘new’’ migrant groups. 

In all participating States east of the United States and Canada, 

the problems faced by Roma, Sinti and Travellers are increasingly 

visible. The discriminations and racism they experience have been 

well documented and in a number of instances national strategies 

and plans and regional commitments including the OSCE Action 

Plan, have been put in place to address them, but as mentioned 

earlier implementation remains a challenge. 

Equally, the National Action Plans against racism which all 

members of the United Nations committed to after the Durban 

World Conference against racism in 2001, remain to be implemented - and in some instances more comprehensively developed. 

They can provide a practical and integrated way for States to respond to the renewed concerns about racism which have been 

brought into sharp focus in the aftermath of 9/11 and continue to 

pose challenges for stability and human rights. It is important that 

ambivalence in some participating States about the difficult days 

of Durban does not get in the way of engagement with this helpful 

tool. A number of useful plans have already been developed in consultation and with the participation of civil society organisations 

and their implementation needs to be progressed so that exchange 

of practice and problems is possible. 

People experiencing racism do so as women and men, old and 

young. Policies, plans and actions in response need to respect and 

integrate these differences. 

MY ROLE

My role as Personal Representative involves a number of general 

support, awareness raising, cooperation and coordinating functions. 

I have been very excited by the possibilities it holds for furthering 

work to confront and address racism and discrimination, especially 

given the open opportunities to engage with OSCE institutions and 

participating States. 

I have also been reinforced in my commitment to add value to 

the work of all regional organisations and agencies through enhanced coordination and cooperation and in the need to more actively engage in civil society initiatives against racism. I believe 

there is also a need to raise awareness about the realities for the 

discriminated of institutional, indirect and often unconscious manifestations of racism, and to contribute to developing discussion and 

understanding of previously less analysed areas in the discrimination field. 

PRIORITIES

The priorities I have set include: 

• Raising awareness of contemporary forms and issues regarding 

individual and institutional racism throughout the OSCE region including, women’s experiences of racism. 

• Raising awareness regarding the contribution of migrants to 

economic, social and cultural enhancement and supporting the deVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
33

velopment of initiatives, principles and good practice towards the 

integration and inclusion of migrants. • Supporting and giving visibility to the work of OSCE and 

ODIHR including the excellent work being undertaken by OSCE 

missions in various settings. • Promoting programmes to address racism experienced by 

Roma, Sinti and Travellers, in particular by supporting implementation of the OSCE Action Plan. • Promoting civil society involvement, as well as cooperation and 

coordination between the OSCE, EUFRA and other regional bodies 

active in addressing racism and discrimination. 

CONCLUSION

Through my OSCE work it is increasingly evident that the 

EUFRA has played a key role and carried out significant work in 

identifying and monitoring racism in Western Europe and that 

there is a real need for the data collection initiatives and other lessons learned at EUFRA to extend throughout the OSCE region. 

What is clear is that despite relatively well developed initiatives 

and legislation, racism and xenophobia continue. They are pervasive phenomena and while some progress has been made we cannot 

afford to become complacent. Each of us as individuals and in our 

particular institution has a specific role to play in a necessarily 

joint struggle towards the assurance of human rights and equality 

for all. I look forward to continuing to build and develop solidarity 

to ensure that individual institutions can work to add value in the 

struggle against racism and discrimination overall. 

In the context of my mandate, it is clear that numerous and far 

reaching areas of work could be identified. Given the limitations 

and confines of my part-time role, it has been necessary to identify 

a number of priorities for action while at the same time acknowledging other areas of concern.

34

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GAY J. MCDOUGALL, U.N. 

INDEPENDENT EXPERT ON MINORITY ISSUES 

In 2005 I was appointed to serve as the first United Nations 

Independent Expert on Minority Issues. The terms of reference of 

the mandate are provided in Commission on Human Rights resolution 2005/79, which includes to ‘‘promote the implementation of the 

Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities.’’ Additionally, a central 

part of my mandate is the enforcement of the right to non-discrimination based on race as protected by the International Convention 

on the Elimination of all forms of racism, racial discrimination, 

xenophobia and other forms of intolerance. 

My methods of work include: diplomatic engagement with governments through country visits to assess the general situation in 

the country and written communications about specific concerns; 

consultations with civil society, non-governmental organizations 

and victims groups; in-depth studies on thematic issues like the denial of citizenship to targeted minority groups; reports and recommendations to the U.N. Human Rights Council and the provision of technical assistance to facilitate reform efforts. I work closely with the Special Rapporteur on racism, the Special Rapporteur 

on religion and the Special Rapporteur on migrants. I have also 

worked with the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities. 

One of the lessons that I have learned over the period that I 

have carried out my mandate is that racism is ubiquitous; it’s a 

global phenomenon. The victims differ in language and culture, but 

the experiences of exclusion, subordination, violence and discrimination are remarkably similar in every region of the world. This is 

an observation that is certainly reflected in the OSCE countries. 

I have also learned that it is difficult to fully appreciate how racial discrimination manifests in a country without taking that 

measurement from the ground. So what I would like to do today 

is to first identify the most common manifestations of racism that 

I have found throughout the OSCE countries (of Europe). Then I 

want to describe what I found a few months ago when I did a mission to France, a prominent OSCE country. 

GENERAL INDICATORS OF RACISM IN THE 21ST CENTURY

Below I have listed, with limited commentary, a number of the 

contemporary characteristics of racism and racial discrimination 

that can be identified in countries in all regions of the world, including the OSCE countries. 

• Denial by government and majority populations that racial discrimination exists in their country, leading to a lack of political will 

to address the problem. 

• A profound level of skin color prejudice that inter-links with 

fear of an invasion of different cultures that could rob countries of 

their ‘‘national identity.’’

• Extreme, and widely uncontested, bigotry toward Roma/Travellers that has been undiminished over many decades. 

• Disproportionate levels of poverty in minority communities 

that have been targets of discrimination and exclusion, marked by 

great disparities in access to quality education, extremely high levVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
35

els of unemployment, inadequate health care and the denial of 

equal access to housing. • An increasing number of political party platforms based on racism, xenophobia and doctrines of racial superiority that in some 

countries are permeating mainstream politics. • Asylum seekers, refugees and immigrants, particularly those 

who are ‘‘visible minorities,’’ face acute levels of racism with high 

incidences of physical and verbal violence against them. Increasingly governments are adopting policies and enacting legislation to 

restrict the rights of persons belonging to these groups. • Increased intolerance and violence against persons because of 

their religion, including Islamophobia and Anti-Semitism. This includes an increase in insulting and offensive expressions targeting 

religious beliefs, which constitute incitement to racial or religious 

hatred. • Full enjoyment of citizenship or civil status is being denied to 

minorities or impaired by restrictive, exclusionary notions of national identity. • With respect to certain minority groups, women are particularly caught in a net of state policies that confuse issues of culture, 

religion and fundamental human rights. This confusion is exemplified in the euphemistically termed ‘‘head scarf policies’’ in OSCE 

countries, but those policies do not represent the most dangerous 

in the category. • Increase in racial profiling, particularly in the context of 

counter terrorism policies and practices. • An inadequate legal framework that fails to: address institutional racism; extend protections to cover discriminatory activities 

by private sector actors in addition to public institutions; establish 

penalties for violations that are effective enough to be a deterrent 

for future violations; reach de facto in addition to de jure discrimination; fails to empower civil society to initiate mechanisms of recourse and redress; and does not establish a broad legislative platform for affirmative action programs. 

MISSION TO FRANCE

In September, 2007, I carried out a country mission in France, 

in pursuance of my mandate. During my visit I traveled to Paris, 

Marseilles and Strasbourg and environs, where I held consultations 

with civil society groups, religious leaders, academics and others 

working in the field of minority issues, anti-discrimination and gender issues. I visited communities living in suburbs of Paris and 

Marseilles described as urban ‘‘ghettos’’ or ‘‘sensitive’’ suburbs, including Bobigny and La Courneuve, which were affected by urban 

upheavals in 2005 and those that took place just weeks after my 

mission. I talked directly to community members about their lives, 

issues and concerns. I was also given broad access to senior government officials. 

While there are other minorities facing discrimination in France, 

I chose to focus primary attention on the experiences of French citizens and long-term residents of immigrant heritage, particularly 

those of North African and Sub-Saharan origin, Muslims, and those 

from overseas departments (e.g. the Caribbean) and territories who 

are resident in mainland France. Persons belonging to these 

36

groups—primarily people of color described as ‘‘visible minorities’’—

typically experience serious discrimination and are grossly underrepresented in State and political institutions. Racism (including 

Islamophobia), discrimination, alienation and lack of social mobility 

for persons belonging to these groups were contributing factors to 

the violent urban upheavals that occurred in French cities in 2005. 

The particular problems faced by people in ‘‘sensitive’’ suburbs 

are a direct consequence of racial discrimination and consequently 

require policy initiatives to address the special circumstances they 

face. Discrimination against minorities manifests itself in such 

areas as the allocation of housing, access to employment, quality of 

education, and grossly inadequate levels of political participation. 

Issues of identity are central in the discourse and mind-sets regarding exclusion. Members of minority communities described the 

extreme pressure they feel to alter their cultural and religious 

identities as a precondition for immigration and full inclusion and 

acceptance in French society. 

My visits to minority communities revealed high levels of frustration. I found that young people from minority communities feel 

their hopes and dreams are being denied; they see no possibility of 

upward mobility because of their skin color, religion, surname or 

address (in the ghettos). People who have worked hard, played by 

all the rules and truly believe in the principles of the French Republic are trapped in socially and geographically isolated urban 

ghettos, with unemployment over 40 per cent in some areas. They 

feel discriminated against and rejected by rigid notions of French 

national identity to which they do not conform. 

I found that there is a general climate of suspicion and negativity against those believed to be of immigrant origin, generated 

in part by public debates over immigration policies, the announcement of quotas for deportations and questions of DNA testing. 

Much more must be done to establish an acceptance of cultural diversity. There is a widespread feeling within the community of visible minorities—many of whom are second or third generation 

French—that to become a citizen of France is not sufficient for full 

acceptance; that acceptance will be granted only with total assimilation that forces them to reject major facets of their identities. 

Only when they find a way to shed the color of their skin and hide 

the manifestations of their religion or the traditions of their ancestors will they be accepted as truly French. The message that they 

take from the name of the new Ministry of Immigration, National 

Identity, Integration and Co-development seems to be that the 

presence and increasing numbers of people of immigrant heritage 

is a threat to the national identity of France; that it is a problem 

that must be solved. 

Minority women voiced specific additional concerns, including the 

rights and protection of minority women in abusive relationships; 

concerns over access to social services and protection mechanisms; 

access to justice; the legal status of women of immigrant origin in 

cases of divorce, encompassing the right to remain in France after 

divorce and the execution by French courts of foreign divorce judgments based on gender-biased laws; the rights of minority women 

relating to inheritance, housing and property; specific issues relating to the education of girls of Muslim faith; security issues and 

37

the high incidence of rape of women in disadvantaged minority 

communities in suburbs; and the lack of access to political participation of minority women. 

There are some recent positive anti-discrimination initiatives, including the 2004 Anti-discrimination Law and the establishment of 

the Independent High Authority for Equality and Against Discrimination (HALDE), an independent body with powers to mediate or 

refer discrimination cases for prosecution, conduct studies and promote non-discrimination programs and activities. But, while welcoming the role of HALDE and civil society organizations in prosecuting discrimination on a case-by-case basis, this cannot be a 

substitute for targeted and more robust approaches that are necessary to achieve a deeper and far-reaching impact on the persistent discrimination experienced by minorities. At the least, penalties for acts of racial discrimination should be sufficiently severe 

to act as a deterrent to future violations. 

Given the level and nature of inequalities in France, focusing 

solely on the more limited obligation of refraining from discriminatory actions is not sufficient. The State is under a positive obligation to guarantee that minorities enjoy equality in fact. Robust affirmative action policies in the field of employment could help to 

transform the ranks of the civil service, the police, and other public 

and private institutions so that they fully reflect the broad diversity within French citizenry. The government must show greater 

leadership in reforming its own institutional employment structures. 

France has historically rejected the recognition of minority 

groups or collective rights as incompatible with the French Constitution and the principles of the Republic, which prioritize individual rights, equality, unity and universalism. This has been an 

obstacle to the adoption of policy initiatives that by their nature 

must acknowledge the reality of discrimination against specific 

population groups within French society. It has prevented any serious consideration of affirmative action programs or the collection of 

statistical data concerning the socio-economic status of population 

groups that can be disaggregated by ethnicity or religion. These 

kinds of government measures, rather than being considered to violate the Constitution, should be seen as essential to achieving a 

true vision of ‘‘Liberte ́, Egalite ́, and Fraternite ́’’. The acknowledgement of differences of race, ethnicity, religion or heritage should 

not be considered to threaten the principles of unity and equality 

that are the foundation of French society. 

I also received information regarding the situation of the Gypsy/

Travellers, the Jewish community and linguistic minorities including the Breton, Basque, Catalan and Occitan communities. Further 

details related to these communities can be found in my full report. 

Thank you.

38

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOHN PAYTON, PRESIDENT AND 

DIRECTOR–COUNSEL, NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND 

Good morning. My name is John Payton, President and DirectorCounsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. 

(‘‘LDF’’). Founded under the direction of the late Thurgood Marshall in 1940, the Legal Defense Fund is the nation’s finest civil 

and human rights law firm. In our sixty-plus year existence, we 

have represented African Americans in most of the country’s major 

racial discrimination cases. In many respects, LDF is legal counsel 

to all Americans on issues of race. 

We are pleased to present this testimony to the Commission on 

Security and Cooperation in Europe regarding ‘‘Racism in the 21st 

Century’’. We thank Chairman Rep. Alcee L. Hastings, Co-chair 

Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin, other Commission members and staff for 

inviting us to participate in these proceedings. This convening is 

particularly timely, as the nation and the world’s attention have 

been focused as of late on the contemporary forms of racial discrimination and the very issue of race itself. This year LDF contributed to a national shadow report which followed the U.S. government’s submission pursuant to the International Convention on the 

Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD). And 

more recently, we played a key role in coordinating the visit of the 

United Nations Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. In 

each of these opportunities to engage an international audience, 

LDF and our colleagues brought a perspective informed by both 

historical knowledge and a keen understanding of racism in its various contemporary manifestations—from invidious racial epithets 

and intentional discrimination, to structural racism and policies 

that yield disparate racial impacts. 

When we were founded, African Americans and other minorities 

were oppressed through a comprehensive system of laws and customs enforced by courts and by violence. We have made remarkable 

progress since then. The legal apparatus of racial segregation is 

largely dismantled and in its place is a completely different set of 

laws—for example, the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the 1965 Voting 

Rights Act, the 1968 Fair Housing Act, as well as court rulings 

which expand the concept of equality. 

But that progress has not been steady and profound challenges 

related to race remain. We are aware that some would like to declare that serious issues of race are behind us, and they point to 

visible examples of African Americans and other minorities occupying positions of power. They point to African-American members 

of Congress, members of the Cabinet, CEOs of multinational corporations, entertainers, members of the media and so forth. And 

they especially point to presumptive Democratic Presidential Nominee Senator Barack Obama as evidence that race no longer remains salient in our society. We all know better. Racial justice in 

America has proved elusive. Indeed, racial inequality still unfairly 

affects the lives of millions of Americans. 

While invidious discrimination is still present, other forms of discrimination sometimes a result of unconscious racism—have become institutionalized and systemic. It is part of the very fabric of 

39

how this nation’s most important systems, agencies and institutions function. The manner in which this discrimination operates 

serves to mask its very existence and skews people’s sense of moral 

clarity; yet, its impact is no less pointed. 

LDF’s mission is to see that African Americans—and all Americans—become full, equal and thriving participants in our democracy. In order to accomplish this goal, we must address racism as 

we see it, and as we experience it. That means challenging systems, policies and practices that subjugate people because of their 

race, whether intentionally or unintentionally. In this regard, 

LDF’s impact on the country has been profound. Yet great challenges remain. In addition to NGOs such as LDF, we also need the 

cooperation, support and leadership of individuals in government, 

civil society and the private sector. We all have a collective responsibility to address the manifestations of racism and its sources. 

The following examples are illustrative of recent trends in racial 

justice in the United States, and how LDF and allied organizations 

have sought to address the problems. As they demonstrate, the 

challenges to achieving racial justice in the United States are numerous. However, in each of the areas noted below, we are engaged 

in ongoing efforts to change the status quo. 

THE AFTERMATH OF HURRICANES KATRINA AND RITA

Perhaps the best contemporary example demonstrating the complexity of racial injustice is found in New Orleans, Louisiana and 

the Gulf Coast region—the area devastated by Hurricanes Katrina 

and Rita in 2005. Even before the natural disasters struck, people 

of color generally, and African Americans in particular, suffered 

from the cumulative effects of generations of racism and poverty. 

Segregated in decaying areas of the city and often relegated to substandard housing, failing schools, limited employment opportunities and dangerous neighborhoods, many African Americans struggled to survive. As a result, when Hurricanes Katrina and Rita 

struck, many had no place to go and no means to get there, even 

though they had very little in New Orleans. Thus, it should have 

come as no surprise that the impact of the storms and their aftermath had a severely disproportionate racial impact. 

The scenes that the world witnessed on television, and that some 

witnessed in person, showed the scores of people left behind during 

and after Hurricane Katrina. Almost all of them were African 

Americans and poor people. The unconscionable neglect was horrifying, yet sadly reminiscent of how African Americans have fared 

in this country for generations. In the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, many African-American residents were rounded up 

by police officers and charged with looting, and some were prevented at gunpoint from escaping the confines of a city in chaos. 

Others were shot, and some killed. Basic necessities such as food 

and water were not made available for days. 

After the storms, people already living in crisis were uprooted, 

and many have since struggled to return. The dispersal of so many 

people has, in effect, created what we call the ‘‘Katrina Diaspora,’’ 

a people connected by culture, shared experiences and challenges 

that have everything to do with race. And this Diaspora, comprised 

mostly of people of color and the poor, have not been formally recVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
40

1 No. 2:07–CV–1503, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43376 (E.D. La. June 13, 2007). 

ognized by the United States as Internally Displaced Persons 

under international standards. They have received precious little 

assistance from official sources despite an outpouring of sympathy 

and support from some private citizens and the international community. And even as this private support begins to wane, the 

stakes become higher in terms of the plight of the displaced and 

the impact on culture, community and opportunity. 

Over the past three years, LDF has devoted a significant amount 

of resources to address the needs of the Katrina Diaspora. We have 

seen first-hand the impact that the storms and the failed government response have had on poor African-American communities. 

And we have also seen how the same forces have destabilized the 

region’s black middle class, which represents the fruit of the Civil 

Rights Movement. While we have seen distinct racial disparities 

that reflect both intentional discrimination and structural racism 

in a number of areas, two areas in particular merit special attention—Voting Rights and Education. These two areas are important 

because they are the realms in which African Americans have experienced some of the most determined forms of racial discrimination, with increasingly creative efforts designed to frustrate their 

opportunity and access. 

Shortly after the storms, the State of Louisiana sought to conduct elections in a business-as-usual fashion, despite the fact that 

more than half of New Orleans’ pre-Katrina residents were still 

displaced, most of them African-American. Under state law, thousands of displaced people were not eligible to vote via an absentee 

ballot. Instead, they would have been forced to find the means to 

make their way back to New Orleans. Of course, many of these 

people were living in temporary shelters and packed into hotel 

rooms with extended family all across the country. So, for most, 

traveling to New Orleans would have meant financing transportation for entire families, including young children and elderly relatives—all to cast a ballot. In our view, this was the equivalent of 

a modern-day poll tax, a facially benign imposition that would have 

disproportionately impacted people of color with little means. To 

address this situation, LDF joined local lawyers in the Wallace v. 

Blanco case to ensure that displaced African-American voters could 

have meaningful participation in the election.1 This case led to the 

first domestic satellite voting system and an unprecedented courtordered election monitoring program. 

From October 2006 to early February 2007, hundreds of students 

returning to New Orleans after being displaced were literally 

turned away at the schoolhouse door. Instead of being enrolled in 

classes immediately as the law requires, they were placed on a 

waiting list—sometimes for days, weeks or longer. This policy affected mostly African-American students—those whose families 

were most likely to struggle to resettle in New Orleans and needed 

more time to make their way back home. Many of the families returning to New Orleans, including LDF clients, lived in temporary 

shelters, FEMA trailers or packed into overcrowded apartments or 

houses with relatives. When education officials failed to respond to 

a demand for immediate enrollment of all returning students, LDF 

41

2 347 U.S. 483 (1954). 

3 U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, Educational Attainment of the Population 18 Years and Over, by 

Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin, in CURRENT POPULATION SURVEY 2007, available at 

http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/education/cps2007.html. 4 Christopher B. Swanson, Cities in Crisis: A Special Analytic Report on High School Graduation 1 (2008). 

filed a federal civil rights lawsuit to vindicate the rights of those 

students who were denied educational services and to protect those 

who would return in the future. This effort resulted in a favorable 

settlement and adoption of an official policy reform requiring 

schools to enroll returning students within a specified period of 

time. 

Similar examples of racial injustice abound in other aspects of 

the post-storm recovery, and parallel LDF’s other practice areas. 

This story is in many ways a microcosm of the experiences of people of color throughout the nation’s history. Thus, any serious racial justice agenda must have the aftermath of these storms as a 

critical component of its efforts. 

EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY

Education is recognized by societies across the globe as fundamental to an individual’s development and as the foundation of a 

well functioning society. The same values are nominally shared by 

Americans. As the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged in LDF’s 

best-known case, Brown v. Board of Education, education is ‘‘the 

very foundation of good citizenship.’’ 2 A quality education is essential to economic opportunity in the United States. In today’s global 

economy, there are fewer and fewer jobs for Americans without a 

high school diploma and those that remain leave people mired in 

poverty or dangerously close. 

Nevertheless, despite some progress, Brown’s promise has rung 

hollow for too many people of color in the United States who are 

far more likely to receive an inferior education than they are a 

good one. This is particularly true for African-American and Hispanic students, who most often find themselves trapped in racially 

isolated and failing schools. 

For example, recent data from the U.S. Census Bureau indicates 

that African Americans aged twenty-five or older are more likely 

to be without a high school diploma than they are to have a college 

degree. Whites in the same age group are far more likely to have 

graduated from college than they are to be without a high school 

diploma.3 This stark racial disparity tells only part of a more disturbing story. A recent study found that the high school graduation 

rates for black and Hispanic students are a dismal 53.4% and 

57.8% respectively, compared to those for whites and Asians, which 

are still a modest 76.2% and 80.2% respectively.4 Poor schools 

within highly populated metropolitan areas are a main contributor 

to these low graduation rates. An overwhelming majority of the 

black population lives within these metropolitan areas and, therefore, is subject to these failing schools. For example, the cities of 

Detroit, Michigan; Baltimore, Maryland; and Atlanta, Georgia have 

high school graduation rates of 24.9%, 34.6%, and 46.0%, respecVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
42

5 Id. at 9. 

6 U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, Profile of General Demographic Characteristics, in U.S. CENSUS 

2000, available at http://censtats.census.gov/pub/Profiles.shtml. 7 127 S. Ct. 2738 (2007). 

8See Brief of 553 Social Scientists as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents at 3, Parents 

Involved v. Seattle Sch. Dist., 127 S. Ct. 2738 (2007) (Nos. 05–908, 05–915) (‘‘While there are 

examples of academically successful schools with high concentrations of nonwhite students, more 

often than not, segregated minority schools offer profoundly unequal educational opportunities. 

This inequality is manifested in many ways, including fewer qualified, experienced teachers, 

greater instability caused by rapid turnover of faculty, fewer educational resources, and limited 

exposure to peers who can positively influence academic learning.’’). 

tively,5 and black populations of 81.6%, 64.3%, and 61.4%, respectively.6

As a gateway to broader opportunity, equitable access to education is a major racial justice issue. The lack of quality public education for students of color should be of paramount importance to 

anyone who cares about racial justice and equality. Young people 

are set on certain tracks early in life—tracks of quality education 

and opportunity, or tracks with poor access to quality education 

that can lock them into cycles of poverty and often lead many 

young people into involvement with the juvenile and criminal justice systems. The inter-generational effects of this cycle have devastated entire families, neighborhoods and communities. 

At LDF, our nation’s public education system has become the 

focal point in the current struggle for racial integration and equal 

opportunity. Yet, while once legally segregated schools emerge from 

the era of court-ordered desegregation, the Supreme Court has 

erected significant obstacles for those school districts voluntarily 

seeking to ensure racial integration in their classrooms. The Supreme Court’s decision in Parents Involved in Community Schools 

v. Seattle School District No. 1 7 held that the Seattle and Louisville school districts’ race-conscious integration policies violated the 

Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. In the wake of the decision, school districts across the nation are struggling to devise integration plans that will pass constitutional muster. 

At the same time, the current trend toward resegregation in our 

cities and schools has presented an imperative that we make sure 

those schools offer high quality education to their students. Many 

inner city schools attended by minority students offer fewer academic opportunities, possess fewer institutional resources, employ 

less committed and less effective teachers, experience higher dropout rates, and provide lower quality job opportunities and career 

prospects.8 This is simply intolerable. Over fifty years after Brown 

and its declaration of education being the key to democracy, we can 

clearly see that these schools are failing African-American students. Through strategic litigation, advocacy and technical expertise, LDF is leading the fight to ensure that school districts advance the goal of providing the highest quality education to all students. 

CRIMINAL AND JUVENILE JUSTICE

The United States incarcerates a greater number and percentage 

of people than any country in the world. According to a recent report by the Pew Center for the States, over 2.3 million people are 

in prisons or jails, which means that more than one in 100 AmerVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
43

9The Pew Center on the States, One in 100: Behind Bars in America 5 (2008). The precise 

figure is 1 in 99.1. 10 Id. 11 Id. at 6. 12Prison Policy Initiative, Crime and Incarceration Around the World, http://

www.prisonpolicy.org/prisonindex/uslsouthafrica.html. (last visited July 11, 2008). 13For a recitation of the ABA resolution, see Terence F. MacCarthy, Unanimous Resolution, 

23 Champion 20, 25 (Apr. 1999) (citations omitted). 

ican adults is behind bars.9 The next closest countries were China, 

with 1.5 million people behind bars, and Russia with 890,000 people incarcerated.10 In a nation seemingly obsessed with criminalizing behavior, the impact is even more severe in communities of 

color. Racial disparities exist at every level in the criminal justice 

system, from arrests for the most minor of offenses to executions 

for the most severe ones. Consequently, American prisons are disproportionately populated with African Americans and Latinos. 

While 1 out of every 106 white men aged 18 or older is behind 

bars, for Latino males in that age group the figure is 1 in 36; and 

for African-American males it is a striking 1 in 15.11 Further, according to the Prison Policy Initiative, in 2001 the United States 

incarcerated Black males at a higher rate than the apartheid regime in South Africa did in 1993.12 A visit to virtually any juvenile 

or criminal court, detention center or prison in this country will 

demonstrate this distinct racial impact. 

Sentencing disparities along racial lines have been a particularly 

egregious problem, especially when it comes to this country’s socalled ‘‘War on Drugs’’. While some racial disparities are the result 

of prejudice and discrimination by actors within the system, others 

are actually built into the statutory scheme. For example, the 1986 

Anti-Drug Abuse Act introduced a sentencing formula that equates 

one gram of crack-cocaine to 100 grams of powder cocaine. Statistics show that more whites use crack-cocaine than African Americans, yet the incarceration and conviction rates of African Americans far outweigh those of whites. Given the harsh sanctions for 

even simple possession of crack, many African Americans convicted 

of these crimes are sentenced to much longer terms than white 

counterparts convicted of crimes involving powder cocaine. In this 

way, the 100:1 ratio and mandatory minimum sentences for simple 

possession of crack cocaine have become a notorious form of racial 

discrimination in the criminal justice system. LDF has urged Congress to enact legislation addressing the 100:1 disparity, a necessary counterpart to U.S. Sentencing Commission’s recent decision 

to lower recommended sentences for crack cocaine offenses. 

Other problems—such as racial discrimination in jury selection, 

law enforcement targeting of black neighborhoods for drug interdiction operations and poor quality defense for the indigent—also 

have a disproportionate impact on African Americans. For example, 

with respect to indigent defense, a report from the American Bar 

Association’s Section on Criminal Justice noted that ‘‘people of color 

require appointed lawyers disproportionately more often than 

White people. Therefore, when the quality of representation provided by appointed lawyers is diminished and underfunded, the 

consequences will be disproportionately felt by people of color.’’13

The collateral effects of these incarceration levels play out in numerous ways, whether it is the difficulty of finding jobs upon leavVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
44

14 ADVANCEMENT PROJECT, EDUCATION ON LOCKDOWN: THE SCHOOLHOUSE TO 

JAILHOUSE TRACK 18 (2005) (citing U.S. Department of Education, 2000 Office of Civil Rights 

Elementary and Secondary School Survey (2000)). 15 Howard Witt, School Discipline Tougher on African Americans, ChI. TRIB., Sept. 25, 2007 16 Russell J. Skiba, Zero Tolerance, Zero Evidence: An Analysis of School Disciplinary PRACTICE 11–12 (2000), available at http://www.indiana.edu/?safeschl/ztze.pdf. 17 Howard N. Snyder, Juvenile Arrests 2003, OJJDP JUV. JUST. BULL., Aug. 2005, at 5. 

ing prison, the dilution of voting strength of particular communities because of felon disfranchisement laws or the moral and 

practical impact on communities with so many of its residents in 

or on their way to jail. 

Young people are not immune from the reach of the criminal justice system. Increasingly, children are being tried as adults in 

criminal court, with disastrous consequences. LDF recently released a report detailing the phenomenon of state courts sentencing 

people to life without parole (LWOP) for crimes committed when 

they were children. The report documents that African Americans 

are drastically overrepresented among the juvenile LWOP population: nearly 60% of those sentenced to life without parole as juveniles nationwide are African-American. In Mississippi, whose overall population is 36% African-American, a full three-fourths (76%) 

of the young people sentenced to LWOP are African-American. 

Although we know that children are capable of changing their 

lives for the better, many juvenile justice systems focus on punishment rather than rehabilitation, thereby destroying children’s opportunities before they have a real chance. This same retributive 

mentality has seeped into the public school system. In addition to 

the obstacles to quality education described above, many youth of 

color also face policies designed to exclude them from school altogether. Racially disproportionate use of exclusionary practices, such 

as suspensions, expulsions and even arrests at schools for non-violent conduct, have pushed many young people of color further down 

what we refer to as the ‘‘School to Prison Pipeline,’’ in which young 

people of color are institutionalized rather than educated. 

Persistent inequalities in access to quality education play a significant role in feeding this pipeline, with students of color suffering poor outcomes in terms of high school graduation and dropout rates, as well as limited exposure to advanced courses and alternative education. According to the available data and anecdotal 

accounts, black students are often subjected to these exclusionary 

practices at a disproportionate rate. For example, in 2000, African 

Americans represented only 17% of public school enrollment nationwide, but accounted for 34% of suspensions.14 And a recent 

analysis of U.S. Department of Education data by the Chicago Tribune found that black students nationwide are suspended and expelled at nearly three times the rate of white students.15 Moreover, 

studies show that African-American students are far more likely 

than their white peers to be suspended, expelled, or arrested for 

the same kind of conduct at school.16 While starting in schools, 

these trends are mirrored in the juvenile justice system. In 2003, 

African-American youth made up only 16% of the nation’s overall 

juvenile population, yet they accounted for 45% of juvenile arrests.17 These trends simply lay the foundation for the even more 

45

18See, e.g., G. Bingham Powell, Jr., American Voter Turnout in Comparative Perspective, 80 

AM. POL. SCI. REV. 17 (1986) (providing comparative discussion of the low level of voter turnout in the United States); see World Policy Institute, Voter Turnout Comparisons, http://

www.worldpolicy.org/projects/globalrights/prindex.html (last visited July 12, 2008). 19 U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, VOTING AND REGISTRATION IN THE ELECTION OF NOVEMBER 2004 (March 2006), available at http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/p20–556.pdf. 20 Id. 21Mike Baker, More Than 3.4 Million New Voters, AP Survey Finds, ASSOC. PRESS, May 

6, 2008. 22See Alan Wolfe, The Race’s Real Winner, WASH. POST, May 11, 2008, at B1. 

disturbing statistics in the criminal justice system mentioned 

above. 

POLITICAL PARTICIPATION

A central component of LDF’s work is ensuring that all Americans, regardless of race, maintain the right to participate equally 

and fully in our democracy. The right to vote without unnecessary 

and unjustifiable restrictions is both a core feature of our democratic structure and a principle that has long shaped our litigation 

and advocacy efforts in the fight against barriers to full participation. 

If we wish to be regarded as the world’s leading democracy, the 

role of government must be to encourage greater political participation. The United States, however, has one of the lowest participation rates in the election of government officials.18 According to 

U.S. Census Bureau estimates, only 64% of voting age citizens cast 

ballots in the 2004 presidential election, down from 68% during the 

1992 election.19 During that same period, 72% of all voting-age citizens were registered to vote, down from 75% in 1992.20 This decline is particularly troubling given recent laws passed by Congress, such as the National Voter Registration Act (known as the 

‘‘Motor Voter’’ law), which aim to make registration opportunities 

more widely available. 

The current presidential election cycle, however, has energized 

more citizens to become active in electoral politics than in any recent time. In the last year, there has been a dramatic surge in new 

registration among African-American voters in a number of states 

including Alabama, Louisiana, Tennessee and North Carolina, 

among others.21 As some commentators have aptly observed, ‘‘Democracy has been the real winner of the process.’’ 22

However, the success story that has emerged during this election 

cycle will prove to be a hollow victory if those newly registered voters are ultimately unable to cast their ballots on Election Day due 

to the onerous burdens imposed by discriminatory voting tactics. 

Indeed, in recent years, we have seen a series of efforts that have 

the effect of placing undue burdens on citizens’ attempts to vote. 

Increasing the burdens on the exercise of the right to vote clearly 

has the effect of depressing participation rates among minority voters in this most central aspect of our democratic process. 

Two years ago, Congress reauthorized the Voting Rights Act for 

another twenty-five years, basing its authority on an extensive 

record of recent racial discrimination in many forms of voting. Congress found that ‘‘vestiges of discrimination in voting continue to 

exist as demonstrated by second generation barriers constructed to 

prevent minority voters from fully participating in the electoral 

46

23Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization 

and Amendments Act of 2006, Pub. L. No. 109–246, § 2(b)(2), 120 Stat. 577 (2006). Shortly thereafter, the newly renewed Voting Rights Act came under constitutional attack; LDF is involved 

in defending its Section 5 preclearance provision. Northwest Austin Mun. Util. Dist. No. One 

v. Mukasey, No. 1:06–CV–01384, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42682 (D.D.C. May 30, 2008). 24 128 S. Ct. 1610 (2008), decided with the companion case Indiana Democratic Party, et al. 

v. Todd Rokita, et al. 25See Brief of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. as Amicus Curiae in 

Support of Petitioners at 4–10, Crawford v. Marion County Elec. Bd., 128 S. Ct. 1610 (2008) 

(Nos. 07–21, 07–25). 26The Court did but leave open the possibility of future challenges that more concretely demonstrate how such laws burden the rights of voters. 27 Indiana Secretary of State, Indiana Primary Election, May 6, 2008, Voter Turnout by County and Statewide, http://www.in.gov/apps/sos/primary/soslprimary08?page=office&countyID=-

1&partyID=1&-officeID=36&districtID=-1&districtshortviewID=-1&candidate= (last visited July 

13, 2008). 

process.’’ 23 Too often, however, courts are not prepared to address 

the very barriers that the Voting Rights Act was designed to prevent. 

Last term, in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board,24 the 

Supreme Court upheld the State of Indiana’s mandatory requirement that people display government-issued identification when 

they go to cast a ballot—widely described as the strictest voter 

identification law in the nation. Despite the State’s failure to 

produce any evidence of voter impersonation at any time in Indiana’s history—the claimed basis for the law—and its awareness of 

the disfranchising effects of this restrictive requirement on minority, elderly and poor voters,25 the Court found that the record was 

insufficient to strike down the law as facially unconstitutional.26

Given existing patterns of racial isolation and concentrated poverty, mandatory voter identification laws have a particularly stark 

impact on persons living in poor and vulnerable communities in our 

country. These measures are unwarranted erosions of our democracy that, just as their predecessors, will not withstand the test of 

time. Like the infamous poll taxes and grandfather clauses before 

them, they are predicated on falsehoods and can be permitted to 

exist only if we are willing to embrace a limited notion of democracy intended to introduce a structural caste into our notion of ‘‘We 

the People.’’

It is hard to imagine that laws such as Indiana’s will not impact 

elections given the number of voters who arrived at polling sites 

without the statutorily required form of identification and given 

the number of voters who were likely deterred from voting because 

of the onerous burdens established by the law. The most recent 

presidential primary election in Indiana was a close contest, with 

a mere 14,192 (1.1%) of the 1,278,314 votes cast separating the two 

candidates.27 A team of LDF attorneys, in partnership with other 

civil rights groups, conducted an election monitoring program during the primary, and made some worrisome observations. One of 

our objectives was to determine the extent to which African Americans in Gary and surrounding communities in Lake County encountered difficulty casting ballots as a result of Indiana’s voter 

identification law. LDF attorneys learned that voters were turned 

away after arriving at polling sites without qualifying identification. While we were able to help some voters obtain identification 

from the local Bureau of Motor Vehicles so that they could cast a 

ballot prior to the closing of the polls, the actual number of voters 

who appeared at their polling places but were turned away for failVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
47

28 IND. CODE. ANN. § 3–11–8–25.2 (LexisNexis 2008). 29See, e.g., Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 562 (1964) (stating that ‘‘the right to exercise the 

franchise in a free and unimpaired manner is preservative of other basic civil and political 

rights’’); Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1, 17 (1964) (‘‘Other rights, even the most basic, are 

illusory if the right to vote is undermined.’’); Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370 (1886) (hailing voting as ‘‘a fundamental political right, because preservative of all rights’’). 

ing to present statutorily required identification remains unknown. 

Indiana does not require its poll workers to track how many voters 

appear at the polls without qualifying identification, a practice 

which would certainly provide the most accurate measure of the 

law’s impact. Moreover, we may never know how many people were 

apprised of the law, realized they did not possess valid government-issued identification, and decided to stay home on Election 

Day as a result. 

The presumed availability of provisional ballots as a fail-safe option was critical to the Supreme Court’s determination that Indiana’s law does not impose excessive burdens on voters.28 However, 

that presumption was incorrect. LDF attorneys in the field were informed by poll workers that they did not always inform voters who 

did not possess qualifying identification of their right to cast a provisional ballot. Instead, some of these voters were simply turned 

away from the polls. Even if poll workers did uniformly offered provisional ballots to voters who lacked valid government-issued identification, the extra step required for the ballots to count—a trip to 

the county seat within 10 days of the election—is excessively burdensome for poor voters. For example, if a voter without photo 

identification casts a provisional ballot in Gary, a trip to Crown 

Point (the county seat) requires traveling over thirty miles round 

trip. 

By removing barriers to the ballot box, we increase the likelihood 

that newly registered voters will choose to remain engaged and be 

active participants in our civic life. However, states—without any 

credible justification—are moving in the opposite direction by considering restrictive laws, such as voter identification requirements, 

which unnecessarily restrict access and impose barriers and hurdles for citizens now entering the political process. Democracy 

thrives when it is practiced, not prevented. The challenge we now 

face is determining how to structure the political process in a way 

that is more inclusive and provides affirmative opportunities for 

broad and meaningful participation. To do so effectively, we must 

remain mindful of those who are marginalized in our society—the 

poor, the elderly and our nation’s racial and ethnic minorities. Voting is a core constitutional right 29 and not a privilege to be conferred as a prize after one navigates senseless hurdles. The Congress and the courts must act accordingly. 

ECONOMIC JUSTICE

From opportunity for advancement in the workplace to the freedom of choice to live in any community, African Americans have 

long endured various forms of racial discrimination. The result has 

been the stunting of black economic opportunity, with the impact 

felt across generations. Racism in employment can be found in hiring and wages as well as in treatment at the workplace. The 2005 

Current Population Survey shows that African-American men earn 

48

30 U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Social and Economic Supplement (2005). 31 Curtis Lawrence, Race Pay Gap Persists at All Grad Levels, CHI. SUN-TIMES, Jan. 4, 

2004, at 3. 32Phyllis Barnum, Robert C. Liden & Nancy Ditomaso, Double Jeopardy for Women and Minorities: Pay Differences With Age, 38 ACAD. MGMT. J. 863 (1995). 33 NATIONAL WOMEN’S LAW CENTER, PAY EQUITY FACT SHEET (May 2008), available 

at http://www.nwlc.org/fairpay/PayEquityFactSheetl050508.pdf. 34 Jared Bernstein, Economic Snapshot: Weaker Job Market Re-Opens Racial Income Gap, 

ECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE, July 5, 2006, http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/

webfeatureslsnapshotsl20060705. 35 Eve Tahmincioglu, Racial Harassment Still Infecting the Workplace, MSN CAREERS, Jan. 

13, 2008, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22575581/. 36Marianne Bertrand & Sendhil Mullainathan, Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than 

Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination, 94 AM. ECON. REV. 

991 (2004). 37 Jeffrey Grogger, Speech Patterns and Racial Wage Inequality (Harris School Working Paper 

Series 08.13, 2008), available at http://harrisschool.uchicago.edu/About/publications/working-papers/pdf/wpl08l13.pdf. 

75 cents, and Hispanic men earned 63 cents to every dollar earned 

by white men.30 Even at high levels of educational achievement 

this disparity persists. Census data shows that black men with 

high school diplomas earn roughly 24% less than equally educated 

white men, black men with bachelor’s degrees earn roughly 25% 

less than their white counterparts, and black men with master’s 

degrees earn 27% less.31 Furthermore, this wage gap increases 

with the age of an employee, even after controlling for organizational tenure, education, and skill.32 The situation is even worse for 

black and Hispanic women. Black women earn just 63 cents to 

every dollar earned by white men while Hispanic women earn a 

mere 52 cents to the dollar.33 In 2004, the total income for the median black family was just 62% of the income for the median white 

family.34

In addition, racial harassment continues to exist in the workplace. In 2007, the number of racial harassment cases reached an 

all-time high of 6,977. The harassment faced by black employees 

includes racist graffiti, physical threats, subjection to Nazi symbols, 

and the display of hangman’s nooses. Many workers who report 

this harassment find little managerial response to the misconduct 

or, even worse, are faced with supervisors that condone and take 

part in the harassment.35

Recent academic literature has contributed to the abundant evidence of continued racism in employment. In 2004, economists 

Marianne Bertrand and Sendhil Mullainathan published the results of a study in which they randomly assigned African-American-sounding names (e.g., Lakisha and Jamal) or White-sounding 

names (e.g., Emily and Greg) to fictitious resumes which they then 

mailed to job-openings in Chicago and Boston.36 Although the content of the resumes were identical, the resumes that contained 

White-sounding names received 50% more call-backs than those 

with African-American-sounding names. This result was consistent 

across occupation, industry, and employer size. Another study released this year by Jeffrey Grogger at the University of Chicago 

presents findings that those people identified to have black-sounding speech patterns earned 10% less than comparably skilled, experienced, and educated whites.37 As shocking as these studies are, 

they reflect the racism that persists in American society. 

Another area of longstanding concern to LDF is equal housing. 

As our nation marks the 40th Anniversary of the Fair Housing Act 

49

38Douglass S. Massey & Garvey Lundy, Use of Black English and Racial Discrimination in 

Urban Housing Markets New Methods and Findings, 36 URB. AFF. REV. 452 (2001). 39 ACORN, Foreclosure Exposure: A Study of Racial and Income Disparities in Home Mortgage Lending in 172 American Cities 1–3 (2007), available at http://www.acorn.org/fileadmin/

HMDA/2007/HMDAreport2007.pdf. 

this year, we must acknowledge that many jurisdictions within our 

country are as racially segregrated today as they were when the 

Act was passed in the wake of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s assassination in 1968. Although the Fair Housing Act of 1968 has been 

law for 40 years, racial discrimination and neighborhood segregation persist in American communities. 

A study by Douglass S. Massey and Garvey Lundy of the University of Pennsylvania provides some insight into the persistence of 

racism in the housing market.38 The authors conducted a study 

where black and white students inquired about apartments by 

phone. The study found that those students who ‘‘sounded black’’ 

were less likely to get through and speak to a rental agent, less 

likely to be informed of a unit’s availability, more likely to pay an 

application fee, and more likely to be told that credit-worthiness 

may be a problem in qualifying for a lease. Thus, although these 

callers were identical in all ways except for their perceived race, 

the black-sounding students had a more difficult time finding housing than the white-sounding students. 

Recently, the ongoing mortgage foreclosure crisis, largely fueled 

by the drastic increase in the issuance of sub-prime loans, has revealed another area of housing infected by racism. Sub-prime 

loans, such as Adjustable Rate Mortgages (ARMs), exploding 

ARMs, and no-document loans were among those that caused the 

most damage to the housing market. These high-cost mortgage 

products were often issued by lenders who did not account for the 

borrower’s long-term ability to pay the loan. Many of these lenders 

could make a commission by merely issuing such loans and leaving 

the borrower to bear the risks and consequences that the loans entailed. ACORN (a leading organization in fair housing) reports that 

in 2006, African-American home purchasers were 2.7 times more 

likely to be issued a sub-prime loan than white borrowers and 

Latino home purchasers were 2.3 times more likely to receive such 

loans than white borrowers.39 A similar disparity existed in the 

mortgage refinancing market, where African Americans were 1.8 

times more likely to be issued a sub-prime loan than whites and 

Latinos were 1.4 times more likely. The disparity was even greater 

among upper-income home purchasers. Upper-income African 

Americans were 3.3 times more likely to be issued a sub-prime loan 

than white borrowers and upper-income Latinos were 3 times more 

likely. Many of these borrowers qualified for lower-cost fixed-rate 

mortgages but were never offered that option. Thus, when housing 

prices declined and these sub-prime borrowers were unable to refinance their high-cost mortgages at lower rates, the minority community was disproportionately harmed and many African-American 

and Latino homeowners were forced into foreclosure. 

Furthermore, violations of the Fair Housing Act, and the right to 

the equal provision of public services that make housing viable, 

continue to be widespread. Last week, a federal court awarded 

$10.8 million to black residents who were denied public water for 

50

40 United Church of Christ & Witness Ministries, Toxic Wastes and Race at Twenty 1987–

2007 (2007), available at http://www.ucc.org/justice/pdfs/toxic20.pdf. 41Thompson v. HUD, 348 F. Supp. 2d 398 (D. Md. 2005). 42There is a two-way link. Residential segregation often leads to educational segregation (‘‘In 

communities where we find racially segregated housing patterns, however, assigning students 

based solely on geographic proximity to schools can result in significant racial isolation.’’). 

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC., STILL LOOKING TO THE FUTURE: VOLUNTARY K–12 SCHOOL INTEGRATION 21 (2008). Efforts to promote educational 

integration can lead to residential integration (‘‘A comprehensive school integration plan can actually counter residential segregation. In fact, after decades of court-ordered school integration, 

residential segregation actually declined across the South in the 1990s.’’). Id. at 47. Since the 

Supreme Court has forcefully pushed back against school district voluntary integration plans, 

renewed attention on housing strategies may be an effective strategy. 

fifty years because of discrimination by government officials. White 

residents who lived nearby were served by water lines, but blacks 

were not. In another example, with LDF’s support, an AfricanAmerican family in rural Tennessee is suing government officials 

and several private companies for polluting the family’s groundwater with cancer-causing chemicals. The family claims that government officials intentionally discriminated against them. The officials knew as early as 1988 that the family’s well water was contaminated with cancer-causing toxins that had leaked from an adjacent landfill into the water supply, at levels approaching thirty 

times the standard set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. However, rather than take steps to warn and protect the family, 

government officials did just the opposite—they informed the family that the water was safe for consumption. Meanwhile, officials 

notified white families in the area that they should not drink the 

groundwater and even ensured that those families were connected 

to the municipal water supply. Several members of the black family 

have contracted various form of cancer since then, and one has 

died. 

This problem is not isolated. Minority neighborhoods are frequently host sites for dangerous facilities such as landfills, electrical power stations, incinerators, and waste treatment plants. According to a recently released study, ‘‘Toxic Wastes and Race at 

Twenty, 1987–2007,’’ people of color are more concentrated near 

hazardous waste facilities than twenty years ago. Among the 

study’s findings, 40 of 44 states with hazardous waste facilities 

have disproportionately high percentages of minorities living in 

host communities.40 Today, African Americans and other minorities 

represent 56% of those living in neighborhoods within two miles of 

commercial hazardous waste facilities. Not surprisingly, the study 

concluded that ‘‘race continues to be a significant independent predictor of commercial hazardous waste facility locations when socioeconomic and other non-racial factors are taken into account.’’

LDF is currently involved in a case seeking a precedent-setting 

remedy for Fair Housing Act violations by the Department of Housing and Urban Development in unlawfully concentrating AfricanAmerican public housing residents in the most impoverished, segregated areas of Baltimore City.41 The remedy proposed by LDF is 

designed to promote housing for public housing residents in the entire metropolitan region and ensure access to communities of opportunity. 

Given LDF’s institutional knowledge about school integration, we 

also recognize the deep structural role that residential segregation 

plays in perpetuating inequality in our nation’s schools.42 The relaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
51

43 Brief of the Caucus for Structural Equity as Amicus Curiae Supporting Respondents at 17, 

Parents Involved v. Seattle Sch. Dist., 127 S. Ct. 2738 (2007) (Nos. 05–908, 05–915) (emphasis 

added). The brief also notes that, ‘‘[s]egregated housing patterns fuel segregated classrooms and 

disparate educational outcomes. In turn, low quality public schools reinforce segregated housing 

patterns due to the strong correlation between housing prices and public school quality . . . In 

short, school segregation is both an important outcome and a crucial source of residential segregation.’’ Id. at 26. 44 NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC., FACT SHEET—IMPACT 

OF RACE-NEUTRAL ALTERNATIVES 1 (internal citations omitted), available at http://

www.opportunityagenda.org/atf/cf/%7B2ACB2581–1559–47D6–8973–70CD23C286CB%7D/

RaceNeutral%20Alternatives%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf. 45This concept is defined in KIRWAN INSTITUTE, COMMUNITIES OF OPPORTUNITY: A 

FRAMEWORK FOR A MORE EQUITABLE AND SUSTAINABLE FUTURE FOR ALL (2007), 

available at http://www.sustainablepittsburgh.org/REDS/2006/

CommloflOpportunitylJanl2007.pdf. The framework is spatial; recognizes that inequality 

has a geographic footprint; utilizes GIS data to analyze the distribution of opportunities; 46 High opportunity areas include the availability of sustainable employment, high-performing 

schools, a safe environment, access to high-quality health care, adequate transportation, quality 

child care, and safe neighborhoods. 

tionship between housing and education is clear. According to the 

Caucus for Structural Equality, ‘‘[t]he racial makeup of residential 

neighborhoods is the most important determinant of the racial composition of the schools within them. . . . As residential neighborhoods in the United States are substantially segregated by race, so 

too are schools to the extent that they employ localized attendance 

policies.’’ 43 LDF has recognized that, ‘‘[b]ecause school districts 

generally rely on proximity when assigning students to schools, 

‘[a]bsent some substantial decline in racial residential segregation, 

race-neutral assignment policies are unlikely to produce significant 

racial school desegregation.’ ’’ 44

Just yesterday, LDF and three other national civil rights organizations launched a National Commission on Fair Housing and 

Equal Opportunity. Using the occasion of the Fair Housing Act’s 

Anniversary, the Commission will address the vestiges of our nation’s segregated housing policies and the acts of private industry 

which perpetuate the residential segregation we all experience 

today. The Commission is chaired by former Secretaries of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Henry Cisneros and 

Jack Kemp. The Commission will conduct hearings around the 

country to collect testimony, research, data and information on fair 

housing enforcement and the persistence of residential segregation 

forty years after the passage of the Fair Housing Act. The hearings 

will culminate in a report (to be released at the end of the year) 

outlining recommendations on how we can move forward together 

to meet the goals of the Fair Housing Act. 

Affirmative residential housing policies can provide an additional 

tool in our nation’s efforts to promote integrated schools in the 

wake of the Supreme Court’s recent decisions on voluntary integration. Combating residential segregation has the potential to break 

apart concentrated areas of poverty and reform the makeup of minority schools. A wide range of housing strategies are available, including inclusionary zoning to require the availability of affordable 

housing in large housing developments; incentives for Low Income 

Housing Tax Credit developments in areas with income diversity, 

population growth, and job opportunity; and opportunity mapping 45 to identify high-opportunity areas 46 and connect racial minorities with those geographic regions. 

52

47 Civil Rights Division Oversight Hearing Before the S. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. 

(2007); Oversight of the Civil Rights Division: Hearing Before the S. Comm. on the Judiciary, 

109th Cong. (2006); Oversight Hearing on the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, H. Comm. 

on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2007); Oversight Hearing on the Employment Section of the Civil 

Rights Division, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil 

Liberties, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2007); Changing Tides: Exploring the Current State of Civil Rights Within the Department of Justice, Hearing Before the Subcommittee 

on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. 

(2007); Carol D. Leonnig, Political Hiring in Justice Division Probed, WASH. POST, June 21, 

2007, at A1; Charlie Savage, Civil Rights Hiring Shifted in Bush Era, BOSTON GLOBE, July 

23, 2006, at A1. 48 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General & Office of Professional Responsibility, An Investigation of Allegations of Politicized Hiring in the Department of Justice Honors 

Program and Summer Law Intern Program (2008), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/special/

s0806/final.pdf; see also Carrie Johnson, Ideology-Based hiring at Justice Broke Laws, Investigation Finds, Wash. Post, June 25, 2008, at A11. 49Leonnig, supra note 47, at A1; Jason McLure, DOJ Probe Turns to Civil Rights Division, 

LEGAL TIMES, June 4, 2007. 

FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT OF CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS

LDF has been enforcing constitutional and civil rights laws for 

more than six decades. We know perhaps better than anyone that 

the federal government must be a crucial partner in our nation’s 

collective battle against racism and discrimination. Last year, we 

commemorated the 50th Anniversary of the U.S. Department of 

Justice Civil Rights Division. Created in the wake of the Supreme 

Court’s landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education, the Division has played a crucial role in making the promise of equal protection under law meaningful. At its inception, the Division was 

dedicated exclusively to ridding society of the racial segregation 

and racial discrimination that permeated virtually every societal 

structure. Sadly, while racial and other forms of discrimination 

continue to affect our country, today the Division has sharply deviated from its original mission, and the impact can be seen across 

many areas. 

As LDF has noted in testimony before Congress, the Civil Rights 

Division has been embroiled in controversy in recent years, with 

devastating effects on federal civil rights enforcement. Congressional oversight hearings and news reports have recounted the severe problems plaguing the Division, including the politicization of 

litigation decisions; improper hiring practices; the firings and 

transfers of valued career lawyers and section chiefs; a decrease in 

the racial diversity of Division staff; the shifting of enforcement 

priorities; and a substantial decline in cases filed on behalf of racial 

minorities which have comprised the core of the Division’s docket 

for most of its existence.47 Just last month, the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility issued a report finding that political appointees within 

the Department violated internal policy and the Civil Service Reform Act by using ideological litmus tests for hiring attorneys into 

the prestigious Honors Program as well as summer interns.48 The 

problems of the Civil Rights Division are so severe that it is the 

subject of a separate investigation by the same entities into both 

substantive legal decisions made by the Division as well as its personnel practices.49

In civil rights cases, the Justice Department has taken positions 

which have not only abandoned its traditional role, but which have 

turned it in the opposite direction. Nowhere has this been more apVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
53

50 Brief for the United States As Amicus Curiae Supporting Petitioner, Meredith v. Jefferson 

Co. Bd. of Educ., No. 05–915. 51Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School Dist. No. 1, 127 S. Ct. 2738, 2792 

(2007) (Kennedy, J., concurring in part and concurring in the judgment); id. at 2811 (Breyer, 

J., dissenting). 52 Brief for the United States As Amicus Curiae Supporting Petitioner, Grutter v. Bollinger, 

539 U.S. 306 (2003) (No. 02–241). 53Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003). 54 Complaints Filed, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Employment Litigation 

Section, available at http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/emp/papers.html. 55 Changing Tides: Exploring the Current State of Civil Rights Within the Department of Justice, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, H. 

Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. 145 (2007) (testimony of Wade Henderson, President and 

CEO, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights). 

parent than in the Supreme Court’s consideration of the voluntary 

school integration cases out of Louisville, Kentucky and Seattle, 

Washington. Since Brown v. Board of Education, in which the Justice Department argued in support of those challenging school segregation laws, the federal government has played a central role in 

school desegregation cases. Either the Department, LDF, or both, 

has been involved in a majority of the school desegregation cases 

litigated since Brown. However, in Meredith v. Jefferson County 

Board of Education and Parents Involved in Community Schools v. 

Seattle School District No. 1, the Department took the position that 

any voluntary, race-conscious action taken by school districts to 

promote integration in public schools violates the Equal Protection 

Clause.50 This position constituted a reversal of historic proportions 

by the Department, which throughout its fifty-year existence has 

forcefully advocated for equal educational opportunity. Ultimately, 

five members of the Supreme Court disagreed with the position advocated by the Division and recognized that limited race-conscious 

measures can be used in pursuit of the compelling interests in promoting diversity and avoiding racial isolation in schools.51 The Division’s position in these cases continued a disturbing trend of taking adverse positions in educational opportunity cases in the Supreme Court. In the seminal affirmative action case, Grutter v. 

Bollinger, the Division argued in 2003 that the race-based admissions policy was unconstitutional,52 a position with which the Supreme Court ultimately did not agree.53

We have witnessed a significant deterioration in traditional civil 

rights enforcement by the Division. The past seven years have seen 

a persistent downturn in ‘‘pattern and practice’’ cases, which represent the most efficient and effective manner to redress widespread discrimination. At the same time, while discrimination that 

adversely impacts a particular protected class is actionable under 

the law, the Division under the Bush Administration has filed very 

few such cases,54 and has prohibited them altogether in the Housing Section.55

We remain very concerned with the fact that the Division has 

filed only a few cases on behalf of African Americans and other racial minorities under various civil rights statutes, including voting 

54

56 In seven years under the Bush Administration, the Division has approved and filed only 

one case alleging voting discrimination against African Americans under Section 2 of the Voting 

Rights Act. Litigation Brought by the Voting Section, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights 

Division, Voting Section Home Page, available at http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/litigation/

caselist.html. 57 It was not until 2006 that the Division under the Bush Administration filed its first case 

alleging that employment practices had a discriminatory impact on African Americans. Complaints Filed, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Employment Litigation Section, 

available at http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/emp/papers.html. 58 Id. 

rights 56 and fair employment laws.57 It is troubling that, while 

these cases are in decline, the Division has increased its filings of 

claims alleging discrimination against white persons. For example, 

two of the last three race cases filed by the Employment Section 

have alleged discrimination against white employees.58 In the area 

of voting rights, we are also concerned that the Division continues 

to blur the line between its traditional role of observing and monitoring election day activities and the criminal enforcement responsibilities historically undertaken by the Criminal Division, which 

can cause an intimidating effect on minority voters. Essentially, 

the Division’s enforcement priorities ignore the historical and continuing subjugation of minority citizens. 

Moving forward, it is critical that the Civil Rights Division adhere to its original mission. Priorities can be augmented without 

abdicating core responsibilities. Civil rights enforcement is not and 

cannot be a zero sum game in our complex and increasingly diverse 

society. Protecting African Americans is not inconsistent with protecting Latinos; protecting disabled persons is not inconsistent with 

protecting women; and protecting citizens who are being discriminated against because of their religious beliefs need not be in tension with doing the same for those whose national origin has subjected them to discrimination. Priorities can and will change from 

administration to administration, but the Division’s role as a protector of marginalized citizens and minorities is its core charge. 

Taking account of new priorities and of new or intensified discrimination faced by various groups is appropriate, but need not be 

achieved through the wholesale abandonment of longstanding priorities aimed at addressing inequities and injustice. 

The Civil Rights Division is second to none in terms of the time, 

resources and capacity it has to bring systemic litigation. While the 

private bar and the civil rights NGOs such as LDF can have a profound effect on civil rights law, defining its cutting edge, there is 

no substitute for the Civil Rights Division’s role. Very often cases 

brought by the Division have industry-wide impact in terms of deterrence and reform. The broad-based injunctive relief that the Division can pursue cannot be matched through the efforts of private 

lawsuits alone because the pecuniary interests of plaintiffs often 

lead to much more narrow relief and no institutional reform. 

We also recognize that civil society and the private sector play 

an important, dual role. As the example of the post-Hurricane 

Katrina relief effort demonstrated, it is simply not enough for 

NGOs and civil society to engage in thoughtful acts of charity and 

service. We need all stakeholders to be advocates for racial justice. 

That means individuals and institutions declaring themselves to be 

anti-racist and also demanding the same of others. In addition to 

their direct work on these issues, they can also support this cause 

55

59 532 U.S. 275 (2001). 

indirectly by demanding accountability from all levels of government. 

CONCLUSION

Discrimination in our nation has proven difficult to overcome, 

and it persists in the arenas of education, voting, housing and employment, and criminal justice, among others. As U.N. Special 

Rapporteur Dr. Doudou Diene recently recognized in preliminary 

observations after his recent fact-finding mission to the United 

States, racism is on the rise both around the globe and here in this 

country. Dr. Diene noted ‘‘[t]he map of social and economic 

marginalization is tightly coinciding with the ethnic map. The communities most marginalized socially, economically and politically 

are the historically discriminated minorities.’’ Often unconscious, 

this racism and discrimination continue to infect nearly every facet 

of public and private life. The matter is one that impacts the security of our nation and the global community. 

Increasingly, discrimination persists due to strained interpretations of policies and laws that were once designed to provide opportunity to the historical victims of invidious discrimination. In far 

too many circumstances, the executive and judicial and legislative 

branches of government have either failed to aggressively pursue 

racial justice, and in some cases have acted in ways turn back the 

clock. In addition to the failings of the executive branch detailed 

above, the U.S. Congress is too often mired in partisan politics to 

effectively advance a racial justice agenda. And, as alluded to earlier, many decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court and lower courts 

have proved damaging. In one of the most striking examples, the 

Supreme Court held in Alexander v. Sandoval 59 that private individuals must allege and prove intentional discrimination and cannot use racially disparate impacts to prove their case under Title 

VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 

The United States, its agencies and political subdivisions must 

vigorously enforce existing civil rights laws. And we must ensure 

that these same entities expand their understanding of how contemporary racism operates. Along with the U.S. Constitution and 

federal statutes, international treaty instruments, such as the 

CERD (which the U.S. has ratified with three reservations, understandings and declarations qualifying the extent to which it would 

adhere), constitute the supreme law of the land. As you know, the 

CERD prohibits racial discrimination in a broad sense, including 

any policy that has the purpose or effect of impairing human rights 

and fundamental freedoms on the basis of race. 

Having a department of the federal government that is focused 

and motivated to discharge its anti-discrimination mission is critical to enforcement of the civil rights laws, and also has tremendous practical and symbolic significance. And strict compliance 

with the CERD, strengthening civil rights laws, and overruling or 

adopting legislative fixes to damaging Supreme Court decisions are 

all necessary strategies to move this country closer to racial justice. 

These measures would not only increase the country’s safeguards 

56

against the effects of racism; but they would also enhance the country’s accountability in the international community. 

LDF strongly supports the work of this Commission and we appreciate the opportunity to work in partnership to address these 

important issues. We urge you to continue your leadership on these 

issues and continue reaching out to NGOs like the Legal Defense 

Fund.

57

UNITED NATIONS General Assembly 

A/HRC/4/9/ADD.2 4 JANUARY 2007

Human Rights Council 

IMPLEMENTATION OF GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 

60/251 OF 15 MARCH 2006 ENTITLED ‘‘HUMAN RIGHTS 

COUNCIL’’

REPORT OF THE INDEPENDENT EXPERT ON MINORITY ISSUES

MISSION TO HUNGARY (26 JUNE–3 JULY 2006) 

SUMMARY

The Independent Expert on minority issues, Ms. Gay McDougall, 

in pursuance of her mandate, visited Hungary from 25 June to 4 

July 2006. During the course of her visit, the Independent Expert 

held numerous consultations in Budapest, and undertook visits to 

Roma communities in the Pecs region and to other groups to see 

first hand the situation of minorities and to consult directly with 

community members. 

The Independent Expert highlights that the Hungarian Government has demonstrated significant political will and dedicated considerable resources and attention to address the needs of, and problems faced by minorities in general. She considers the unique Hungarian system of minority self-governments to be a valuable contribution to efforts to enable cultural autonomy for many officially 

recognized minority groups in Hungary. However, at the local level, 

due to higher priority needs of Roma communities facing severe 

discrimination, exclusion and poverty, the system has largely been 

diverted from its intended function to preserve Roma culture, identity and language. 

The Roma have been the most affected by Hungary’s difficult 

transition period from socialism to a market-based economy. Economic decline and privatization of State industries caused a disproportionately high percentage of employed Roma to lose their 

jobs. Nationwide Roma unemployment rates continue to greatly exceed those of other minorities and the majority population, exacerbated by exclusion from labour markets due to widespread discrimination and anti-Roma prejudice. 

Statistics reveal a life expectancy for Roma of over 10 years less 

than that of the general population. Education of Roma is characterized by widespread segregation on racial grounds and poor educational opportunities, particularly for Roma girls. Thousands of 

Roma live without running water, electricity and other basic services. The Roma population face serious discrimination, exclusion 

and unusually high levels of poverty. These problems place particular burdens on Roma women who play the primary role in fashioning coping mechanisms for their families and who must also negotiate the unique limitations placed on them in the larger society 

due to their status as women. 

Roma issues require urgent and focused attention over a considerable period. The Independent Expert expressed immediate concerns that current moves by the newly re-elected Government to reVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
58

structure its previous institutional focus on Roma issues, in favour 

of a broad-based policy to address ‘‘disadvantaged groups’’, will lead 

to an erosion of progress on Roma issues. She highlighted concern 

over the situation of Roma in the fields of education, employment, 

health, housing, and criminal justice, as well as the need to comprehensively address societal discrimination and anti-Roma prejudice. 

The Independent Expert notes that the Government must take 

effective legislative and administrative steps to monitor and enforce compliance with national standards and the fulfilment of the 

rights of Roma at the municipal level. Essential early measures are 

needed to provide full and effective political participation of minorities including the Roma, at all levels, including within Parliament, 

as a key means to fulfil their rights. Data disaggregated by ethnicity and gender is urgently required to measure, monitor and 

remedy ethnic discrimination. 

INTRODUCTION

1. The Independent Expert on minority issues, in pursuance of 

her mandate, visited Hungary from 25 June to 4 July 2006. During 

the course of her visit, she conducted extensive consultations with 

government representatives, civil society organizations, and academic and media institutions and visited the Budapest and Pecs regions. She conducted interviews, including with senior government 

officials, in order to assess the situation of minorities in Hungary, 

and gained the views of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) 

and others working in the field of minority issues through consultations and open discussion forums. 

2. The Independent Expert undertook visits to minority communities, including a Roma community in the Pecs region and a German minority community in the Budapest region, to consult directly with community members, local minority self-government 

representatives and others in order to gain their views and opinions. She undertook visits to kindergartens, schools and community 

centres, local cultural institutions, and to a Roma housing rehabilitation scheme. She met specifically with women from minority communities, notably the Roma, in order to gain their perspectives on 

issues related to her mandate and held a dedicated forum for Roma 

women. 

3. In view of the particularly serious situation faced by the Roma 

minority relative to other minorities in Hungary, the Independent 

Expert considered that the Roma warranted a particular focus during her visit. A particular emphasis was placed upon Roma issues 

in consultations, discussion forums and visits, and is reflected in 

the present report. While focusing on Roma in Hungary, the Independent Expert acknowledges the serious situation faced by Roma 

Europe-wide. Her focus on Roma in no way reflects a negative 

judgement as to the relative situation of Roma in comparison with 

their situation in other European countries. Analysis indicates that 

Hungary has demonstrated innovation and leadership in its efforts 

aimed at confronting anti-Roma discrimination. 

4. The Independent Expert’s evaluation of the situation of minorities in Hungary is based on the Declaration on the Rights of 

Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic 

59

Minorities (hereafter ‘‘the 1992 Declaration on Minorities’’) and 

other relevant international standards, which identify four broad 

areas of concern relating to minorities globally. These are: (a) protecting a minority’s existence, including through protection of their 

physical integrity and the prevention of genocide; (b) protecting and 

promoting cultural and social identity, and the right of national, 

ethnic, religious or linguistic groups to affirm and protect their collective identity and to reject forced assimilation; (c) ensuring effective non-discrimination and equality, including ending structural or 

systemic discrimination; and (d) ensuring effective participation of 

members of minorities in public life, especially with regard to decisions that affect them. 

5. The Independent Expert was provided with excellent assistance and cooperation from the Hungarian authorities throughout 

the planning and conduct of her visit. She also thanks numerous 

NGOs and academic institutions for their vital assistance, support, 

information and documentation, which has greatly informed her 

visit and subsequent report and recommendations. She also benefited from the work of the Council of Europe Secretariat to the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention on the Protection 

of National Minorities, and the office of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe High Commissioner on National 

Minorities. 

6. The Independent Expert regrets the fact that widespread reforms to the institutional structures of the Hungarian Government, 

including those specifically relating to minorities, were under way 

during the course of her visit to Hungary. Some institutional 

changes may therefore not be fully reflected within the present report. 

I. MINORITIES IN HUNGARY—RECOGNITION AND 

DEMOGRAPHICS 

7. Hungary officially recognizes 13 national and ethnic minorities, which are: Armenian, Bulgarian, Croatian, German, Greek, 

Polish, Roma, Romanian, Ruthenian, Serbian, Slovak, Slovenian 

and Ukrainian. According to the census of 2001, a total of 314,000 

people declared to belong to one of these minority groups (out of a 

total Hungarian population of circa 10.55 million), although actual 

numbers are much higher. The Roma are the largest minority 

group with a Government-estimated population of approximately 

600,000 people. Minorities live in about 1,500 settlements throughout the country, and generally constitute a minority even within 

the settlements they inhabit. The Government records that the 13 

recognized minorities speak 14 different languages, due to the 

Roma using 2 different languages (Romani and Beash). 

8. The right of conscience and freedom of religion are safeguarded in Hungary. Individuals, belonging to different national, 

ethnic, religious communities may freely practise, or refrain from, 

their conscientious conviction. According to the census of 2001, 

there are 250 religious groups in Hungary. Until 2006, 146 denominations were registered as a church at the registration court. To establish a church or a religious community as a legal entity requires 

a representative and 100 individuals declaring the acceptance of 

the rules of operation. 

60

9. To be considered by the Hungarian Parliament for recognition 

as a national or ethnic minority, claims must be based on the group 

having existed in Hungary for 100 years, and 1,000 signatures of 

minority individuals legally resident in Hungary must be submitted. Claims by the Macedonian minority and the Russian minority for recognition were rejected by Parliament due to failure to 

meet these criteria. The Government rejected requests by the Chinese Government to recognize a Chinese minority in Hungary. In 

June 2006 the deadline for submission of signatures by members 

of Hungary’s Jewish community passed without the required signatures, despite estimates that the Jewish population numbers some 

100,000 persons. 

II. LEGISLATIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK FOR 

MINORITY RIGHTS IN HUNGARY 

A. KEY LEGISLATION AND MONITORING BODIES

10. Since 1990 the Governmental Office for National and Ethnic 

Minorities (ONEM), a key element of the institutional framework 

to address minority issues, has been in charge of elaborating and 

coordinating the Government’s minority policy. The Hungarian 

Parliament adopted the comprehensive Act LXXVII on the Rights 

of National and Ethnic Minorities in 1993. The Act declares the 

right to national and ethnic identity as a universal human right 

and the special individual and collective rights of national and ethnic minorities as fundamental freedoms to be respected and enforced. 

11. The 1993 Act includes the collective right to establish minority self-governments for officially recognized minority groups, with 

the aim of ensuring a suitable framework for the cultural autonomy of minorities. Since 1994, the election of members of national 

and local minority self-governments has taken place every four 

years. The number of minority self-governments operating at the 

local level on 1 November 2004 was 1,827, with a total number of 

7,772 elected representatives. 

12. The ‘‘national minority self-government’’ is the body which 

represents the minority at the national level. Legislative and State 

administrative bodies are required to consult the national minority 

self-government on issues that affect the minority, and they have 

the right of veto in legislation concerning traditional historic minority settlements and monuments and core teaching materials 

used in minority public education. 

13. The office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for National 

and Ethnic Minorities Rights (Minority Ombudsman) was established in conformity with the provisions of the Constitution and Act 

No. 59 of 1993. This independent institution is empowered to investigate complaints regarding abuses of minority rights and to initiate general and individual measures to achieve remedy. The Minority Ombudsman seeks to work in cooperation with the newly established Equal Treatment Authority (see paragraph 14 below) and 

plays a critical role in enforcing the ban on discrimination, despite 

important limitations to his powers. The private sphere and the judiciary do not fall within the Minority Ombudsman’s jurisdiction, 

61

limiting possibilities to consider complaints related to private sector employment and the criminal justice system. 

14. Act No. CXXV on Equal Treatment and the Promotion of 

Equal Opportunities was adopted by Parliament on 22 December 

2003 (entering into force at the end of January 2004), inspired by 

Hungary’s obligations for European Union accession in May 2004, 

and has assisted in filling a gap in Hungary’s legislative framework. The Act lists 19 factors that would constitute discrimination 

either of a direct or indirect nature and is applicable to both public 

and private institutions and organizations. Comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation was also a primary recommendation of the 

Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), in 

its consideration of the report submitted by Hungary at its sixtyfirst session in 2002. 

15. The 2003 Act requires all government institutions and other 

entities with over 50 per cent State ownership and over 50 employees to adopt an Equal Chances Plan, although this requirement 

does not extend to totally private enterprises and foreign-owned 

companies. Reports have suggested lack of progress by government 

institutions in this regard, while local authorities ‘‘can’’ adopt such 

programmes. These programmes seek to analyse the situation of 

disadvantaged groups and establish steps to be taken to have a 

positive impact and to create equal opportunities. The Act makes 

clear expectations that affirmative action programmes should be 

implemented at all levels and explicitly changes the operative norm 

from ‘‘the banning of negative discrimination’’ to ‘‘the requirement 

of equal opportunities’’. 

16. The government body responsible for monitoring enforcement 

of this Act, the Equal Treatment Authority (ETA), has functioned 

since early 2005 and had considered circa 900 cases as at June 

2006, some 30 per cent relating to Roma. Following a complaint 

this body is required to complete its procedures within 75 days (45 

if minors are affected), significantly reducing the time taken to 

reach a finding in discrimination cases. Findings of violation of the 

Act can result in a requirement to cease discriminatory treatment 

and/or the imposition of a financial penalty (paid to the State), and 

findings of violations can be made public. The ETA does not have 

authority, for example, to require a violating employer to hire a 

person who has been discriminated against, or to impose punitive 

damages. It is the stated desire of the ETA to achieve friendly settlements between parties. 

B. INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS

17. In 1995 Hungary ratified two key documents of the Council 

of Europe regarding minority protection: the Framework Convention on the Protection of National Minorities, and the European 

Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. Hungary has ratified 

the 1961 European Social Charter and several of its protocols, but 

it has not yet agreed to be bound by the Revised European Social 

Charter of 1996 and has also not ratified the additional protocol 

making possible collective complaints under the Charter mechanism. This is of particular concern, given the serious problems 

faced by the Roma minority in a number of Charter areas. 

62

18. Of particular relevance to minorities, Hungary has ratified 

the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the International Covenant on 

Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Convention 

on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and the 

Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. 

Hungary is obligated to report on a regular basis to the relevant 

monitoring bodies, and has a good record of reporting. 

III. THE GENERAL SITUATION OF MINORITIES AND FUNCTIONING OF THE SYSTEM OF MINORITY SELF-GOVERNMENT 

19. According to data of the Hungarian Central Statistical Office, 

the social indicators of 12 out of the 13 officially recognized minority communities (Armenian, Bulgarian, Croatian, German, Greek, 

Polish, Romanian, Ruthenian, Serbian, Slovak, Slovenian and 

Ukrainian) are similar to those of the majority population. The 

Government considers therefore that, from a socio-economic viewpoint, the effective integration of these 12 minorities in Hungary 

is complete. 

20. With regard to the preservation and promotion of cultural 

and language identity, the system of minority self-government provides minorities with finance to achieve a high degree of cultural 

autonomy in some cases. Meetings between the Independent Expert and Presidents of the Slovak and Croatian minority self-governments, together with a visit to a German minority community, 

demonstrated that the system offers significant benefits for some 

minorities in the development of cultural institutions and services, 

and the teaching and preservation of minority languages. 

21. Funding based on a tender system has provided essential 

grants to assist in establishing such facilities as libraries, museums 

and heritage centres, theatres, research and educational institutions, and media and publishing outlets, and to engage in activities 

of a cultural nature, for example youth camps and exhibitions. 

Problems have been encountered due to the high level of financial 

and administrative dependence of local self-governments upon the 

national ‘‘parent’’ bodies, and an inadequate basis for allocation of 

funds, leaving some unable to function effectively. However, recent 

amendments to the funding system should allow a budget allocation for all local minority self-governments based on a number of 

established criteria. 

22. State funding is often insufficient to fulfil the full cultural 

and educational requirements of minority communities. However, 

some well-integrated minorities operate income-generating activities including publishing enterprises and training facilities, and 

have supplemented the overall funding available. Such activities 

have also created employment opportunities for some communities. 

23. A visit to the German minority community and school in 

Solymar in the Budapest region revealed a generally high level of 

satisfaction with the system of minority self-government, and a 

harmonious and enabling relationship with municipal authorities. 

Community representatives noted that following significant historical difficulties for the German minority—deportation of many families in the post-war period and restrictions on language use—the 

63

present system has assisted in maintaining key elements of minority culture and identity and proved extremely valuable to the community. 

24. In education, the system of minority self-governments has enabled funding for the teaching of and in minority languages at primary and secondary levels. According to the regulations, both local 

and national minority self-governments are entitled to take over a 

local minority school if they conclude an agreement with the local 

municipal council. Competition for limited funds was however 

noted as a problem that has created tensions and resulted in 

schools achieving only limited progress in minority language education, in terms of the hours of teaching available and the subjects 

taught. Concerns were expressed that plans to consolidate schools 

would have further detrimental effect on minority language teaching. 

25. In recognition of difficulties encountered by small minority 

communities and municipal authorities in regard to the provision 

of minority language education, Act LXXIX of 1993 on Public Education as modified by Act LXVIII of 1999 offers a system of ‘‘complementary minority education’’, which makes participation in minority education possible for minorities that do not have a minority 

school due to low numbers of children. Students attending normal 

school education are entitled to special additional courses to study 

their minority language and culture. This instruction is recognized 

and the certificate achieved entitles students to credits to assist 

them to enter higher education. Extra-school courses called ‘‘Sunday schools’’ also constitute a special form of minority language 

education organized by national minority self-governments, with financing from the Ministry of Education. 

26. Abuses of the system of minority self-government have been 

recorded, including cases where non-minority individuals have acquired positions within, or actually established, minority self-governments for financial and political gain, in what has been termed 

‘‘ethno-business’’. Amendments to the 1993 Act on National and 

Ethnic Minorities, requiring registration of persons belonging to 

minorities in order to vote and stand for election to minority selfgovernments, aim to address such problems, although complaints 

continue to be raised by minorities. Amendments also allow minority self-governments to take over certain institutions, including 

schools, with a view to enhancing their ability to fulfil minority 

language teaching requirements. 

27. Anti-Semitism is considered by some observers to have been 

a consistent feature of Hungarian public life in recent years, and 

part of political discourses of the Hungarian right, sometimes in 

coded, although sometimes in explicit form. However, by comparison with the Roma, for example, accusations of widespread hostility 

against Jews have not been seen to result in systemic exclusion or 

discrimination in sectors such as employment. Sporadic incidents 

and the activities of the far right, including neo-Nazi marches and 

vandalism of cemeteries, have created tensions and anxiety 

amongst the Jewish community. 

64

IV. THE SITUATION OF THE ROMA IN HUNGARY 

A. EXISTENCE AND IDENTITY

28. The general situation of discrimination, exclusion and antiRoma prejudice remains cause for serious concern in Hungary. 

Based on social and economic indicators and statistical surveys, 

and in common with their situation across Europe, Roma remain 

the most deprived group with respect to education, employment, 

health and housing and suffer disproportionately high levels of extreme poverty. In response to this situation the Government has 

implemented a number of policy measures, often of an innovative 

nature. 

29. Three major Roma groups exist in Hungary, the ‘‘Magyar 

Cigany’’ or Hungarian Gypsies, the Vlachs and the Beash. The 

Magyar Cigany are considered the most integrated of Hungary’s 

Roma communities and constitute probably around 80 per cent or 

more of Hungary’s total Roma population, many living in and 

around the Budapest region. The Vlachs, originally from Romania, 

number around 100,000 and are considered culturally very different, often maintaining traditional, patriarchal communities 

headed by a single male community leader. The Beash are the 

smallest Roma community, estimated to number around 40–50,000. 

There are completely or predominantly Beash communities in the 

south-west region of the country. Government estimates put the 

Roma population at up to 600,000, although some NGOs working 

on Roma issues believe the actual figure to be considerably higher. 

30. Aspects of Roma identity and culture, including traditional 

Roma languages, have suffered serious decline to the point of vanishing in some communities. The Government considers that approximately 80–85 per cent of the Roma population have lost the 

full use of Roma languages, partly a result of ‘‘assimilationist’’ policies pursued under communism and a lack of opportunities within 

the formal education system to learn or be taught in Roma languages, culture and traditions. 

31. In 2002, the Socialist-led Government introduced a positive 

policy to recruit Roma professionals to senior positions and departments dedicated to Roma-related issues in relevant ministries, reflecting a mainstreamed, yet targeted approach to Roma issues, 

identified by the Independent Expert as a valuable example of 

‘‘good practice’’. However, following re-election in 2006, the same 

Government has favoured the incorporation of Roma issues, without differentiation, into a broader institutional and policy framework to address the problems of ‘‘disadvantaged groups’’. This restructuring is widely perceived by Roma representatives as damaging to prospects for informed and appropriate policy to address 

the unique problems faced by the Roma, which clearly distinguish 

them from other socially or economically disadvantaged groups. 

32. Hungary’s desire to join the Euro-Zone by 2010 is considered 

to be fuelling widespread budgetary cuts and institutional 

downsizing, with the aim of reducing Hungary’s budget deficit and 

meeting criteria for Euro-Zone entry. While recognizing the potential long-term positive effects and opportunities created by economic growth resulting from accession to the European Union and 

future Euro-Zone entry, due to persistent discrimination in the 

65

labour markets, the Roma will likely be the last to benefit from 

new employment opportunities. The urgent situation of the Roma 

warrants continued dedicated attention and funding by Government institutions, sufficient to ensure effective and sustainable solutions. 

33. The Independent Expert held a forum for Roma women and 

interviewed women regarding their experiences and opinions. 

Women are central to Roma families, bearing much of the burden 

of childcare and maintaining traditional Roma culture and identity, 

while also often fashioning coping mechanisms for their families 

when facing hardship. As such they are deeply affected by the consequences of discrimination and the impact of poverty, and their 

experiences and voices are vital to understanding the full extent of 

the problems. Roma women commonly face multiple or ‘‘intersectional’’ forms of discrimination due to their status as both Roma 

and women. 

34. Roma women described concerns related to fundamental 

issues of hunger, low income, housing, unemployment and their 

children’s schooling. Other issues such as domestic violence and 

trafficking were considered important but many expressed their inability to deal adequately with such problems because of the allconsuming demands of day-to-day survival for themselves and their 

families. When Roma women are victims of domestic violence, discrimination against them as Roma makes unviable the recourse 

that non-Roma women might have to law enforcement, judicial 

sanctions or shelters. Access to, and knowledge of services for 

women remains an important obstacle for Roma women, and 

blockages in regard to the implementation of national policy at the 

municipal level exacerbates this. Issues related to child marriage 

in some sectors of the Romani community, are also lacking adequate policy measures. 

35. Roma women are likely to face exclusion from employment 

opportunities equal to that experienced by Roma men and are further disadvantaged by patriarchal attitudes within the larger society. Women are generally paid less, and for Roma women ‘‘the 

doors are often closed and we are not even able to demonstrate our 

skills’’. During the forum, Roma women highlighted that Roma 

women with nursing or teaching qualifications, for example, have 

been unable to find jobs largely due to widespread discrimination. 

36. The Independent Expert welcomed the report of Hungary to 

the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against 

Women (CEDAW) in 2006. This report highlights the generally disadvantaged situation of Roma women, although regretfully it fails 

to provide disaggregated data to fully reveal the extent of the problems faced, or to fully elaborate policies and programmes to address the specific needs of Roma women. 

37. Within Hungary’s universalist approach to tackling discrimination (avoiding the targeting of special groups), Roma women’s 

issues fall within broader initiatives in the field of gender. Roma 

women expressed their view that due to the particular circumstances of discrimination, and multiple-discrimination, such 

general measures are inadequate to meet their needs. The Independent Expert welcomed new gender initiatives in relation to employment, education, housing, domestic violence and rape, however, 

66

she agreed that without a targeted approach these would fail to 

meet the needs of Roma women. 

B. ROMA POLITICAL PARTICIPATION

38. Roma are very poorly represented within the national Government and only three Roma Members of Parliament (representing the main opposition party) were elected in 2006 to the 

386-member Parliament. The governing coalition has no Roma MPs 

and there is considered to be a general lack of political will to field 

Roma representatives as political candidates amongst all political 

parties, despite competition for Roma votes. Proposals to reduce 

Parliament by 2010 to between 200–289 members, may further reduce the possibilities for Roma representation according to Roma 

commentators. 

39. Under the provisions of the Constitution and the 1993 Act 

LXXVII on the Rights of National and Ethnic Minorities, there is 

a requirement to ensure the representation of minorities within 

Parliament. However no mechanism for the representation of minorities has been established since the transition period and a solution is long overdue. The Independent Expert supports the opinion 

of the Council of Europe Advisory Committee on the Framework 

Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, that the Government should draw inspiration from systems used in other countries and in this regard recalls articles 6 and 7 of the 1992 Declaration on Minorities relating to inter-State cooperation. 

40. Current Roma MPs were elected as mainstream party representatives. Although a Roma political party, Roma O ̈ sszefoga ́s 

Pa ́ rt (Party for Roma Cooperation) did field candidates in recent 

elections, it achieved a poor percentage of the votes cast. Uniquely 

amongst European Union countries, Hungary has two Roma 

women Members of the European Parliament. Domestically, at all 

but the lowest levels of minority self-government, Roma women are 

underrepresented. A higher percentage of Roma women play leadership roles in the minority self-government at the local settlement 

level where there are few if any resources, but nevertheless, an expectation that they will address the community’s social problems. 

41. The system of minority self-governments established 999 

local Roma self-governments in 2002 increasing to 1,118 following 

2006 elections. Support given to the National Roma Self-Government in 2006 was 820,000 euros with an additional 254,000 euros 

for the functioning of institutions under their management. However, at the local level, due to higher priority needs of communities 

facing severe discrimination, exclusion and poverty, the system has 

largely been diverted from its intended function to preserve Roma 

culture, identity and language. 

42. The failure and neglect of municipal authorities to fulfil their 

social and economic responsibilities for which they are State funded, have left Roma self-governments to address pressing issues beyond their originally designated function. Many face pressure to act 

as social service providers, which is in actuality the responsibility 

of municipal authorities. Roma self-governments lack the resources 

or capacity to provide the solutions required by Roma communities, 

and conflicts, including inter-community conflict, can result. The 

67

Independent Expert stressed that the system was not intended as 

a vehicle for confronting urgent social and economic problems. 

43. There is a need to clarify the competencies and jurisdictions 

of minority self-governments. Efforts to amend legislation at the 

national level to increase the authority of local minority self-governments have reportedly been blocked or weakened by mayors 

who also serve as members of Parliament. A welcome initiative to 

start in November 2006 requires that Presidents of minority selfgovernments be ex officio members at meetings of municipal authorities, allowing them to raise issues directly with the competent 

authorities. 

44. The minority self-government system does provide a useful 

structure, with electoral legitimacy, which can be a voice for Roma 

community concerns. Roma can progress within the system of minority self-government from the local to potentially the county and 

national levels. It also offers a training ground for political participation and an incentive and motivation towards wider Roma political activity into mainstream political structures. In 2006, at the 

national level, the highest number of candidates for minority selfgovernments were fielded by two Roma minority organizations. 

Government amendments to the 1993 Act on National and Ethnic 

Minorities seek to eliminate an anomaly in the original legislation 

that allowed non-minorities to stand for elected positions and to exercise a franchise in elections for minority self-governments. However, a registration process in order to vote and to stand for election has been criticized on the grounds that Roma are reluctant to 

identify themselves as such for official purposes because of memories of historical persecution, including genocide in Europe. Additionally, many Roma consider themselves poorly served by current 

political mechanisms and see little advantage in cooperation. By 

the 15 July 2006 registration deadline, 106,341 Roma voters had 

registered as such. 

C. DISCRIMINATION

45. The Independent Expert considers that widespread discrimination and anti-Roma prejudice exist within Hungarian society, resulting in exclusion in all walks of life and significant political, social and economic marginalization. She expressed particular concern regarding the effects of discrimination in the fields of education, employment and housing, addressed separately in the 

present report. 

46. Despite increasing growth and opportunity generally in Hungary, the situation of the Roma is not improving, and may be worsening due to a widening gap between mainstream society and the 

Roma. In the period of transition from communist rule, Roma suffered disproportionately from the effects of reform. Discrimination 

and prejudice significantly increased as Roma faced long-term unemployment, poor service provision and access to education, and 

consequent negative stereotyping by wider society. The long-term 

consequences of discrimination and exclusion have resulted in a belief expressed by many Roma, that their situation is unlikely to improve. 

47. Allegations of widespread discrimination within the healthcare system and social services are cause for concern. DiscriminaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
68

tory practices, including reports of segregated maternity wards for 

Roma women in some hospitals, and a high incidence of discriminatory treatment by medical staff have been cited as influencing 

Roma not to seek medical assistance in hospitals. Roma women 

also expressed serious concern at the disproportionate removal of 

Roma children into institutions on arbitrary grounds or on the 

basis of poverty. Municipal authorities can take a child without a 

court decision, and Roma women stated that the only way to gain 

redress or appeal the decision with the local authority was via judicial remedy about which many Roma are uninformed. 

48. A 2002–2003 study by the Hungarian Helsinki Committee 

considered issues of racial discrimination against Roma in the 

criminal justice system and confirmed practices of racial profiling 

by the police. Research considered 1,147 court files and found discriminatory practices, notably in police stop and search policies. 

These findings suggest that the disproportionate numbers of Roma 

prison inmates may partly be attributed to discriminatory practices. Roma are only 5–6 per cent of the population, however, they 

are estimated at between 30 and 40 per cent of inmates. 

49. Efforts by civil society groups to conduct anti-discrimination 

training for the judiciary are welcome. The activities of the Minority Ombudsman and the Hungarian Helsinki Committee to investigate possible discrimination in criminal justice have, however, 

been hampered due to the judiciary falling beyond the jurisdiction 

of the Minority Ombudsman, and public prosecutors commonly refusing to allow access to files. 

D. POVERTY

50. The Roma in Hungary are disproportionately affected by severe poverty. A 2003 World Bank report states that 40.3 per cent 

of Romani households in Hungary live in absolute poverty compared to only 6.9 per cent of general Hungarian households, while 

Hungary’s 2004 Millennium Development Goals (MDG) report, Reducing Poverty and Social Exclusion, states that by the end of the 

1990s, 62 per cent of Roma families lived on less than half the median income (p. 20). According to a United Nations Development 

Programme (UNDP) and International Labour Organization (ILO) 

survey in 2002, more than half of Roma children live in households 

which regularly go hungry. 

51. The Independent Expert has established within her initial report (E/CN.4/2006/74, para. 64) that minority groups that face 

widespread discrimination or exclusion are much more likely than 

other groups to be impoverished. The poorest communities in almost any region tend to be minority communities that have been 

targets of longstanding discrimination, violence or exclusion. 

Mainstreamed and targeted efforts to reduce poverty are essential 

to efforts to promote the full range of civil, political, social and economic rights for minority communities. 

52. Poverty as faced by the Roma in Hungary is both a cause and 

a manifestation of the diminished rights and opportunities available to the members of that community. Poverty in this context involves more than just a lack of income or a daily struggle for basic 

sustenance. Roma are generally less able to participate effectively 

in political decision-making or to access mechanisms of justice 

69

when their rights are violated. They suffer from unequal access to 

education, health care and employment. 

53. Life expectancy rates are 60 years for Roma, compared to a 

national average of 72.3, while infant mortality rates are high. 

These are disparities which the Independent Expert considers to be 

a direct consequence of poverty. Furthermore a serious shortage of 

some 126 general medical practitioners in Roma areas, suggests 

that many may have little or no essential primary medical care 

services. Excluding Budapest, 18.6 per cent of Hungary’s Roma live 

in a settlement without a local doctor. 

54. Social welfare benefits are available upon application and are 

important in alleviating poverty. However, it is likely that due to 

lack of information and inadequate coverage of an effective social 

worker system in disadvantaged areas and isolated settlements, a 

relatively high percentage of Roma are failing to apply for full benefits to which they are entitled. 

55. Hungary’s 2004 MDG report usefully highlights the Roma’s 

disproportionate experience of poverty. However, a major obstacle 

to measuring the magnitude of poverty, discriminatory treatment 

and social exclusion affecting Roma is Hungary’s failure to date to 

generate and make available disaggregated data in fields such as 

education, health care, housing, and social services. Such data is 

essential to formulating adequate policies to confront both specific 

problems, and the wider situation of poverty affecting Roma. 

56. According to the Government, the Hungarian Central Statistical Office is responsible for regularly collecting and publishing 

data on the situation of the different population groups in Hungary 

with respect to their income, education levels, poverty levels and 

other social and economic data. Reportedly under the Government’s 

interpretation of Hungary’s data protection law, gathering data according to ethnicity is illegal in Hungary. It is clear that if 

disaggregated data has been gathered by the Government it has 

been done on an inconsistent basis. 

57. The European Union has affirmed that data protection rules 

apply to personal data, not to aggregate data about groups, nor 

data disaggregated by ethnicity or other criteria. The European 

Union’s social inclusion process imposes a range of requirements on 

Governments to produce accurate data on the situation of 

marginalized groups. 

E. EDUCATION

58. Urgent attention is required to fully address the education 

needs of Roma children, including ensuring access to quality education, curriculum and language issues, and the specific situation 

of Roma girls regarding education. Significant efforts by the Government to address segregation and discrimination are commended 

by the Independent Expert, however, they have to date achieved 

only limited impact despite high levels of funding and prioritization 

of this issue. 

59. Hungary’s third periodic report to the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (EC/12/HUN/3, para. 598) states 

that almost all Roma children now complete eight classes of primary school, a significant improvement over the rates of only 26 

per cent and 75 per cent at the beginning of the 1970s and 1990s 

70

respectively. However, very few progress to achieve a secondary 

school leaving certificate. Roma are 50 times less likely to receive 

a college or university diploma than non-Roma and less than 1 per 

cent hold higher education certificates. 

60. Post-communist Constitutional provisions entrenched local 

government authority in a number of important areas including 

education, creating a stumbling block for national efforts to address 

disparities in education between Roma and non-Roma children. To 

date, no Government has been able to achieve amendments to the 

Act on education that would wrest even limited powers from local 

authorities. While the national Government faces some limitations 

in its influence on local authorities, it is considered not to have 

been robust enough in its efforts to enforce its national education 

integration policy. Furthermore, there is no effective independent 

monitoring and evaluation system within Hungary and schools are 

under no obligation to accept or invite independent inspectors even 

if recommended by the national Government. 

Segregation in education 

61. One Roma woman commented that: ‘‘Roma children are being 

robbed of their future by segregation in education.’’ The vast majority of children attend primary schools that are segregated with respect to Roma and non-Roma students. Eliminating segregated 

schooling at the primary level has become the priority objective for 

creating access to quality education for Roma. This important imperative adopted by the national Government has been the focus of 

resistance by many parents and local ‘‘majority’’ governments. 

62. Resistance has taken a number of forms including: ‘‘white 

flight’’ to communities without Roma populations within the school 

districts, labelling Roma children as mentally disabled and diverting them to separate schools or separate tracks within majority 

schools, designating Roma as ‘‘private students’’ who need not attend classes, and even co-opting the Roma minority self-government structure in order to neutralize its ability to block local efforts to evade desegregation initiatives of the national Government. 

63. The system of ‘‘free choice’’ established by the Constitution 

has been used as a mechanism for segregation in the school system. Parents can decide not to send their children to certain 

schools, and schools in other districts were free to make decisions 

as to which students to accept from outside their catchment area. 

Amendments to the Education Act in 2005 offer useful potential to 

assist in combating ‘‘free choice’’ as a vehicle for school segregation, 

since schools will be required to accept ‘‘disadvantaged students’’ 

first and to guarantee that a certain balance is maintained in the 

student body. This would avoid the ‘‘tipping point’’ phenomenon 

whereby increases over a certain percentage of Roma students 

would drive the best teachers to abandon the school and non-Roma 

parents to withdraw their children. 

64. Another vehicle to achieve segregation is that Roma children 

are disproportionately placed in separate schools or classes for the 

mentally or learning disabled, regardless of their actual intellectual 

abilities. The Commissioner for the Integration of Disadvantaged 

and Roma Children of the Ministry of Education has stated that 

while 2 per cent of non-Roma children are in special needs schools 

71

for children classified as ‘‘slightly mentally disabled’’, this figure is 

20 per cent amongst Roma children. Children are tested prior to 

entrance to the primary school system, at which stage Roma children are more likely to be filtered into such special schools. While 

attendance of kindergarten is important to early educational 

progress, estimates suggest that a high percentage of Roma, usually those living in smaller or isolated settlements, lack kindergarten places. Moreover 10–11 per cent of Roma children never attend kindergarten although, according to the Act on Public Education, one year is compulsory for every child before they start 

school. On a positive note, new policies have been conceived to 

make it harder to fail children in the first three years of schooling, 

assisting disadvantaged children to catch up. 

65. Financial motivations at the municipal level may work to 

perpetuate segregation and Roma exclusion from mainstream education. The State gives to municipalities higher grants on a per 

capita basis for children labelled slightly mentally disabled. However, without effective independent monitoring, there is often no 

evidence that extra funds are spent on the special needs schools, 

which are widely regarded as substandard with poor facilities and 

low teaching standards. Research groups suggest that the numerical intake of children into special needs schools remains constant 

year-on-year, suggesting a system based on quotas and institutional maintenance, rather than on the specific education needs of 

disabled children. 

66. As part of its Action Plan for the Decade of Roma Inclusion 

2005–2015, focusing on education, employment, health and housing, the Hungarian Government has provided financial incentives 

to local governments to assist in desegregation of schools. However 

the take-up has been poor and serious abuses of the system have 

been reported. For those authorities that fail to put in place desegregation measures, according to the Equal Treatment Act and recent judicial decisions, no penalties have been imposed and their 

core State funding remains intact. 

67. A widely cited recent judicial decision on school segregation 

found the Miskolc Municipality, in its role as Education Authority 

for Hungary’s second largest city, to be maintaining segregation of 

Roma children in primary schools where they are taught in separate buildings and receive lower quality education. A legal action 

brought in June 2005 focused on seven schools which were ‘‘administratively and financially’’ merged but in practice maintained 

physical segregation. In June 2006, the Debrecen Appeals Court 

overturned a first instance judgement, in finding that Miskolc 

maintained the segregation of Roma children, violating their right 

to equal treatment. Importantly the Court agreed that not only active, but passive conduct could lead to a violation of the Equal 

Treatment Act. 

68. In Ja ́szlada ́ny in 2002 the municipal government actively 

segregated Roma and non-Roma children through the creation of a 

private foundation school (occupying half of the existing school 

building) excluding Roma children. This was partially achieved by 

manipulation of the system of minority self-government in order to 

neutralize its powers of veto. In the Roma minority self-government 

elections, the mayor’s wife, considered by community members to 

72

1The Public Foundation for Hungarian Gypsies gives scholarships for Roma pupils, based on 

ethnic criteria, and a separate programme of the Ministry of Education called U ́ travalo ́ provides 

support to socially disadvantaged children and their mentors based on social criteria. 

be non-Roma, stood as a candidate and was elected president. Until 

reforms instituted in July of this year, non-minorities could participate as candidates and the electorate in contests for minority selfgovernments. In this capacity, she supported the foundation school, 

thus allowing it to be registered. 

69. The Equal Treatment Act bans segregation in schools and the 

Equal Treatment Authority has the power to bring legal cases 

against local authorities in cases of segregation. However, a finding 

of violation, even by the Constitutional Court, is not matched by 

sufficient penalty to prevent continuation of the offence or to act 

as a deterrent. In the Miskolc case, the Appeals Court concluded 

that, beyond a finding of violation and an order to publicize its 

finding via the media, it could not require Miskolc to actively engage in implementing a desegregation plan. 

Education of Roma girls and women 

70. Hungary’s 2006 report to the Committee on the Elimination 

of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) demonstrates that 

some 35–40 per cent of Roma women have not completed primary 

school education. The Independent Expert expressed her concern in 

particular over the educational situation of Roma girls, both in regard to the discriminatory educational environment and attitudes 

within Roma communities that further restrict the participation of 

girls in education. 

71. Policy measures must take into account the different obstacles faced by girls, and the specific concerns of parents, for example 

in relation to situations where children must travel to schools in 

neighbouring localities. The persistence of rigidly defined traditional gender roles within Roma communities was highlighted as a 

factor seriously restricting access of Roma girls to full education 

possibilities. The high proportion of Roma girls leaving education 

at an early age requires focused attention. A system of ‘‘second 

chance schools’’ offers an opportunity for those who have become 

mothers at an early age, to continue education by accommodating 

childcare needs. The Independent Expert commends such initiatives as examples of ‘‘promising practice’’. Government statistics 

also reveal a predominance of female students benefiting from a 

scholarship programme for Roma students. 

Roma scholarship programme 

72. The Government’s Roma scholarship programme 1 is highlighted by the Independent Expert as offering Roma students increased opportunities to progress within the education system by 

reducing the financial burden upon disadvantaged families. In the 

academic year 2005/06, 1,562 Roma received a scholarship. Moves 

in 2005 towards ‘‘post-financing’’ scholarships, requiring students 

to be reimbursed tuition fees at a later date, may restrict opportunities for many potential Roma students. Additionally examples 

were given of students excluded from their studies by administrative difficulties. With adequate safeguards and monitoring to proVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
73

tect against abuse by non-Roma, the scholarship system is considered an example of ‘‘good practice’’. 

F. EMPLOYMENT

73. The Roma minority face widespread discrimination in employment contributing to disproportionately high unemployment 

rates. According to the Public Foundation for European Comparative Minority Research, in 2006 only 29 per cent of the male Roma 

population between 17 and 75 are employed. The European Roma 

Rights Centre (ERRC) highlights that 64 per cent of Roma interviewed stated that they had suffered direct racial discrimination in 

hiring procedures, and that Roma were eight times more likely to 

be unemployed than non-Roma. In some areas, near total exclusion 

of Roma from the labour market is partially attributable to a dramatic consequence of racial discrimination. Many Roma are compelled to find work in the grey economy, offering low wages, and 

no job security or related benefits in sectors including construction 

and forestry. Hungary’s recent economic growth has had no significant impact on Roma unemployment, due to widespread discrimination. 

74. According to civil society analysis, while nearly all were employed during the communist era, from the late 1980s through the 

early 1990s, approximately 40 per cent of employed Roma lost their 

jobs, compared to approximately 10 per cent of the majority population. Post-communist reform resulted in privatization or decline 

of nationalized industries and subsequent job loss, most affecting 

low or unskilled workers and those facing discrimination. 

75. Analysis of the employment situation amongst Roma women 

has been frustrated by the general lack of gender perspective within labour market studies, and national policy on Roma issues has 

lacked a specific gender perspective. It is estimated that an additional 25 per cent of Roma women stay at home to care for the 

household or children. High levels of unemployment amongst Roma 

women are also driven by poor levels of education and multiple or 

intersectional forms of discrimination. 

76. A dangerous legacy of long-term and widespread unemployment amongst Roma communities is a lack of working role models 

for Roma children and poor levels of motivation amongst Roma 

families to expend scarce resources on education when they perceive a future of unemployment. Hungary’s MDG report indicates 

that 50 per cent of Roma children live in households without any 

active earners. 

77. Numerous cases of anti-Roma discrimination in employment 

have been catalogued and legal cases have been brought recently 

under the 2004 Equal Treatment Act and via the Equal Treatment 

Authority and the Minority Ombudsman. However, findings of discriminatory practice by employers have not resulted in penalties 

adequate to act as a deterrent against future discrimination. To 

date anti-discrimination legislation has largely failed to impact significantly on discrimination against Roma in the labour market. 

78. In response to this serious situation, the Hungarian Government has funded a number of employment initiatives and targeted 

labour market programmes over recent years with varying degrees 

of success. Such schemes include training and skills development 

74

initiatives, projects to assist Roma through employment agencies, 

expansion of public works programmes, and a Social Land Programme. In addition, in 2003 the Hungarian Ministry of Economy 

and Transportation launched a programme to aid micro, small- and 

medium-sized Roma business ventures, encourage entrepreneurship and facilitate Roma employment. Between 2003–2005 approximately 2 billion forint (7 million euros) were invested into Roma 

businesses and 400 new jobs created. According to the Government, 

in 2006 the amount allocated to the same purpose has been increased by 25 per cent. 

G. HOUSING

79. Housing has been described by one observer as the biggest 

emergency in Hungary in the post-communist era. Roma are disproportionately housed in substandard accommodation, in some 

cases detrimental to health. The Independent Expert witnessed 

first hand families in such circumstances. UNDP states that 46 per 

cent of Roma households are without basic amenities. Homelessness, affecting an estimated 30,000 people in Hungary according to 

NGO statistics, also disproportionately affects Roma and should be 

addressed as a matter of urgency. 

80. Forced evictions of Roma in Hungary are a problem requiring 

government attention and improved legislation and policy. About 

10,000 people are currently threatened with eviction in Budapest, 

many of them Roma. In the post-communist reform era, autonomous but poorly financed local authorities raised funds by selling 

public housing resulting in one of the lowest public housing stocks 

in the region. Rental accommodation is often beyond the means of 

Roma families surviving on benefits, who often default on rental 

payments and are subsequently vulnerable to eviction. 

81. Targeted forced evictions of Roma in the context of 

neighbourhood gentrification plans and authorities deliberately 

paying benefits late so that Roma families default on rent payment, 

have been reported. Instances have been documented and legal 

cases brought regarding activities to restrict Roma from purchasing 

or moving into houses in non-Roma localities. In one instance, with 

the alleged sanction of a local mayor, community members acted to 

seriously damage a house that a Roma family was due to occupy. 

Other tactics to exclude Roma include local authorities purchasing 

houses from public funds rather than allowing Roma families to 

purchase, or offering higher amounts to sellers than prices agreed 

with Roma families. 

82. The Independent Expert welcomes initiatives to address the 

housing needs of some disadvantaged Roma settlements through 

rehabilitation schemes. The Government recently funded nine 

Roma settlements to upgrade housing, one of which (Kisvaszari) 

was visited by the Independent Expert. This project resulted in the 

building of new housing for the most in need and the refurbishment of existing houses for others, dramatically improving living 

conditions for some families. Funding restrictions have resulted in 

rehabilitation programmes being limited in number and scope and 

failing to include proposals for complementary measures in the 

areas of local employment and education. Inter-community conflicts 

75

have arisen due to limitations in resources resulting in a selection 

process of those families to benefit from the schemes. 

83. Under a government benefits policy Roma families with two children currently receive a grant of 2,400,000 forint (US$ 11,000) 

towards adequate housing, doubling to 4,800,000 for families with 

four children. However, it is also widely considered by NGOs that 

there is a housing crisis for Roma families, and the Independent 

Expert witnessed large families who had been rehoused only as 

part of a separate and limited programme of settlement rehabilitation. Analysis is required to ensure that housing subsidies to which 

Roma are entitled are being claimed and delivered in a timely 

manner, and are sufficient to provide adequate housing. 

84. It is evident that the Government’s efforts to provide adequate legal protection to individuals have not been sufficient with 

regard to housing. The Government has not yet ratified key provisions of international law, most notably the Revised European Social Charter. In addition, the Government has removed a number 

of previously existing protections against forced evictions. It is clear 

that Roma would benefit significantly from improvements to general law in the field of housing rights. 

V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

85. Having widely consulted, assessed documentary information, 

and collected and analysed the views of various parties and stakeholders, the Independent Expert concludes that the Hungarian 

Government has demonstrated a high degree of attention and significant political will to addressing the unique needs of and problems faced by minorities. 

86. The Independent Expert is required by her mandate to identify best practices by States and in this respect highlights a number of legislative and policy initiatives undertaken by the Government. The Independent Expert believes that the 1993 Act on the 

Rights of National and Ethnic Minorities provides an innovative 

and dedicated approach to minority issues. Hungary’s system of minority self-governments, based on this Act, is a ‘‘promising practice’’ 

and a valuable contribution to cultural autonomy. It should however be monitored closely to ensure that it functions effectively and 

in accordance with its stated purpose. She notes in particular Act 

No. CXXV on Equal Treatment and the Promotion of Equal Opportunities, which provides a comprehensive and valuable legislative 

framework on anti-discrimination. 

87. The body charged with monitoring implementation of the Act, 

the Equal Treatment Authority, is considered to represent a ‘‘promising practice’’, that offers the potential, through rigorous application and enforcement of the Act, to significantly impact upon the 

incidence of discrimination in Hungary and encourage the development of affirmative action programmes throughout the public sector and in those areas of the private sector covered by the Act. 

88. Equally, the Independent Expert considers the establishment 

of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the National and Ethnic 

Minorities Rights (Minority Ombudsman) as ‘‘good practice’’ and 

congratulates the Parliamentary Commissioner for work undertaken in this capacity. She encourages collaboration and coordination between these institutions. Furthermore, government initiaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
76

tives in the field of micro-financing of Roma business ventures represent ‘‘positive practices’’ and such programmes should be continued. 

89. The Independent Expert makes the following conclusions and 

recommendations: 

(a) The Independent Expert considers the system of minority 

self-governments to be a valuable contribution to efforts to enable cultural autonomy for 13 minority groups in Hungary. 

Care should be taken, however, to make clear that the minority self-governments’ system is not seen as a substitute for full 

and effective participation in the ‘‘majority’’ political apparatus 

or as a mechanism through which municipal governments may 

evade responsibility to guarantee fundamental economic and 

social rights; 

(b) The Government of Hungary should seek to adopt, without further delay, measures to ensure the effective political 

participation of underrepresented minorities including the 

Roma in Parliament as provided for in Hungary’s Constitution. 

Full and effective participation in national and regional political structures, as well as Roma representation within key government ministries, is considered essential to future efforts to 

protect and promote the rights of Roma and other marginalized 

groups; 

(c) The Government of Hungary should ensure consultation 

with and the full and effective participation of minorities including the Roma in all decisions that affect them, and in the 

planning, design, implementation and evaluation of policies 

and programmes in respect of minority issues; 

(d) The Government should take steps to clarify the relationship between local minority self-governments and municipal 

‘‘majority’’ governments to emphasize the primary responsibility that rests with municipal majority governments for meeting the social welfare needs of minority communities, including 

health care, education, housing and social benefits; 

(e) In recognition of the extreme poverty faced by a disproportionate number of the Roma population, a governmental 

institution should be established with responsibility for coordinating the work of different ministries and institutions to ensure coherent and coordinated approaches to poverty reduction, 

particularly with targeted efforts with respect to the Roma minority. 

90. The Independent Expert considers that activities of the newly 

re-elected Government to restructure its previous institutional 

focus on Roma issues, including dedicated departments in a network of the most relevant ministries, in favour of a broad-based 

policy to address disadvantaged groups, alongside widespread 

budgetary cuts and downsizing, will lead to an erosion of the 

progress made to date on Roma issues. The problems faced by 

Roma require urgent and focused attention, including affirmative 

action policies, for a considerable period. 

The Government of Hungary should review and reverse its 

policy of institutional reform and restructuring of government 

departments which is diminishing the focus of attention on 

Roma issues in key ministries. Roma-targeted policies should 

77

be continued and strengthened along with the recruitment of 

Roma professionals into key government posts relating to 

Roma issues and policy. This is highlighted as a previous best 

practice by the Independent Expert. 

91. A comprehensive anti-discrimination law and a newly established Equal Treatment Authority to handle complaints were welcomed by the Independent Expert as valuable new additions to 

Hungary’s legal standards and enforcement mechanisms. However, 

limitations in the powers of the Parliamentary Commissioner for 

the National and Ethnic Minorities Rights (Minority Ombudsman) 

and the Authority have circumscribed the impact that these mechanisms have had to date. Further, in the absence of positive legislation placing specific responsibility for implementation of law and 

policy on identified government bodies, judicial interventions with 

regard to discrimination will go no further than a finding of violation. Without such positive law, the courts have been reluctant to 

issue orders for compliance. 

(a) Amendments to existing legal provisions or new provisions should clarify the responsibility of specifically identified 

government agencies to implement law and policies relating to 

non-discrimination and equality. Such positive legislation 

would give licence to the judiciary to elaborate directives (corrective remedies) for rectifying situations found to be in violation of statutes or the Constitution. 

(b) The Equal Treatment Authority should be empowered to 

impose specific corrective actions upon entities found in violation of the Equal Treatment Act, to impose punitive damages 

and to vigorously champion the undertaking of affirmative action programmes in all of the public and private sectors. Resources available to the Authority should be increased to 

match the dimensions of the problems experienced in Hungary. 

(c) The Equal Treatment Authority should be fully independent from the Government, and the role and powers of the 

Parliamentary Commissioner for the National and Ethnic Minorities Rights (Minority Ombudsman) should be strengthened. 

92. Hungary’s post-communist constitutional arrangements entrenched significant autonomy for municipal authorities in areas 

such as education. This has thwarted the national Government’s efforts to gain broad-based compliance with national policies on 

issues such as school desegregation. The Independent Expert noted 

that the Government must take effective steps to monitor and enforce compliance with national standards and fulfilment of rights 

of Roma at the municipal level. 

93. The situation of multiple discrimination faced by Roma 

women presents specific challenges, including in the fields of education, employment, health care and housing, which require targeted attention and dedicated resources within the relevant ministries and local and regional authorities. Attention to Roma issues 

only within the context of a wider policy framework on gender and 

women’s rights issues will fail to meet the needs of Roma women 

or protect and promote their rights, freedoms and opportunities. 

The full and effective participation of Roma women is an essential component of Government and civil society efforts to 

address their issues. The early establishment of an advisory 

78

body on Roma women’s issues to the Ministry of Social and 

Labour Affairs should be considered as a means of gaining the 

views and experience of Roma women and assisting in the 

planning, design, implementation and evaluation of policy with 

regard to Roma women. 

94. The Independent Expert highlighted particular concern over 

the situation of Roma in the fields of education and employment, 

as well as the need to comprehensively address the widespread societal discrimination and anti-Roma prejudice manifest in other 

sectors relating to social and economic rights. With respect to these 

sectors, the Independent Expert makes the following recommendations. 

Education 

95. While the government policy with respect to desegregation 

must be commended, it is clear that the current approach based on 

financial incentives is grossly inadequate to match the non-Roma 

citizen resistance at the municipal level. 

(a) The State must devise effective measures to fulfil its obligation to guarantee compliance with its national anti-discrimination and equal treatment legislation, its Constitution and its 

international legal obligations to eliminate discrimination. It 

must put in place effective dissuasive sanctions that attach to 

relevant identified authorities if compliance is not realized. 

Consideration should be given to the withdrawal of funding 

from schools that fail to integrate according to their legal requirements; 

(b) The free-choice system for parents and the ability of 

schools to freely select or exclude students has been an engine 

to generate segregation in Hungary’s public schools. The Independent Expert welcomes recent initiatives to limit ‘‘free 

choice’’ in ways that would create and sustain a healthy balance of ethnic diversity in public schools and equal access to 

the highest possible quality education for all students. Such 

measures should be maintained and vigorously enforced; 

(c) The Government must also initiate a system of compulsory independent monitoring of schools to ensure that national 

policies with respect to desegregation are fully implemented at 

the municipal level. 

96. The current practice of labelling young Roma children as 

mentally disabled without justification based on the child’s intellectual capabilities is an unfortunate ruse to create segregated schools 

and classrooms. The practice is a serious violation of the rights of 

the child, discriminatory against Roma and has massive negative 

impact on the lives and future life chances of the targeted children. 

(a) This system should be abolished and legal sanction 

brought against those authorities continuing this practice; 

(b) Culturally and linguistically appropriate assessments of 

learning abilities should be developed by nationally recognized 

professionals in consultation with professionals from minority 

communities to replace the current testing process that has resulted in the disproportionate targeting of Roma students for 

schools and classrooms for the mentally disabled. Students who 

have already been tested should be reassessed immediately. A 

79

national plan, implemented at the local level with full involvement of parents, should be established and independently monitored to ensure that the legitimate special needs of identified 

students, including Roma, are met in the most appropriate 

manner; 

(c) The Independent Expert greatly welcomes government 

initiatives such as the ‘‘Sure Start’’ programme, to support 

Roma and other disadvantaged students from the earliest age. 

However, urgent attention is required to address the current 

shortfall in kindergarten places for Roma children particularly 

in isolated rural settlements; 

(d) Initiatives aimed at assisting disadvantaged students, including afternoon schooling and extra-curricula activities are 

welcome. Such measures should be extended and adequately 

funded to take into account the serious extent of discrimination 

faced by the Roma at all levels of the education system, and 

to assist Roma children to complete secondary education; 

(e) An affirmative action policy in regard to access to higher 

education, including via the Roma scholarship scheme, should 

be maintained and expanded to encourage Roma to complete 

higher education courses. Revisions to the financing and administration of the scholarship programmes, including the introduction of ‘‘post-financing’’ have created financial and administrative barriers for some students and should be reviewed; 

(f) Roma communities should be encouraged, including 

through a targeted public awareness campaign and through 

the social worker system, to realize their full obligations to the 

education of both boys and girls and to encourage school attendance; 

(g) All currently certified teachers and all currently in institutions of teacher training should receive training on pedagogical approaches for ethnically diverse student bodies. Included should be specific training: 

(i) In working with children from disadvantaged backgrounds; 

(ii) On how to help non-minority children overcome their 

racial prejudice and resentment; 

(iii) On how to deal with hate speech in the classroom. 

Employment 

97. In order to fashion appropriate policy initiatives, the Government must more proactively confront the important factor of racial 

discrimination that operates against Roma in the labour market. 

(a) The Government should robustly enforce and monitor the 

provisions of the Equal Treatment and Promotion of Equality 

Act which requires public organizations, including government 

offices, of more than 50 employees to establish and implement 

an equal opportunities plan and to recruit Roma workers. This 

legislation should be extended to all private and foreign owned 

organizations. 

(b) The equal opportunities plans should include specific 

goals and timetables for corrective measures and implementation should be proactively monitored and evaluated on an anVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
80

nual basis by the Equal Treatment Authority. Their implementation should be evaluated based on a results framework, that 

is, to what extent there has been a change in the profile of the 

workforce. Achieving an ethnically balanced workforce should 

be the responsibility of the employer. 

(c) The Equal Treatment Authority should use a ‘‘carrot and 

stick’’ approach to motivate employers to comply; using its authority to investigate and impose penalties where they find 

non-compliance and finding ways to offer technical and financial assistance where that would be an incentive. 

(d) Sophisticated employment training programmes that target disadvantaged communities are welcome and should be expanded by government and private employers. Training should 

be for skilled work as well as unskilled, and should be paired 

with job placement services that include placement for people 

with vocational or secondary school education. 

(e) The Government should put a particular focus on outreach to the more than 30 per cent of jobless Roma women for 

employment training and job placement. Housing 

98. Regarding housing, the Independent Expert makes the following recommendations: 

(a) A government-funded rehabilitation programme for Roma 

housing should be continued and expanded to address the urgent housing needs of many communities. This scheme should 

include wider community rehabilitation initiatives, including 

the provision of contracts to Roma businesses, and the training 

and employment of community members; 

(b) The Government should remedy gaps in current legislation leading to housing rights violations against minorities. 

The Government should: (i) without delay, ratify relevant 

international standards including the Revised European Social 

Charter; (ii) provide domestic law recognition of the right to 

adequate housing; and (iii) improve domestic law protections to 

tenants, in particular protections against forced eviction. 

99. The Independent Expert also made recommendations regarding other social services: 

(a) An independent investigation into the functioning of child 

protection services should be undertaken to enforce national 

guidelines and criteria, and effective mechanisms to regulate 

and monitor child protection services at the local level; 

(b) Urgent steps are required to ensure adequate coverage by 

general medical practitioners, and to address the current serious shortfall in the number of general practitioners, particularly working in disadvantaged and rural Roma settlements 

and with Roma communities; 

(c) Adequate provision of a network of qualified social workers, including via recruitment and training of Roma and those 

experienced in Roma issues should be undertaken urgently as 

an essential measure to ensure full knowledge of, and access 

to, key social and health services and benefits for Roma communities; 

(d) A government-sponsored publicity campaign using appropriate media should be conducted as required to assist in the 

81

process of raising public awareness of services and benefits 

particularly to disadvantaged Roma communities. 

Collection and use of disaggregated data 

100. In terms of collection and use of disaggregated data, the 

Independent Expert makes the following recommendations: 

(a) The collection of data disaggregated by ethnic group as 

well as along gender lines is recommended as an essential 

means of revealing the full extent of social and economic problems experienced by different ethnic groups, and to assisting in 

the development of appropriate and effective policy and practice; 

(b) The Government should undertake confidence-building 

and awareness-raising measures amongst the Roma, and other 

minority groups, to promote participation in voluntary data 

collection, including census registration, and allay fears that 

data collection will be used as a further means of continuing 

discrimination.

82

UNITED NATIONS General Assembly 

A/HRC/7/23/ADD.2 4 MARCH 2008

Human Rights Council 

PROMOTION AND PROTECTION OF ALL HUMAN RIGHTS, 

CIVIL, POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL 

RIGHTS, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT 

REPORT OF THE INDEPENDENT EXPERT ON MINORITY ISSUES

MISSION TO FRANCE (19–28 SEPTEMBER 2007) 

SUMMARY

The independent expert on minority issues, Ms. Gay McDougall, 

in pursuance of her mandate, visited France between 19 and 28 

September 2007. During her visit she travelled to Paris, Marseilles 

and Strasbourg and environs, where she held consultations with 

ministers and other senior government representatives, NGOs, civil 

society groups, religious leaders, academics and others working in 

the field of minority issues, anti-discrimination and gender issues. 

The independent expert visited communities living in suburbs of 

Paris and Marseilles described as urban ‘‘ghettos’’ or ‘‘sensitive’’ 

suburbs, including Bobigny and La Courneuve, which were affected 

by urban upheavals in 2005. She talked directly to community 

members about their lives, issues and concerns in relation to her 

mandate and held forums specifically for minority women, enabling 

them to reflect specific issues facing them. 

The independent expert found that serious discrimination is experienced by members of minority communities in France, clearly 

targeted at those ‘‘visible’’ minorities of immigrant heritage, many 

of whom are French citizens. She concluded that the particular 

problems faced by people in ‘‘sensitive’’ suburbs are a direct consequence of discrimination and consequently require policy initiatives to address the special circumstances they face. Discrimination 

against minorities manifests itself in such areas as the allocation 

of housing, access to employment, quality of education, and grossly 

inadequate levels of political participation. Issues of identity are 

central in discourse and mind-sets regarding exclusion. Members of 

minority communities described an extreme pressure on them to 

alter their cultural and religious identities as a precondition for immigration and full inclusion and acceptance in French society. 

Visits to minority communities revealed high levels of frustration. She found that young people from minority communities feel 

their hopes and dreams are being denied; they see no possibility of 

upward mobility because of their skin colour, religion, surname or 

address (in the sensitive suburbs). People who have worked hard, 

played by all the rules and truly believe in the principles of the 

French Republic are trapped in socially and geographically isolated 

urban ghettos, with unemployment over 40 per cent in some areas. 

They feel discriminated against and rejected by rigid notions of 

French national identity to which they do not conform. 

The independent expert found that there is a general climate of 

suspicion and negativity against those of immigrant origin, genVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
83

erated in part by public debates over immigration policies, the announcement of quotas for deportations and questions of DNA testing. Much more must be done to establish an acceptance of cultural 

diversity. Currently, she found, there is a widespread feeling within the community of visible minorities that to become a citizen of 

France is not sufficient for full acceptance; that acceptance will be 

granted only with total assimilation that forces them to reject 

major facets of their identities. Only when a way is found to shed 

the colour of their skins and hide the manifestations of their religion or the traditions of their ancestors will they be accepted as 

truly French. The message that they take from the name of the 

new Ministry of Immigration, National Identity, Integration and 

Co-development seems to be that the presence and increasing numbers of people of immigrant heritage is a threat to the national 

identity of France; that it is a problem that must be solved. 

The independent expert commended recent anti-discrimination 

initiatives, including the 2004 Anti-discrimination Law and the establishment of the Independent High Authority for Equality and 

Against Discrimination (HALDE), an independent body with powers to mediate or refer discrimination cases for prosecution, conduct 

studies and promote non-discrimination programmes and activities. 

While welcoming the role of HALDE and civil society organizations 

in prosecuting discrimination on a case-by-case basis, she emphasized that targeted and more robust approaches are required to 

have a deeper and far-reaching impact on persistent discrimination 

experienced by minorities. Penalties for acts of racial discrimination should be sufficiently severe to act as a deterrent to future violations. 

Given the level and nature of inequalities in France, fulfilling the 

negative obligation of non-discrimination is not enough to secure 

equality in practice. The State is under a positive obligation to create favourable conditions for the exercise of the rights of minorities. 

The independent expert calls for the promotion of equality through 

affirmative action policies in the field of employment that should 

help to transform the ranks of the civil service, the police, and 

other public and private institutions to fully reflect the broad diversity within French citizenry. 

France has historically rejected the concept of minority rights 

and recognition of minority groups or collective rights as incompatible with the French Constitution and the principles of the Republic, which prioritize individual rights, equality, unity and universalism. This has been an obstacle to the adoption of policy initiatives that by their nature must acknowledge the reality of discrimination against specific population groups within French society. It 

has prevented any serious consideration of affirmative action programmes or the collection of statistical data concerning the socioeconomic status of population groups that can be disaggregated by 

ethnicity or religion. The independent expert recommends that 

such government measures, rather than being considered to violate 

the Constitution, should be seen as essential to achieving a true vision of ‘‘Liberte ́, Egalite ́, Fraternite ́’’. The acknowledgement of ethnicity, religion and heritage should not be considered to threaten 

the principles of unity and equality that are the foundation of 

French society. 

84

1Quotes used in this report are original comments made to the independent expert during 

consultations with governmental and non-governmental sources during her visit. In all cases, 

the identity of the source is withheld. 

Minority women voiced specific additional concerns, including the 

rights and protection of minority women in abusive relationships; 

concerns over access to social services and protection mechanisms; 

access to justice; the legal status of women of immigrant origin in 

cases of divorce, encompassing the right to remain in France after 

divorce and the execution by French courts of foreign divorce judgements based on gender-biased laws; the rights of minority women 

relating to inheritance, housing and property; specific issues relating to the education of girls of Muslim faith; security issues and 

the high incidence of rape of women in disadvantaged minority 

communities in suburbs; and the lack of access to political participation of minority women. 

The independent expert also received information regarding the 

situation of the Gypsy/Travellers, the Jewish community and linguistic minorities including the Breton, Basque, Catalan and 

Occitan communities. 

INTRODUCTION

1. In conformity with her mandate’s requirement to promote implementation of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging 

to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (hereafter ‘‘the 1992 Declaration on Minorities’’), the independent expert 

visited France between 19 and 28 September 2007. She conducted 

extensive consultations with senior government representatives, including ministers responsible for human rights, urban policy and 

poverty, the President of the Constitutional Council and other senior officials, in order to assess government perspectives on minority 

issues in France. She also consulted civil society organizations, academic institutions, students and media representatives and held 

open discussion forums.1 The independent expert visited Paris, 

Marseilles and Strasbourg and their environs, where she consulted 

directly with community members, local regional government representatives, regional intergovernmental organizations and others 

in order to gain their views and opinions. She held forums specifically for minority women in order to allow them to express their 

views, talk about their lives and raise the issues most important 

to them. 

2. The independent expert expresses her thanks to the Government of France for the excellent assistance and cooperation extended to her during the preparation and conduct of her visit, and 

to those government officials with whom she met. 

3. The independent expert wishes to thank the numerous nongovernmental organizations and civil society groups that met with 

her, provided valuable information, and facilitated aspects of her 

visit. The important work being done by NGOs has ensured that 

issues relating to discriminatory policies and practices are on the 

political agenda and before the courts. The independent expert encourages additional support for such organizations. 

4. The independent expert has chosen to focus primary attention 

on the experiences of French citizens and long-term residents of 

85

immigrant heritage, particularly those of North African and SubSaharan origin, Muslims, and those from overseas departments 

and territories resident in mainland France. Persons belonging to 

such groups, often people of colour described as ‘‘visible minorities’’, 

typically experience serious discrimination and are grossly underrepresented in State and political institutions. Racism (including 

Islamophobia), discrimination, alienation and lack of social mobility 

for persons belonging to such groups were contributing factors to 

the violent urban upheavals that occurred in French cities in 2005. 

5. The independent expert also held consultations with representatives of Gypsies/Travellers/Roma communities and linguistic 

minorities such as the Bretons and Basques and Occitan-speaking 

communities. That information will also be reflected in this report. 

6. The independent expert’s evaluation of minority issues in 

France is based on the 1992 Declaration on Minorities and other 

relevant international standards, from which she has identified 

four broad areas of concern relating to minorities globally. These 

are: (a) the protection of a minority’s survival, through combating 

violence against them and preventing genocide; (b) the protection 

and promotion of the cultural identity of minority groups and the 

right of national, ethnic, religious or linguistic groups to enjoy their 

collective identity and to reject forced assimilation; (c) the guarantee of the rights to non-discrimination and equality, including 

ending structural or systemic discrimination and the promotion of 

affirmative action when required; and (d) the guarantee of their 

right to effective participation of members of minorities in public 

life, especially with regard to decisions that affect them. The current report is based upon analysis of these four areas of concern 

as they relate to France. 

I. LEGAL AND POLITICAL CONTEXT 

A. RECOGNITION OF MINORITIES IN FRANCE

7. France does not recognize the concept of minority rights and 

the official recognition of minority groups or collective rights is considered incompatible with the French Constitution and the principles of the Republic, which give priority to individual rights, 

equality, unity and universalism. In France’s 2007 report to the 

Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Government states: ‘‘Under the French Constitution, the nation is defined 

as being composed of persons with equal rights: ’France is an indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic. It guarantees 

equality of all citizens before the law without distinction as to origin, race or religion’ (art. 2). It follows from the French position 

that minorities are not recognized as holders of collective rights, 

but this position does not prevent the public manifestation or expression of diversity.’’

8. Successive French Governments have maintained the position 

that there should be no official acknowledgement of the ethnic, religious or cultural characteristics of citizens, despite the recommendations of European and United Nations anti-discrimination 

bodies. France attached a reservation to article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and to article 30 

of the Convention on the Rights of the Child relating to the rights 

86

2The French reservation attached to both article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil 

and Political Rights and article 30 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child states that: 

‘‘The Government of the Republic declares that, in the light of article 2 of the Constitution of 

the French Republic, article 27 (article 30 in the case of ICRC) is not applicable so far as the 

Republic is concerned.’’ 3 E/CN.4/2006/74. 

of minorities.2 France has not ratified the Council of Europe’s 

Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities or 

the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. As a 

United Nations Member State, France is required to observe and 

conform to the provisions of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, adopted by consensus in 1992. 

9. As stated in her initial report,3 the independent expert supports the view that the existence of minorities and the determination of which groups constitute minorities does not lie with the 

State alone, but is dependent on a range of both objective and subjective criteria, in accordance with the principles of international 

law. The Human Rights Committee, in its general comment No. 23 

(1994) on article 27 (Rights of minorities), makes it clear that ‘‘the 

existence of an ethnic, religious or linguistic minority in a given 

State party does not depend on a decision by that State party but 

[needs] to be established by objective criteria’’. At the same time, 

minority status is closely tied to how a group defines itself. 

B. DOMESTIC LEGISLATION RELEVANT TO MINORITY ISSUES

10. The independent expert notes the extensive legislative framework and institutional mechanisms established to combat racism, 

discrimination and anti-Semitism in France, which provide a 

strong legal foundation for the protection of the right to non-discrimination of persons belonging to minority groups. While space 

precludes a full analysis of relevant legislation and institutions, 

she highlights a number of developments which are particularly 

significant in relation to the protection and promotion of the rights 

of minorities. 

11. The core of France’s anti-discrimination regime is found in 

the Criminal Code and the Labour Code. French law has been interpreted as prohibiting the Government from collecting information about the racial or ethnic background of its citizens. The independent expert welcomes the additional provisions of Act No. 2004–

1486 of 30 December 2004, inspired by European Union anti-discrimination directives. This Act prohibits discrimination ‘‘on the 

grounds of origin, gender, family/marital status, physical appearance, surname, state of health, disability, genetic characteristics, 

lifestyle, sexual orientation, age, political opinions, religious beliefs, 

union activities, and real or supposed membership or non-membership of an ethnic group, nation or race’’. Under the provisions of 

this Act, the Independent High Authority for Equality and Against 

Discrimination (Haute Autorite ́ de Lutte contre les Discriminations 

et pour l’Egalite ́, HALDE) was established as an independent statutory authority, competent to deal with all forms of discrimination, 

whether direct or indirect, prohibited by law or by an international 

commitment ratified by France. 

87

4 HALDE 2006 Annual Report. 

5See the Equal Opportunities Act of 2 April 2006. 

12. Article 19 of the Act relating to discrimination on the grounds 

of ethnic origin and incorporating into domestic law Council directive No. 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 is significant in that, upon 

presentation of evidence of direct or indirect discrimination by a 

complainant and a finding that a prima facie case exists, it shifts 

the burden of proof on to the defendant to prove that the challenged action or measure was justified by facts unrelated to any 

type of discrimination. Previously, a serious obstacle to the prosecution of discrimination cases was that the burden of proof lay 

solely with the plaintiff. However, the concept of indirect discrimination is applied only in matters of employment and housing. 

13. HALDE is composed of an 11-member Council. It receives 

complaints from victims, members of Parliament and NGOs and 

determines the action to be taken on claims and issues recommendations. It has powers to mediate or refer discrimination 

cases for prosecution; conducts studies; and promotes non-discrimination programmes and activities. HALDE can intervene directly 

in court cases and can propose a settlement involving the payment 

of a fine. Unfortunately, it lacks enforcement powers with respect 

to non-payment of fines but can use publicity to ‘‘shame’’ parties 

failing to comply. In 2006, over 35 per cent of the 4,058 claims received were on the grounds of discrimination on the basis of ‘‘origin’’, indicating the victim is a person belonging to a visible minority. Nearly 43 per cent of all claims related to discrimination in employment. Of the 2,143 cases actually handled by HALDE in 2006, 

fines were proposed as settlements in 20 cases and 42 others were 

transferred to the State Prosecutor.4

14. HALDE can conduct investigations on its own initiative, allowing it to act independently even where no complaint is received. 

It uses the tool of ‘‘discrimination testing’’,5 which compares how 

individuals who are similar in all significant respects but for ethnic 

origin are treated when seeking access to employment, housing or 

other public goods. Discrimination exists when the rejection rate 

for visible minorities is more than a specified rate higher than the 

‘‘benchmark’’ testers. Importantly, French courts now accept the results of ‘‘discrimination testing’’ as admissible proof of discriminatory behaviour. However, a court official must be present to validate the ‘‘testing’’ evidence, which can be prohibitive. 

15. The independent expert welcomed the positive work done by 

HALDE and recognizes that it is a young institution (created on 30 

December 2004) and that it is still too early to fully assess its impact on decreasing racial discrimination. One positive sign is that 

its caseload more than tripled between 2005 and 2006. Creative 

initiatives by HALDE seek to raise awareness of discrimination 

and assist individuals in benefiting from its services, including a 

telephone shared-cost hotline and a radio programme hosted by 

HALDE’s President. 

16. In March 2006, a new law (Law No. 2006–396 of 31 March 

2006) on equal opportunities was adopted by the French Parliament following the outbreak of urban violence in French cities 

in autumn 2005. Focusing largely on promoting employment opporVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
88

6 Act 2004–204 of 9 March 2004 increased the applicable penalties for racial discrimination. 

Now, the penalty for a person committing an act of racial discrimination can be as high as three 

years’ imprisonment and a 45,000 euro fine. Where a discriminatory refusal of admission takes 

place on premises open to the public or with the aim of denying access, or where the discrimination is the act of a person vested with public authority, the penalties have increased from three 

to five years’ imprisonment, and from a 45,000 to a 75,000 euro fine. 

tunities in urban areas classified as ‘‘sensitive’’ or ‘‘high risk’’, the 

law also gives HALDE additional powers. Among these are provisions enabling HALDE to recommend that local government representatives impose administrative penalties on companies found 

guilty of discriminatory behaviour. 

17. HALDE is only empowered to propose the payment of a ‘‘settlement’’ by those found responsible for discrimination, however 

does not have the legal authority to impose a penalty. However, the 

ceilings on penalties that can be proposed by HALDE on both individuals (3,000 euros) and on legal entities (15,000 euros) are set at 

a very low level and such penalties are only infrequently applied. 

The punishments that can be imposed for acts of discrimination 

under the Penal Code can be considerably higher and include the 

possibility of prison terms in addition to fines of up to 75,000 euros 

for individuals.6 However, it was noted by non-governmental 

sources that despite the possibilities open to the courts, penalties 

for discrimination are usually low and symbolic rather than being 

sufficiently severe to act as a deterrent to future violations. 

18. The independent expert notes the inactivity of an Inter-Ministerial Committee to Combat Racism, Anti-Semitism and Xenophobia, which has not been convened since 2005. Such bodies offer 

the potential to ensure coordinated policies and practices across 

ministries, recognizing their interrelated mandates and the need 

for cooperation and holistic approaches to combat racism and its 

impact on minorities. The local prosecutor in the Paris suburb of 

Bobigny noted the potential benefits of greater cooperation between 

the authorities responsible for criminal justice, including those responsible for alternatives to custodial sentencing and those with 

mandates relating to education and employment. 

II. IDENTITY, LANGUAGE, CULTURE AND RELIGION 

A. ISSUES OF IDENTITY

19. Members of minority communities consistently described feelings of frustration that becoming a citizen of France is not sufficient for full acceptance by French society. They spoke of their 

sense that the precondition for acceptance is nothing less than total 

assimilation. They feel that rigid notions of French national identity required them to reject major aspects of their identities. Only 

when they find a way to disguise the colour of their skins and hide 

the manifestations of their religion or their traditions will they be 

accepted as truly French. They spoke of feeling unwelcome because 

of who they are. They referred to the newly named ‘‘Ministry of Immigration, National Identity, Integration and Co-development’’ as 

conveying a message that the presence and increasing numbers of 

people of immigrant heritage is a threat to French national identity. A Muslim community member in the Marseilles suburbs stated: ‘‘We are called upon to conform . . . but it is important to be 

89

proud and not hide your identity and culture. We have to respect 

the laws but be ourselves. The real French are also us: Mohammad 

and Fatima. Where are we going to go?’’

20. The independent expert notes that debates under way during 

her visit in regard to a new immigration bill (subsequently adopted 

as Law No. 2007–1631 of 20 November 2007 relating to control of 

immigration, integration and asylum) regarding DNA testing for 

immigration applicants and quotas for deportations are highly relevant to her mandate. They contribute to generating a national climate of suspicion and negativity against those of immigrant or 

Muslim origin; creating a presumption that they are all illegal and 

are fraudulently bringing non-family members into France, a factor 

that may boost Islamophobia. 

21. Community members stated that the commonly felt sense of 

exclusion and alienation is leading to an unfortunate anti-integration reaction, in which members of minority groups are retreating 

from mainstream French society, which they perceive as rejecting 

them. Manifestations can be seen in the growing radicalization of 

young Muslim men and an increase in ethnically-based gang culture. It was noted that the urban disturbances of 2005 were partly 

triggered by what was perceived as a violation of a mosque by police, which caused consternation throughout France’s Muslim communities. A student of Algerian heritage in Strasbourg stated: 

‘‘People always say to me ’where do you come from?’ I come from 

Lyon. I am French. But when people keep asking me I feel less 

French and more Algerian. I am often told ‘look at you, you are not 

French’. You end up saying you are from another country and you 

don’t feel French any more.’’

B. LANGUAGE AND CULTURAL RIGHTS

22. Representatives and scholars of numerous linguistic and cultural minority groups from different regions in France, including 

the Bretons and Basques and the Catalan- and Occitan-speaking 

communities, strongly complained that their languages and cultural rights are not fully respected and promoted within France. 

They predict that some regional languages and elements of cultural 

identity and heritage are in danger of disappearing in the medium 

to long term. Following the amendment of the Constitution of 

France in 1992 to reflect the position of French as the language of 

the French Republic, community representatives described government policy to promote French at the expense of regional languages. Immigration trends have brought significant numbers of 

speakers of various non-European languages, notably Arabic, to 

France. 

23. Basque community representatives reported that, despite 

community desire to maintain and preserve the Basque language, 

there are some 5,000 fewer Basque speakers than 10 years ago and 

the language is seriously endangered in France as a result of lack 

of official status. Representatives of the Catalan- and Occitanspeaking communities also pointed out that absence of recognition 

or official status results in a constant decline in the number of 

Basque, Catalan and Occitan speakers in both absolute and percentage terms to such an extent that, despite the recommendations 

of European and United Nations anti-discrimination bodies, these 

90

7Third periodic report of the Government of France to the Committee on Economic, Social and 

Cultural Rights (E/C.12/FRA/3), 15 March 2007. 8 Article 1 states that ‘‘States shall protect the existence and the national or ethnic, cultural, 

religious and linguistic identity of minorities within their respective territories and shall encourage conditions for the promotion of that identity’’ and that ‘‘States shall adopt appropriate legislative and other measures to achieve those ends’’. 

languages are endangered languages limited to use in the private 

sphere with implications in both linguistic and cultural terms. 

24. Breton representatives reported to the independent expert 

that subsidies had been stopped to schools for teaching of and in 

the Breton language. Independent Breton-language immersion 

schools (called Diwan) exist but are not part of the State education 

system since their incorporation was blocked by the French Constitutional Council, reportedly on the grounds that French is the 

language of the Republic and that no other language may be used 

as a language of instruction in State schools. Representatives of the 

Breton-speaking communities note that the numbers of speakers 

has declined from 1.3 million in 1900 to 200,000 today. 

25. The Government states 7 that ‘‘in the education system, regional and minority languages are taught as optional subjects and 

special competitive examinations are held to recruit first- and second-level teachers of the languages concerned, which include 

Basque, Breton, Catalan, Corsican and Occitan within metropolitan 

France and Creole, Tahitian and Melanesian languages overseas’’. 

The Government underscores that ‘‘museums and cultural centres 

focusing on regional cultures have been established and festivals 

celebrating these heritages are supported by the Ministry of Culture and Communication and local authorities. The Ethnological 

Heritage Council and Mission established by the Ministry of Culture in 1980 have been tasked with preserving key constituents of 

the identity of local cultures and helping to coordinate ethnological 

research policy throughout metropolitan France and its overseas 

departments, regions and communities’’. 

26. The independent expert considers such issues to be central to 

the 1992 Declaration on the Rights of Minorities. Even when linguistic minorities are relatively well integrated in economic, social 

and political fields, the 1992 Declaration 8 places great emphasis on 

preservation of linguistic, religious and cultural identity. The State 

is under a positive obligation to ‘‘create favourable conditions’’ in 

this regard. Information received suggests that policy and practice 

in France require review in consultation with the affected communities themselves, with a view to achieving consistency of approach 

and policy. 

C. RIGHTS OF RELIGIOUS MINORITIES

27. France maintains the principles of secularism (laı ̈cite ́) in regard to different religious faiths. Those of Muslim faith, however, 

may face particular challenges. Under conditions of societal intolerance, suspicion, misunderstanding of Islam and growing 

Islamophobia, the principle of non-discrimination alone is not sufficient to ensure equality in practice. Concerns were raised with the 

independent expert regarding provision of Muslim prayer facilities 

and mosques. There is no specific law on the construction of places 

of worship. While the same rules apply to all religious communities 

91

9The National Consultative Committee for Human Rights (NCCHR) reported 974 racist and 

anti-Semitic incidents in 2005, down 38 per cent from the 1,574 incidents recorded in 2004. 10 Note on terminology—The independent expert recognizes debate regarding appropriate terminology in France and for the purposes of this report conforms to the ERRC uses of the terms 

‘‘Gypsies’’ and ‘‘Travellers’’ to refer to individuals and groups who are descended from groups 

that have long been citizens of France and who have for many generations played a role in 

French society and history. The category ‘‘Gypsies and Travellers’’ includes persons of diverse 

culture, frequently self-identifying as ‘‘Sinti’’, ‘‘Manouche’’, ‘‘Kale’’, ‘‘Gitan’’, ‘‘Roma’’, ‘‘Yenish’’, 

‘‘Traveller’’ or other. 

with respect to leases, land use and ownership and building restrictions, community prejudices may result in unequal treatment by 

local authorities, leading to undue restrictions on Muslim communities. There is a perception of bias when in practice these laws are 

only relevant to the building of mosques because in secular France, 

Islam is the primary religion with a growing need for places of worship. 

28. Estimates put the Muslim population in France at 5 to 6 million people, the largest in Western Europe, most of whom are part 

of settled and established communities. The independent expert 

welcomes the positive practice of government recognition of different religious communities and initiatives, including the establishment of the French Council of the Muslim Faith, that play an 

important role in a process of interfaith and inter-community dialogue. 

29. The innovative ‘‘Marseilles Hope’’ initiative supported by 

town hall and municipal authorities is a collective of religious leaders who meet together and with local authorities to share information, views and issues, and to maintain positive and constructive 

communication. Founded in 1989 as a response to growing urban 

violence, the body promotes inter-community understanding and 

‘‘social peace’’ through a range of activities including interfaith 

symposiums. Marseilles Hope was consistently highlighted by all 

respondents as an exemplary initiative of interfaith and community 

dialogue. 

30. The independent expert was informed that incidents of violent attacks on persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious 

and linguistic minorities and reported racist and anti-Semitic incidents have declined.9 However, it was widely stated by community 

members and representatives that various manifestations of discrimination, including on the basis of their Muslim or foreignsounding names, continue to impact seriously on their opportunities and equal treatment. In such fields as employment and access 

to housing, this problem is so widespread that some feel compelled 

to disguise their names and religious identities. 

D. GYPSIES/TRAVELLERS 10 IN FRANCE

31. Gypsy/Traveller community members and representatives reported increasing levels of discrimination against such groups and 

continuing failure to prosecute offenders. Issues of concern include 

the failure to provide serviced parking areas for caravans and disproportionate taxing of caravans; access to identity cards and documentation issues; obstacles to the right to vote and participate in 

political life; forced evictions; obstacles to the purchase of private 

property; difficulties with regard to education; and the incidence of 

harassment, abuse and violent attack against members of such 

92

groups. They highlighted a general climate of racism against Gypsies/Travellers that perpetuates racist stereotypes, exclusion and 

discrimination and leaves many extremely vulnerable. 

32. Governmental representatives acknowledged claims that certain local authorities openly defy national legislation relating to the 

rights of Gypsies and Travellers. Law No. 2000–614 of 5 July 2000 

relating to the Welcome and Housing of Travellers establishes the 

legal requirement for municipalities of over 5,000 residents to provide parking areas for Gypsy/Traveller caravans. National authorities confirmed that while an estimated 40,000 such sites are required, only 8,000 currently exist. Municipal authorities reportedly 

prefer to pay penalties than comply with the law. In many cases, 

sites, where provided, do not meet required minimum standards of 

infrastructure and environmental adequacy. Complaints were received that Gypsy/Traveller caravans are subject to prohibitively 

high taxes (imposed locally by communes) aimed at dissuading 

them from remaining in municipalities. 

33. A new law adopted by Parliament in 2007 seeks to encourage 

communes to abide by the law. Law No. 2000–614 grants those in 

compliance with requirements to assign parking areas for caravans 

the ability to fast-track the eviction process of caravans parked illegally. Ministry of Interior officials noted that the law had been approved by Traveller associations on the grounds that it would encourage communes to create legal parking facilities for Travellers. 

34. Gypsies and Travellers are subject to a range of special laws, 

including rules regarding documentation and the requirement for 

a travel permit (periodically renewable). Those found not to be in 

possession of a valid travel permit are subject to a heavy fine and/

or a one-year prison sentence. They are not entitled to vote until 

they have been administratively attached to a municipality for 

three years, under article 10 of Law No. 69–3 of 3 January 1969 

relating to the exercise of ambulatory activities and to the regime 

applicable to persons circulating in France without a fixed domicile 

or residence. The qualifying period for all other citizens is only six 

months. In view of the travelling lifestyles of Gypsies and Travellers, such legislation effectively disenfranchises many members of 

such communities; it is discriminatory with respect to the right of 

citizens to vote and stand for election to public office. 

35. Responsibility for government policies concerning the Roma/

Traveller communities rests with the Ministry of the Interior, and 

other ministries including those responsible for housing, health and 

education. In discussions with the Cabinet of the Ministry, the 

independent expert noted that the framework that dominated the 

discussion of those policies was one of ‘‘law and order’’ rather than 

the rights of citizens. This was emphasized by the fact that the official responsible for Traveller affairs was a senior General of the 

Gendarmerie, as was his predecessor. 

36. The independent expert notes that the nomadic lifestyles of 

many Gypsies and Travellers do not diminish the right of their 

children to have access to education, for families to have access to 

adequate health care and social services, and the possibility to seek 

and obtain temporary or longer-term employment. 

93

III. NON-DISCRIMINATION AND EQUALITY 

37. During community forums in Paris and Marseilles, the independent expert was informed of common experiences of discrimination of people from visible minorities. Some described having been 

barred from leisure venues such as clubs, discos and bars, often 

with the excuse of ‘‘a private party’’. The ‘‘testing’’ methodology to 

reveal discrimination has been used increasingly to good effect in 

these situations. In June 2007, five employees from four Paris discotheques were fined for discrimination after turning away those of 

African and Arab origin, marking the first time that a Paris court 

has issued a ruling based on the testing methodology. A representative of an anti-discrimination NGO in Paris stated: ‘‘Those born 

in France do not accept discrimination in the way that their parents or grandparents did, but even those of third or fourth generation continue to be discriminated against over an origin that they 

know very little about.’’

38. Dedicated forums for minority women revealed specific additional issues affecting women, such as the rights and protection of 

minority women in abusive relationships, including concerns over 

access to social services and protection mechanisms; access to justice; the legal status of women of immigrant origin in cases of divorce, including the right to remain in France after divorce and the 

execution by French courts of foreign divorce judgements that were 

based on gender-biased laws; the rights of minority women relating 

to inheritance, housing and property; specific issues relating to the 

education of girls of Muslim faith; security issues and the high incidence of rape of women in disadvantaged minority communities in 

suburbs; and the lack of access to political participation of minority 

women. 

39. The near complete absence of people of colour in the French 

media is indicative of a wider problem of their ‘‘invisibility’’ within 

French society in general, to the extent that the appointment of the 

first black newsreader to a prime-time television news broadcast in 

2006 was itself headline news. The lack of a representative voice 

for minorities in French politics creates a combined effect of both 

invisibility and silence of France’s minority groups, which additionally feel physically segregated from mainstream French society by 

public housing policies that consign them to isolated urban suburbs. 

40. The independent expert was told of messages emanating from 

political parties and senior politicians that have been unwelcoming 

at best and in some instances of a racist and inflammatory nature. 

After the 2005 riots, the Minister of the Interior, Mr. Sarkozy, remarked that he would ‘‘clean the scum off the streets with a highpressure hose’’. This was commonly referred to by community members and has left a legacy of resentment among Muslim communities. The independent expert considers that the messages emanating from the highest officials of the State must be unambiguous 

in signalling full commitment to promoting non-discrimination, 

equality and diversity. As a community member in the Marseilles 

suburbs stated: ‘‘The administration is the first to say ’be careful 

of discrimination’, but they are the ones creating the discrimination.’’

94

41. Racism within the police service that has become institutionalized was highlighted as an ongoing problem. Community 

sources described racial profiling in stop-and-search procedures, 

among many intimidating and humiliating police practices, heavyhanded and aggressive policing, and what they perceive to be an 

‘‘anti-black culture’’ of the police which extends to structural issues 

of recruitment. Some community members spoke of police techniques to make people stay in their neighbourhoods. Many commented that heavy-handed and insensitive policing practices had 

been the major factor in triggering the urban disturbances of 2005. 

It was noted that neighbourhood or ‘‘proximity’’ policing techniques 

designed to build relationships and confidence between local communities and the police had been abolished prior to the disturbances. 

42. The effects of discrimination and exclusion have resulted in 

disproportionately high levels of poverty among visible minorities 

who are long-term residents or French citizens of immigrant heritage. Community members and NGOs described urban ethnic and 

religious ghettos as clear concentrations of poverty within French 

society. While government representatives also acknowledge the 

problems of poverty in the urban suburbs, the independent expert 

is concerned that the Government views poverty among minority 

communities as solely social or economic problems rather than as 

problems closely related to discrimination against members of minority groups. 

43. The independent expert focused on three areas that particularly featured in her consultations as being problematic in regard 

to discrimination against persons belonging to minorities: housing, 

education and employment. 

A. HOUSING

44. The independent expert visited the suburbs of Paris and Marseilles, including Bobigny and La Courneuve in Paris, areas affected by urban upheavals and violence in 2005, and the northern 

suburbs of Marseilles. Her visits enabled her to consult with local 

residents and to see for herself housing conditions and local demographics in these areas. Despite the lack of statistical data along 

ethnic and/or religious lines, visits to the poorest suburbs of Paris 

reveal an obvious high proportion of ‘‘visible’’ minorities and religious minorities. 

45. Consistently, when poor immigrants arrive, those belonging 

to certain ethnic or religious groups are allocated to the poorest 

housing in specific neighbourhoods that have become highly 

ethnicized, resulting in a discriminatory pattern of de facto segregation. Housing in these suburbs is often dilapidated and poorly 

maintained. There are chiefly towering high-rise apartment blocks 

lined up in neighbourhoods devoid of any of the beauty or verve 

characteristic of the streets of central Paris. Teenage boys loiter on 

street corners; not in school and not at work. These are poor 

neighbourhoods, clearly economically depressed and spiritually depressing. Community members commonly noted that quality public 

housing in central locations or higher income areas is rarely allocated to those of immigrant heritage. 

95

11The Government states in its report to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination dated 15 March 2004 that the Act of 17 January 2002 concerning social modernization amended article 1, paragraph 2, of the Act of 6 July 1989 on housing leases. This explicitly 

prohibits refusal to rent housing for reasons related to the tenant’s origins, name, physical appearance, habits, sexual orientation, beliefs, race or nationality. The Act establishes that the 

burden of proof that denial was justified lies with the landlord. 

46. By all accounts, the level of discrimination in the private 

housing market also considerably limits housing options for visible 

minorities. Discrimination persists in spite of legislation prohibiting bias in residential leases.11

47. Government officials acknowledged areas of some 70 per cent 

‘‘foreign’’ residents and the creation of what has become recognized 

as the ‘‘ghetto’’ phenomenon, officially acknowledged only in recent 

years. Community representatives reflected that the urban blight 

of these areas has been attributed to ethnic minorities themselves 

who are blamed for their own conditions, in a process of stigmatization which extends to other spheres of life. Many residents said 

that their very address in the ‘‘sensitive suburbs’’ provides further 

grounds for discrimination. When employers receive applications 

indicating that the job-seeker lives in a ghetto, they reject it because it means the applicant is a minority. One community member stated: ‘‘When they read La Courneuve on your application, it 

goes in the bin.’’

48. Physically isolated housing areas, including suburbs such as 

Clichy-sous-Bois, were noted as being seriously deprived in the development of public transport, resulting in major problems of isolation. Clichy-sous-Bois is only 10 km distant but reportedly more 

than 1.5 hours from central Paris by public transport. This places 

major labour markets, such as central Paris, effectively out of reach 

for those living in such areas. A community member in La 

Courneuve stated: ‘‘People from here don’t go to the centre of Paris. 

Most of the people here are hostages to their neighbourhood. It is 

a housing ghetto, but also a mental ghetto.’’

49. NGO representatives and community members in both Paris 

and Marseilles described low quality, poorly maintained and unsanitary housing. Some commented that inadequate conditions and 

environment, combined with problems of discrimination and unemployment, contribute to a ‘‘climate of despair’’ and a spiral of urban 

decay conducive to such problems as drug dealing and violent 

crime, including a high incidence of rape of young women. 

50. A government representative in the suburb of Bobigny in 

Paris acknowledged that: ‘‘We think that there is a link between 

what happened [2005 urban violence] and a failure of urban policy.’’ Policy debates tacitly recognize, while failing to analyse, the 

reality of ethnic ghettos. NGOs noted that only since 2000 has the 

problem begun to appear on the political agendas of the Government and other major parties, and that it has been given added impetus by the 2005 urban upheavals. During her visit to La 

Courneuve, the independent expert witnessed redevelopment 

schemes under way that focused on renovating existing tower 

blocks of better quality and demolishing others in favour of lowerlevel developments with communal gardens and improved leisure 

facilities. 

51. Conflicting opinions were expressed regarding solutions to 

the problem of ghettoization. Some propose the break-up of the 

96

12Law No. 2000–1208 of 13 December 2000 relating to solidarity and urban renewal states 

in article 55 that all towns with more than 50,000 inhabitants have to make available 20 per 

cent of social housing. 13The France National Discrimination Testing Report presented in March 2007 was invited 

and financed by the DARES research division of the France Ministry of Employment and Social 

Cohesion. The full report is available at: http://www.ilo.org/public/english/protection/migrant/ 

download/franceldiscrlfr.pdf. 

ghettos through policies of relocation and urban redevelopment 

with the express purpose of dispersing minorities throughout 

French neighbourhoods. They recognize that this approach would 

require proactive measures to decrease negative attitudes among 

some ancestral French toward those of immigrant origin. Others 

believe that solutions lie in investing to improve such areas; their 

infrastructure, access to services and employment options. 

52. Under French law,12 all communes are required to have a 

certain percentage of low-cost housing. Community sources complained that rich communes ignore the law and would rather pay 

fines for non-compliance than live with poor minorities. Some suburban residents noted that accusations of ‘‘communitarianism’’ also 

stem from ethnic concentrations and misinformed perceptions of 

voluntary isolationism from wider French society. As one community member commented: ‘‘We want to integrate but we are not allowed to. It is very hard for example to get finance from a bank 

because of our background, name or colour. Then when we are 

forced to take initiatives within our communities we are accused of 

‘communitarianism’.’’

53. The Urban Policy Minister, Ms. Fadela Amara, commented 

on planned activities and substantial funding for the National 

Urban Renewal Agency (ANRU) aimed at upgrading social housing 

through 2012. The Minister noted that this would be with the express objective of creating mixed neighbourhoods in the suburbs. In 

January 2008, the Minister is to unveil the ‘‘plan of respect and 

equality of chance’’, which will consist of initiatives in education 

and accomplishment, employment access, economic development, 

public transport and culture for the deprived suburbs. The plan is 

being developed through a process of consultation and debate with 

those living in the suburbs and local authorities, including via a 

blog. Part of the plan entitled ‘‘Hope Suburbs, a Dynamics for 

France’’ recommends reinforcing the powers of the HALDE in relation to the problems of the suburbs. 

B. EMPLOYMENT

54. The principle of non-discrimination set forth in article L.122–

45 of the Labour Code prohibits any difference in treatment on 

grounds of ‘‘origins, sex, customs, family situation, actual or supposed membership or non-membership of an ethnic group, nation 

or race, political opinions, physical appearance, family name, genetic characteristics, state of health or disability’’, yet NGOs have 

flagged racial discrimination in employment as a major problem in 

France. In March 2007, the International Labour Organization presented results of a major national ‘‘practice testing’’ survey measuring discrimination against immigrant-origin workers in access to 

employment.13 The survey found that four out of five employers 

preferred ancestral French workers over candidates of Maghreb or 

black African origin. Only 11 per cent of French employers were 

97

14The Adia employment agency worked with French sociologist Jean-Francois Amadieu to 

complete the study on discrimination in recruitment practices and published its report in May 

2004, Enqueˆte << Testing >> sur CV-Adia/ Paris I- Observatoire des discriminations. http://

cergors.univ-paris1.fr/docsatelecharger/pr%E9sentation%20du%20testing%20mai%202004.pdf. 

considered to have complied with equal treatment standards 

throughout the recruitment process. 

55. The independent expert was informed that it is common practice for job advertisements as well as notifications relating to rental 

housing to refer to ‘‘BBR’’, indicating ‘‘Bleu, Blanc, Rouge’’, the colours of the French flag. This is commonly understood as a coded 

reference that only ‘‘white’’ French people are invited to apply or 

will be considered. 

56. An historic court ruling in 2007 found a subsidiary of the cosmetic firm L’Oreal guilty of racial discrimination in selecting only 

white applicants for an advertising campaign, the first time that a 

major company has been found guilty of such a discrimination offence in France. L’Oreal, together with a recruitment company it 

had contracted, was fined 30,000 euros. Despite this landmark ruling, the penalty imposed does not appear commensurate with the 

seriousness of the offence and is insufficient (in view of L’Oreal’s 

annual profits of 1.83 billion euros in 2006) to send a strong message to employers that discriminatory practices will not be tolerated by the courts. 

57. Black and Muslim women spoke of having degrees or professional qualifications but not being able to find work in their field 

and having to accept low-paid, temporary cleaning jobs. Even in 

these positions, they described finding that white women are treated differently and have greater job security. A Muslim woman in 

a Marseilles suburb stated that despite being at the top of her class 

in her university law studies, she had subsequently been unable to 

obtain an internship position with a legal firm, whereas all of her 

white peers had obtained and completed their internships. She 

fears that her failure to secure an internship, a requirement for 

certification, will prevent her from becoming a lawyer. 

58. In 2004, a French employment agency answered 258 job advertisements for senior salespeople and managers by sending a 

total of 1,806 fictitious re ́sume ́s.14 Almost 30 per cent of white 

French men and 26 per cent of white French women received positive responses. But when the re ́sume ́s were changed to have Arabsounding names, the positive response rate dropped to only 5 per 

cent. A community member of Algerian origin talked with the independent expert about her difficulty in finding work in Marseilles 

and stated: ‘‘I am of Algerian origin, but I am very white. I can get 

in the door, but when they hear my name is Fatima the excuses 

come.’’

59. The independent expert welcomes initiatives proposed by the 

Minister of Justice, Ms. Rachida Dati, one of three recently appointed female ministers from minority backgrounds, who in July 

2007 instructed all Attorney Generals in France to appoint to their 

offices dedicated staff with the specific assignment to prosecute discrimination. 

60. Ordinance No. 2005–901 of 2 August 2005 established the 

‘‘PACTE’’ (The Pathway to Civil Service Careers) as an alternative 

means of entry to low-level regional, hospital and State civil service 

98

15The Government states that the aim of PACTE is to make the civil service more representative of the society it serves, by trying to curb discrimination and exclusion. PACTE is open to 

those between 16 and 25 with no qualifications, and is a contract governed by public law lasting 

between one and two years and offering training and work experience in ‘‘Category C’’ posts, 

including maintenance, clerical and secretarial positions. It provides access to civil-servant status after an aptitude test. 16http://reverso.nouvelobs.com/url/result.asp?url=http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/actualites/societe/20071206.OBS8586/unlpolicierlsaisitllalhaldelpourldiscriminationlaulconc.html 

&autotranslate=on&template=General&directions=65544. 

posts rather than via the standard competitive examination processes, with the aim of making the civil service more representative.15 However, the programme only targets entry into the lowest 

level jobs and is limited to two-year contracts. In addition, the 

independent expert was informed by senior police commissioners of 

programmes, including the Cadets of the Republic Programme, 

which have been established to assist young people from all sectors 

of society in entering the police force. While anecdotally noting its 

success, police commissioners were unable to provide figures relating to the results in promoting diversity because identifying the 

graduates of the programme by ethnicity or minority status would 

be committing an offence under criminal law. 

61. On several occasions, the independent expert was informed 

by members of ethnic and religious minorities that they had experienced severe problems in finding employment in the police service 

despite having passed the qualifications and that discrimination remains commonplace within the police force. As a community representative in a Marseilles suburb noted: ‘‘It is hard to convince 

young people to do competitive examinations when they say ’show 

us the examples of those who have succeeded’ and there are none.’’ 

A case filed before HALDE shortly after the independent expert’s 

visit focused media attention on issues of discrimination within the 

police service. A policeman of Moroccan heritage charged that he 

was asked racist questions in his interview for the officers’ competition, such as ‘‘Does your wife wear the veil?’’ 16

62. Some proposed initiatives seeking to counter discrimination 

on the grounds of name or address, such as anonymous application 

forms, continue to be debated and have met with support in some 

ministries. A system of urban tax-free zones has also been created 

and will be extended by the Government to assist in bringing investment and employers to particular areas of high unemployment. 

Of course, relocating industries to ghetto areas must go hand in 

hand with requirements or incentives to hire local residents. 

63. Some companies are taking the lead in promoting diversity 

in the workplace through internal equality and non-discrimination 

policies. Since October 2004, heads of 60 companies with operations 

in France, including Airbus, IBM and Total, have signed a ‘‘Charter 

on Diversity’’ to promote non-discrimination, employment opportunities and promotion of minorities. Lack of statistical data continues to hamper evaluation of progress and the outcome of this 

and other initiatives. HALDE notes that it has worked to encourage companies to adopt more transparent internal staffing and recruitment practices. Practices such as ‘‘legacy hiring’’ and recruitment based on social networks are commonplace in certain sectors 

of the French labour market. By their nature, hiring practices that 

are not merit-based or transparent work to exclude minorities. 

99

C. EDUCATION

64. The independent expert notes the high priority given to 

issues of education within France as well as French legislation and 

public policy, as demonstrated in the Government’s country reports 

to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and 

the Committee on the Rights of the Child. However, she remains 

concerned that a reliance on current approaches to tackling discrimination issues fails to fully address the specific situations facing families and children from particular ethnic, religious and linguistic communities. 

65. Disproportionate dropout rates were highlighted as a serious 

issue facing those belonging to minority communities. The Government has sought to address such issues via training, career advice 

and vocational initiatives, in particular via Law No. 2006–396 of 31 

March 2006 on equal opportunities. However, anti-discrimination 

organizations noted a tendency for members of minority groups to 

be directed towards vocational courses rather than studies required 

for university and professional preparation. 

66. Government and NGO representatives highlighted to the 

independent expert the continuing problem of exclusion from access 

to France’s ‘‘elite’’ schools and universities, traditionally the means 

of entry to the civil service in France. The independent expert welcomed plans to enhance pre-training facilities in some schools, 

noted by the Minister Fadela Amara, and initiatives to create partnerships between schools in difficult areas and elite schools, to help 

facilitate access for those from minority communities. 

67. Gypsy/Traveller communities face particular challenges in regard to the education of their children as a result of their ambulatory lifestyles, resulting in particularly low participation levels and 

high dropout rates. Community representatives noted worrying 

trends of Gypsy/Traveller children being placed in schools or classes for those with learning impediments without evidence of impaired learning abilities. Circular No. 2002–101 of 25 April 2002 

provides guidelines on the ‘‘Schooling of Traveller Children and 

Non-Sedentary Families’’, which aim to increase participation in 

the education system; however, Gypsy and Traveller representatives complain that these remain largely unimplemented. 

68. Particular issues face minority girls in the sphere of education. During consultations, the issue of the wearing of the veil by 

Muslim girl students and the wider debate regarding religious symbols in French schools was frequently discussed. The independent 

expert urges that such debates be conducted in an open and inclusive manner and with the rights and interests of the child to the 

fore, including within Muslim communities themselves. She considers that caution must be exercised in legislation and policy that, 

irrespective of neutral intent, impact disproportionately on those 

faiths for which external, visible symbols or clothing are considered 

important tenets of faith, including Muslims, Orthodox Jews and 

Sikhs. 

D. COMPARISONS BETWEEN MARSEILLES AND PARIS

69. Discrimination in housing, policing, and unemployment, together with a lack of social and geographical mobility are imporVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:56 Aug 27, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 U:\WORK\071608.TXT KATIE
100

17 Research quoted in The Economist, 25 October 2007, Minorities and legislatures: Must the 

rainbow turn monochrome in parliament? 18Figures quoted by IFOP, the French market research institute established in 1938 to conduct polls and public research, http://www.ifop.com/europe/groupeifop/grlfr.htm. 

tant contributing factors to social unrest. The independent expert 

noted that Marseilles was relatively unaffected during the urban 

upheavals of 2005. She visited Marseilles to understand the particular circumstances and dynamics that contributed to its stability, meeting with senior government representatives, community 

groups and local residents, and with the innovative ‘‘Marseilles 

Hope’’ collective of religious leaders. 

70. Consultations revealed that the limited nature of disturbances in Marseilles can be attributed to various factors, including 

a closer proximity between the housing for minorities and the city 

centre, which countered feelings of isolation; more community-sensitive policing; stronger family and social cohesion; more meaningful dialogue between communities and religious leaders and between communities and local authorities; relatively greater employment opportunities for those from minority groups; an explicit recognition and celebration of the diverse cultures and communities 

by local authorities; and the historical and geographical factors 

that have contributed to Marseilles’ development as a multicultural 

city. 

IV. POLITICAL PARTICIPATION OF MINORITIES 

71. Article 2.3 of the 1992 Declaration on the Rights of Minorities 

states that: ‘‘Persons belonging to minorities have the right to participate effectively in decisions on the national and, where appropriate, regional level concerning the minority to which they belong 

or the regions in which they live, in a manner not incompatible 

with national legislation.’’ This is a guarantee that must be read 

in conjunction with the political rights of citizens under articles 2.1 

and 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 

72. Although minorities in France account for an estimated 12 

per cent of the population, according to the Institute Montaigne, an 

independent French institute, only 2 of the 555 members of the 

lower house elected in metropolitan (non-overseas) France come 

from the country’s black, Asian and North African minorities.17 In 

the 2007 elections, France’s governing political party, the Union for 

a Popular Movement (UMP), had only seven minority candidates 

running for election while the opposition Socialists had 20 candidates, mostly in the Paris region.18 A total of 7,639 candidates 

stood for 577 seats, including France’s overseas possessions. 

73. The legitimate interests of minorities are not fully considered 

within political institutions that do not reflect the diversity of 

French society. Parliamentary debates on key issues relevant to 

minorities, including policy to combat racism and discrimination 

and to promote equality and immigration issues, are being conducted without representatives of minorities, who are frequent victims of discrimination. Lack of minority representation constitutes 

an extremely serious problem of underrepresentation in the legislative and at all levels of political structure. A significant sector of 

French society feels excluded from the organs of power, as a result 

of which those deliberative bodies suffer a deficit in the absence of 

101

19The independent expert notes that further incidents of unrest and violence occurred in the 

suburbs of Paris (Villiers-le-Bel) in November 2007, following the tragic death of two young men 

after a collision between their motorcycle and a police vehicle. She deeply regrets this further 

violence. 

their views. This raises issues of legitimacy and a legislative process that is not fully informed. 

74. The rise of far-right political platforms within mainstream 

French politics influences the nature of political discourse and decision-making according to community representatives. They highlighted a growing nationalist, anti-immigrant discourse and political climate, exemplified by the slogan ‘‘France, love it or leave it’’. 

This sends a message to communities not to complain. One community member in the suburbs stated: ‘‘If I speak of my living conditions, they will say I hate France. Given that climate, it is hard to 

have a dialogue on how to improve things.’’ NGO representatives 

noted that despite recent urban violence in 2005, issues of disadvantaged urban communities and discrimination featured little 

in 2007 election campaigns of major parties. Rather, immigration 

controls and tougher law and order measures were the primary 

campaign issues, suggesting that solutions to urban problems are 

being sought in ‘‘get tough’’ policies rather than in improved approaches to employment opportunities, urban redevelopment and 

human rights. 

V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE 

INDEPENDENT EXPERT 

75. In spite of important national anti-discrimination legislation, 

serious racial discrimination is experienced by members of minority 

communities in France that is entrenched and institutionalized in 

nature. A political culture of denial has been an obstacle to effective measures to fully implement non-discrimination laws and to 

take concrete steps to address the complex inequalities that have 

been generated. The recent explosions of urban discontent have 

alerted authorities to the need for change.19

76. The independent expert urges the Government to take fully 

into consideration the analysis of the present report in developing 

policy responses to the urban upheavals. The most important actions that can be taken by Government lie in addressing the underlying causes of discontent and working towards structural solutions. 

Acknowledgement of the reality 

77. The Government of France is urged to: (1) recognize the existence of national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities 

within its territories and to withdraw its reservation to article 27 

of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights relating 

to the rights of persons belonging to minorities and article 30 of the 

Convention on the Rights of the Child; and (2) ratify the European 

human rights treaties relating to the rights of minorities, including 

Protocol No. 12 to the European Convention on Human Rights and 

the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention on the Protection 

of National Minorities. 

102

20On 15 November 2007, the Constitution Council, in its decision No. 2007–557 DC, approved 

Law No. 2007–1631 relating to control of immigration, integration and asylum, without article 

63 relating to racial or ethnic data, which it declared contrary to the Constitution. 

Guarantees of non-discrimination and equality 

78. France’s anti-discrimination legislation should be amended to 

allow the imposition of penalties and fines for discriminatory practices that are sufficiently severe as to act as a deterrent to future 

violations. Legislation should also be amended to grant HALDE 

meaningful enforcement powers when there is a failure to comply 

with agreed settlement fines. Courts should impose more severe 

penalties for discriminatory acts, as allowed for under the Penal 

Code. 

79. Robust affirmative action policies should be put in place to 

counter the effects of long-term discrimination against minorities. 

The independent expert encountered strong opinions both for and 

against affirmative action policies, from civil society groups and 

governmental sources. The terminology of ‘‘positive discrimination’’ 

was commonly used, which she believes creates misleading perceptions of ‘‘privileges’’ given to people from certain sectors of society 

at the expense of others. Using such terminology sabotages public 

support from programmes that generate equality in ways that benefit everyone. 

80. A wider debate is required on the issue in France that is 

open, informed and inclusive, and that builds on the experiences of 

other United Nations Member States and the recommendations of 

regional and international institutions. Such a debate should be 

framed by the concept of special measures/affirmative action as it 

is understood in international standards, including articles 1.4 and 

2.2 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All 

Forms of Racial Discrimination. 

81. The independent expert shares the view of the Committee on 

the Elimination of Racial Discrimination that efforts to combat discrimination in France are hampered by inadequate statistical information on the grounds of race, ethnicity or religion. She welcomes 

the current debate regarding the use of statistical data, including 

its constitutionality, and hopes this debate will continue to be informed by the experiences and practice of other European countries.20

82. The collection of data regarding the socio-economic status of 

the population disaggregated by ethnic and religious identities as 

well as along gender lines is recommended as an essential tool to 

reveal the full extent of social problems experienced by persons belonging to different ethnic and religious minority groups. Such data 

will assist in the development of appropriate and effective policies 

and practices to combat the effects of discrimination. 

83. The Government should undertake confidence-building and 

awareness-raising measures among all communities, including minority groups, to promote and encourage participation in voluntary 

data collection, including census registration, and allay fears that 

data collection will be used as a means of deepening rather than 

combating discrimination. 

84. The Inter-Ministerial Committee to Combat Racism, AntiSemitism and Xenophobia has been inactive since 2005 and should 

103

21 A/HRC/4/9, paras. 104 and 109. 

be reinstated and convened on a regular basis. Such a body offers 

the potential to ensure coordinated policies and practices across the 

ministries, recognizing their interrelated mandates and the need 

for holistic approaches in efforts to combat racism and discrimination and to promote the rights of minorities. 

85. Following consultations with the High Commissioner for Active Solidarity Against Poverty in France, the independent expert 

notes that policy initiatives designed to address the needs of the 

poor as an aggregate group rather than targeting the specific nature of the obstacles faced by minority groups will fail to create 

sustainable solutions to their poverty, highlighting the recommendations of the 2007 report Minorities, Poverty and the Millennium Development Goals.21

Discrimination in employment 

86. The public sector must lead by example in promoting and ensuring equality, non-discrimination and diversity, in order to send 

a clear message to all sectors of society. The Government should 

undertake more aggressive strategies to dramatically increase the 

number of people with immigrant heritage in the public service, 

particularly the police, civil service and the judiciary, in order better to reflect the broad diversity within French citizenry. These efforts should be evaluated on the basis of results or outcomes, using 

statistical data disaggregated to reveal the number of visible minorities who have been newly employed and their advancement. In 

the private sector, anonymous employment applications should be 

encouraged. 

Discrimination in housing 

87. The independent expert welcomes proposed initiatives to improve housing and living conditions in French suburbs. However, 

she considers that substantial investment in urban renewal should 

be just one component of a much wider policy package, which includes employment and education in the broader context of dedicated anti-discrimination initiatives. She emphasizes that priority 

should be given to ensuring that new or renovated housing is first 

offered to long-term residents of such suburbs. 

88. When communes fail to meet the regulations regarding the 

availability of a specified percentage of social housing that must be 

allocated to poor families, they should be severely penalized to the 

limit specified in the law. The Government should establish effective means to monitor compliance with the laws in this regard. 

89. Furthermore, the severe penalties currently foreseen in law 

should be imposed on municipalities that violate laws adopted to 

implement the rights of individuals belonging to Gypsy/Traveller 

communities. No municipality should be allowed to disregard the 

law with impunity. 

Discrimination in education 

90. The Government should evaluate its current programmes 

that focus on under-achieving schools against specific studies on 

104

the educational obstacles faced by minority students, both those of 

immigrant heritage and those from Gypsy/Traveller communities. 

Special measures should be adopted to guarantee the right to education in mainstream schools for children of Gypsy/Traveller families. Steps should be taken to protect the right of those children to 

not be segregated into schools or classes for the learning impaired 

when there is no evidence of need. 

Inclusion of minority women 

91. Women from the various minority groups in France face complex issues and specific challenges. In addition to discrimination in 

the fields of education, employment and housing, they are often 

confronted with specific challenges relating to family matters when 

their immigration status is tied to that of their husband. Divorce 

proceedings in foreign courts of certain countries can create problems for the realization of rights that they might have under 

French law. These special concerns require targeted attention and 

dedicated resources within relevant ministries and local and regional authorities. 

92. The full and effective participation of minority women must 

be seen as an essential component of Government and civil society 

efforts to address their issues. The establishment of an advisory 

body to HALDE on minority women’s issues should be considered 

as a means of gaining the views and experiences of minority 

women and assisting in the planning, design, implementation and 

evaluation of policies in order to address their specific issues and 

concerns. 

Promotion of language, religion and cultural rights 

93. The independent expert supports calls for France to ratify the 

European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, which provides valuable guidance to all European States in their treatment 

of such issues, and for the preservation and promotion of the rich 

cultural and language heritage of each State. The Government of 

France should support the use of regional and minority languages 

as a medium of instruction in the early years of public primary 

education for students who so request. 

94. The independent expert supports the conclusions and recommendations which the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion 

or belief stated in her report on her visit to France in 2005, namely, that Law 2004–228 of 15 March 2004 on ‘‘laı ̈cite ́’’ and the wearing of conspicuous religious symbols in public schools ‘‘constitutes 

a limitation of the right to manifest a religion or a belief [. . .] and 

has mainly affected certain religious minorities, and notably, people of a Muslim background’’. The independent expert supports the 

Special Rapporteur’s recommendation that the Government should 

closely monitor the way that education institutions are implementing the law and adopt a flexible implementation of the law 

which would accommodate schoolchildren for whom the display of 

religious symbols constitutes an essential and freely chosen element of their faith. 

105

Enhancement of political participation 

95. Full and effective participation in national and regional political structures, as well as representation within key government 

ministries and institutions, is essential to future efforts to protect 

and promote the rights of minorities. Political parties in France 

should seek ways to increase the number of persons belonging to 

minorities that win election to national regional and local government structures. 

96. The Government of France should establish consultative bodies of persons belonging to minorities to facilitate the full and effective participation of minorities in all decisions that affect them, and 

in the planning, design, implementation and evaluation of policies 

and programmes in respect of minority issues and those which impact on the lives of minorities.

Æ

This is an official publication of the 

Commission on Security and 

Cooperation in Europe.

★★★

This publication is intended to document 

developments and trends in participating 

States of the Organization for Security 

and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

★★★

All Commission publications may be freely 

reproduced, in any form, with appropriate 

credit. The Commission encourages 

the widest possible dissemination 

of its publications.

★★★

http://www.csce.gov

The Commission’s Web site provides 

access to the latest press releases 

and reports, as well as hearings and 

briefings. Using the Commission’s electronic 

subscription service, readers are able 

to receive press releases, articles, 

and other materials by topic or countries 

of particular interest.

Please subscribe today.