Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination

Eighty- sixth session

Summary record of the 2340th meeting

Held at the Palais Wilson, Geneva, on Thursday, 7 May 2015, at 10 a.m.

Chairperson:Mr. Calí Tzay

Contents

Consideration of reports, comments and information submitted by States parties under article 9 of the Convention (continued)

Combined twentieth and twenty-first periodic reports of Denmark (continued)

The meeting was called to order at 10.05 a.m.

Consideration of reports, comments and information submitted by States parties under article 9 of the Convention (continued)

Combined twentieth and twenty-first periodic reports of Denmark (continued) (CERD/C/DNK/20-21; CERD/C/DNK/Q/20-21)

At the invitation of the Chairperson, the delegation of Denmark took places at the Committee table.

Mr. Christoffersen (Denmark), speaking on bahlf of the National Human Rights Institution of Denmark, a State body independent of the Government, said that, according to the National Integration Barometer, 45 per cent of immigrants had experienced discrimination during the previous year. While data on racist hate crimes was not collected systematically, 60 incidents had been reported to the police in 2013, and a significant number of immigrants claimed to be the victims of racist hate crimes on a yearly basis. One of the greatest challenges facing Danish society was how to prevent such crimes.

As a general rule, the children of non-western immigrants did not perform as well in school as children of Danish parents, and fewer children of non-western immigrants successfully completed their compulsory education. In the wake of the global financial crisis, the unemployment rate of Greenlanders living in Denmark and non-western immigrants had risen much higher than that of ethnic Danes.

One in five housing applications submitted by persons with a surname that appeared to be Middle Eastern in origin gave rise to discriminatory treatment. Furthermore, the municipal authorities did not systematically provide those immigrants who were between homes with temporary accommodation, as required by law. The quality of the interpretation services provided to persons from an ethnic minority background during medical visits was poor, which had a negative impact on the quality of the treatment that they received. The fact that the Board of Equal Treatment received very few complaints of discrimination could be attributed to the fact that few immigrants were aware of their rights.

Differential treatment on the basis of race or ethnic origin had become a structural characteristic of Danish society. There was a pressing need to adopt comprehensive policies and programmes to address the root causes of that phenomenon and to combat it on the ground. The Committee should ensure that its recommendations related to specific or structural discrimination and should leave other matters, for example relating to migration, to the competent treaty bodies. The recommendation contained in the Committee’s previous concluding observations (CERD/C/DNK/CO/18-19) calling for a limitation on the powers of the Director of Public Prosecutions had stemmed from a misunderstanding of the Danish prosecution system and need not be taken up.

In Greenland and the Faroe Islands, no law prohibited ethnic discrimination in the labour market or in other sectors, no administrative authority handled complaints of such discrimination and no data on racial or ethnic discrimination was available, notwithstanding the fact that the phenomenon existed. Moreover, there was no national human rights institution in the Faroe Islands. An extension of the mandate of the National Human Rights Institution of Denmark to cover the Faroe Islands was not necessarily the best course of action. Instead, the Danish authorities and those of the Faroe Islands should be called upon to work together to find a solution.

Mr. Thomassen(Denmark) said that the Integration Act laid down the relevant State integration policy and regulated all integration activities at the municipal level. The Act specified the assistance to be given to newly arrived immigrants, regulated housing and integration programmes and established a council for ethnic minorities. To complement the State integration policy, since 2013 each newly arrived immigrant had been assigned an integration plan that took the person’s circumstances into account and that was tailored to their specific needs. The Government of Denmark defined a descendant as a person who had been born in Denmark but whose parents were immigrants. Immigrants were defined as persons who had been born abroad and whose parents both were foreign nationals who had been born abroad.

The delegation was unable to provide statistical data on the Roma population in Denmark, as the ethnicity of persons residing in the country was not recorded in the National Danish Civil Registration System. There were no plans to include data on ethnicity in the system. As the information it held could be accessed by all public authorities and certain private individuals, the inclusion of such data would be imprudent. Censuses were not conducted in Denmark, as the system in question obviated the need for one.

A national Roma inclusion strategy had been adopted to improve the situation of Roma people in Denmark and to ensure their effective social integration. The Roma enjoyed the same rights and access to social services as all other persons residing in the country. All the measures in place to improve the situation of ethnic minority groups also applied to them. The municipal authorities bore much of the responsibility for ensuring the successful integration of the Roma. They had accordingly been informed of the details of the national Roma inclusion strategy.

The Government had also adopted a strategy to address honour-related conflicts, which were prevalent within certain ethnic minority groups. Such conflicts included honour crimes, betrothal, forced marriage and coercion to study a certain subject or to pursue a certain career. The Government’s strategy was primarily addressed at young people, as they were the group most affected by those conflicts.

Ms. Vind(Denmark) said that the Government’s initiatives to combat racial and ethnic discrimination included a project intended to help primary school children gain a better understanding of religions other than their own. The project involved a team comprising three persons, each from a Christian, Muslim or Jewish background, that visited primary schools and delivered a presentation on the three religions and subsequently initiated an interactive dialogue with the children. Special teaching materials aimed at combating prejudice and promoting tolerance among primary school children had also been developed. The anti-racism campaign known as “Show Racism the Red Card” had also yielded positive results.

An anti-discrimination unit had been set up in 2014 to coordinate efforts to prevent and combat discrimination against ethnic minorities and persons with disabilities. The unit also carried out campaigns to raise the awareness of the general public of the right to equal treatment of all persons residing in Denmark. The unit had been allocated a budget of 10.4 million Danish kroner for the period 2013–2016. There was good coordination among the National Human Rights Institution of Denmark, the anti-discrimination unit and the Board of Equal Treatment. Representatives of the Institution sat on the committee responsible for overseeing the work of the anti-discrimination unit.

In 2014, the Government had also adopted an action plan to prevent radicalization and extremism. Under the plan, the National Board of Social Services had launched programmes to build the capacity of local associations to combat those phenomena. The Danish Centre against Human Trafficking functioned under the authority of the National Board of Social Services. The purpose of the centre was to improve and coordinate the measures already in place to assist victims of human trafficking.

Mr. Lamhauge Rasmussen (Denmark) said that the periodic report referred to a finding that there was a statistically significant, albeit small, positive correlation between mother-tongue teaching and academic results in some subjects. However, that finding reflected the conclusions of only one specific study involving bilingual children in Denmark and Sweden and was not necessarily representative of the whole body of research conducted in that area. A research project had been launched to measure the impact of a number of different teaching methods involving mother-tongue teaching. The preliminary results of the project had shown that two of the teaching methods in particular had led to an improvement in students’ overall academic performance. However, the results had also revealed a disparity in the impact of those teaching methods, as students from ethnic minority backgrounds had not shown nearly as much improvement. Further results would be available in mid-2015 and in late 2016. The Government would then determine how the project’s findings could be used to improve the academic performance of students from ethnic minority backgrounds. Greenlandic children living in Denmark received three to four lessons per week in their mother tongue.

Given that statistical data disaggregated by ethnicity was not collected in Denmark, the delegation could not comment on the specific problems encountered by Roma students in the Danish school system. The municipal education authorities had indicated that the problems typically encountered by Roma students could be remedied by means of targeted measures, such as additional language tuition and pedagogical support.

Schools provided lessons on Internet etiquette and critical thinking skills as a means of countering hate speech and racist propaganda on the Internet. The new national curriculum, which had been prepared in cooperation with the National Human Rights Institution of Denmark, would strengthen teaching in that area and include a new module on human rights.

Ms. Jarl (Denmark) said that the Board of Equal Treatment was competent to handle complaints of discrimination that did not require testimony to be obtained from the parties. The purpose of the Board was to lighten the caseload of the civil courts. However, its complaints procedure could not serve as an alternative to court proceedings if they were deemed necessary. All complaints of discrimination could be considered by the civil courts, even if the Board had already ruled on the case.

Ms. Jager Andersen (Denmark) said that Denmark had ratified all the core conventions of the International Labour Organization (ILO), and that those conventions also applied to foreign nationals residing in the national territory. Denmark had not ratified the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. With regard to that instrument, it concurred with the position of the European Commission that the Convention did not draw a clear enough distinction between the rights of workers in regular and irregular situations and that it was not conducive to reducing irregular migration flows. Under the Aliens’ Act, migrant workers who were in possession of residence permits could bring their spouses, cohabitating partners and children to Denmark as accompanying family members. Under normal circumstances, their accompanying family also received residence permits and were allowed to work. The permanent tripartite committee responsible for decisions regarding ILO conventions had recommended that Denmark should not ratify the Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189).

Under the Integration Act, all newly arrived immigrants were to follow a three-year orientation programme, which included free Danish language lessons and activities to prepare them for joining the Danish labour market. If after the three year period they had not found employment, they could benefit from the assistance provided under the general employment schemes in place.

Ms. Amadid (Denmark) said that the police force had recently intensified its efforts to combat hate crimes and would soon be establishing a new monitoring system for that purpose. In the future, annual reports on criminal acts potentially motivated by extremist views would be drafted by the police force rather than the security and intelligence service.

The Government was committed to combating all forms of hate crime and intolerance, including on the Internet. To that end, a national cybercrime centre had been established, which monitored websites that were notorious for criminal activity. The centre was currently drafting guidelines on ways to prevent racism, harassment and other crimes on the Internet. The Director of Public Prosecutions regularly updated the guidelines for officers of the police force and the prosecution service on how to handle hate crimes. Those guidelines addressed the implementation of the section of the Criminal Code relating to crimes with a racist motivation (art. 81.6). Brief summaries of all court rulings relating to the section of the Criminal Code covering criminal cases involving racist statements (art. 266 (b)) were available on the website of the public prosecution service. The decision had been taken not to establish a similar registry for cases relating to article 81.6, as the courts rarely cited that provision expressly in their rulings, so such a registry would not provide an exhaustive overview of the relevant case law.

The statistics provided by the security and intelligence service on hate crimes were based on information from police registries, while the annual crime victim survey provided an estimate of the number of persons who claimed to be victims of hate crimes. As those persons’ interpretation of the term “hate crime” was not necessarily the same as the legal definition of that term, the two sets of data should not be expected to correspond exactly.

The information contained in Danish passports was generated automatically from the civil registry. For all persons born outside Denmark, the country where they were born was listed as their place of birth. Exceptions could be made if such a listing would put them at risk of being detained or being unable to travel.

Mr. Sparholt Jørgensen (Denmark) said that the purpose of the minimum age requirement for couples seeking family reunification was to prevent forced marriages. The ethnicity of the spouses or partners had no direct bearing on the decision to grant a residence permit. The age requirement could be waived under special circumstances. The requirement that the spouse living in Denmark must have stronger ties to Denmark than to any other country could also be waived in some cases, for example if the person had been a Danish national or a legal resident in the country for more than 26 years.

A new temporary protection status applied only to persons who received subsidiary protection pursuant to the relevant ruling of the European Court of Human Rights. If the conditions in the person’s home country did not improve after one year, the residence permit was renewed. The law had been amended due to the increase in the number of asylum seekers in 2014, and the amendment had no bearing on refugees protected under the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. The limited preferential treatment given to persons from other Nordic countries when they applied for Danish citizenship was based on the strong cultural and linguistic ties among those countries. No particular nationality suffered any discrimination as a result of that policy. Generally speaking, the 2012 amendment of the regulations on residence permits had made it significantly easier to obtain such permits, even though it had also increased the required length of residency from four to five years.

Mr. Jørgensen (Denmark) said that, unlike the Criminal Code of Denmark, the Criminal Code of Greenland did not set out specific sentences for offences and did not use the term “punishment”. In accordance with local tradition, the courts were given the freedom to decide which measures were most appropriate, taking into consideration the circumstances and the perpetrator’s personal situation.

The Copenhagen police force took seriously the issue of discrimination in nightclubs and had protocols in place to deal with reports of such incidents. There were 18 district courts in Greenland. The more complicated cases could be referred to the Court of Greenland, and subsequently to the High Court of Greenland, and finally to the Supreme Court of Denmark. The law enforcement authorities attached great importance to equal treatment and diversity in the police force and actively recruited police officers with non-Danish backgrounds.

Mr. Worm (Greenland, Denmark) said that, under the Act on Self-Government, Greenland had the legal authority to conclude international agreements in the fields that fell within its competence but could not independently become a party to an agreement to which Denmark was already a party. With regard to the Thule tribe, the Supreme Court had ruled in 2003 that the tribe had not retained its own social, economic, cultural and political institutions, and that it was therefore not a distinct indigenous people.

The 89 per cent of the population that had been born in Greenland included children born to Danish or foreign parents. Ethnicity was not recorded in the civil registry. The standard written version of the Greenlandic language was based on the western dialect. The various dialects spoken were generally mutually intelligible, and all spoken dialects were therefore in common use. Courses in the Greenlandic language were available to immigrants for a small fee. Danish-speaking inhabitants could communicate with the authorities in Danish. In fact, many government employees were Danish speakers and used Danish as their working language. Both Danish and Greenlandic were taught in schools from the elementary to secondary levels.

The opposition party had submitted a proposal to establish a human rights centre, which would be debated in the parliament in late May 2015. The parliament would also soon discuss a proposal to review the composition of the Human Rights Council of Greenland and to consider the need for legislation on non-discrimination and equal treatment.

There were an estimated 12,000 Greenlanders living in Denmark. There had not been much discussion within that community about obtaining recognition as a national minority. However, much focus had been given to the need to provide special assistance to Greenlanders who suffered from severe social problems. Greenlanders held Danish citizenship and therefore enjoyed access to health care, employment and education on an equal footing with other citizens. There were four cultural and social centres for Greenlanders in Denmark, called Greenlandic Houses, which received special funding from the Danish Government.

Ms. Nó nklett (Faroe Islands, Denmark) said that it was true that the mandate of the Danish Institute for Human Rights did not extend to the Faroe Islands, as that would not be in line with the Government’s political aim of taking full responsibility for areas affecting local daily life. The human rights situation was monitored by a number of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the authorities, through various initiatives. The need for a national human rights institution had, however, been highlighted in recent years. As Danish citizens, the people of the Faroe Islands enjoyed access to health care, employment and education on an equal footing with others. There were about 11,000 Faroese living in Denmark. A course in the Faroese language was offered to the children of that community. Some members of the community believed that obtaining national minority status would give them more rights and more possibilities for preserving their language and culture, but no formal requests had been made in that regard.

Ms. Dissing- Spandet (Denmark) said that the Government was committed to integrating and revitalizing the disadvantaged areas known as deprived neighbourhoods through various measures, including by combating crime and promoting diversity among their inhabitants. The projects under way included a national construction fund to renovate buildings and infrastructure in those neighbourhoods.

Mr. Jørgensen (Denmark) said that, although the Committee’s opinions on individual communications were non-binding, Denmark always gave thorough consideration to them on a case-by-case basis, including any recommendations to provide compensation to the individuals concerned.

Mr. Diaconu said that, even though there was no census taken in Denmark, there were still other possible means of collecting data while respecting principles such as self-identification, voluntary participation and confidentiality. He asked whether any progress had been achieved in improving the situation of the Roma since the adoption of the Roma Inclusion Strategy. He urged the State party to adopt an approach to integration that would ensure protection for the linguistic and cultural identity of the various groups living in the country.

He wished to know whether the guidelines issued by the Director of Public Prosecutions for the handling of racially motivated crimes applied only to those offences classified under article 81.6 of the Code, or also to those classified under article 266 (b) of the Code. Lastly, he encouraged the State party to look to other countries for examples of best practices that might protect human rights more effectively than the institutions currently functioning in Denmark.

Mr. Kut said that complacency about the ability of a legal system to prevent racial discrimination was dangerous, particularly in Europe, where racist incidents were increasingly common. A legal system could be deemed effective in preventing racism only if objective indicators demonstrated that racist incidents were becoming more scarce, but that had not happened in Denmark. The root causes of racism must be addressed, and that required political will. For political reasons, the Danish Government apparently wished to apply the Convention as it saw fit rather than linking it to objective legal conditions. Was freedom of expression under particular threat in Denmark? If that was not the case, then perhaps there was a general unwillingness to tackle racially motivated crimes and hate speech.

Mr. Staur (Denmark) said that the Danish Government examined situations in other countries so as to benefit from their best practice. Because of the State party’s legislation-based legal system, its approach to the integration of the Convention in its law and to racial discrimination itself differed from that of other countries. The Criminal Code limited freedom of expression, for example in the case of personal insults and hate speech, with provisions that were in compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and were similar to those of other European countries.

Mr. Thomassen (Denmark) said that some means of compiling data on ethnicity had been tested and had produced approximate estimates of the number of Roma people in the country. However, improvements were necessary. The involvement of the Danish National Human Rights Institution could be beneficial. While the Roma Inclusion Strategy had not produced specific information on improvements to the situation of Roma people in Denmark, it had highlighted the need to examine the issue at the State and municipal levels. However, close cooperation with the municipalities had not revealed any significant problems relating to the Roma. Under the Integration Act, the concept of integration meant the provision of assistance to allow immigrants to participate in society on an equal footing with other citizens, with protection of their right to preserve their cultural identity.

Mr. Jørgensen (Denmark) said that racist motives constituted aggravating circumstances in all crimes in the Criminal Code. The Government took its international obligations very seriously. In order to ensure compliance with those obligations, it had decided against further incorporation of human rights instruments.

Mr. Bossuyt (Country Rapporteur), noting that incorporation in domestic law was not the only way to implement the Convention, asked why the State party appeared to give higher priority to the European Convention on Human Rights than it gave to United Nations instruments. Children who were not from minorities seemed to benefit more from mother tongue education than children from minorities, which widened the gap between them. He asked how the provisions for family reunification differed from the provisions for the admission of family members of migrant workers.

Mr. Avtonomov asked how the National Human Rights Institution of Denmark had operated in Greenland prior to being granted a mandate to work there in 2014, why negotiations to establish such an institution in the Faroe Islands had begun only recently and how the Greenland Human Rights Council operated. He wished to know whether self-taught courses were available for Greenlandic, whether the 100 kroner fee for Greenlandic classes covered the cost of the whole course or just one class, and whether a plan of action was being prepared for the United Nations Decade for People of African Descent.

Mr. Staur (Denmark) said that while there were no plans to mark the Decade for People of African Descent, any proposals from civil society or the population would be considered.

Mr. Jørgensen (Denmark) said that although the Government had decided against further incorporation of the Convention, it remained a relevant source of law. The wording of parts of the Criminal Code was drawn from it, and it was invoked by the courts.

Mr. Lamhauge Rasmussen (Denmark) said that, while preliminary results might suggest that mother tongue education widened the gap between children who were and were not from minority backgrounds, the results had so far only been reported for studies of education in Danish. The results for other languages might be different. Furthermore, the reasons behind those results should be analysed before conclusions were drawn.

Mr. Sparholt Jørgensen (Denmark) said that the difference in the rules for family reunification when the purpose of the stay in Denmark was employment was attributable to the fact that those coming to Denmark for employment usually stayed temporarily.

Mr. Staur (Denmark) said that highly skilled professionals working in Denmark temporarily could benefit from favourable tax rules. Greenland and the Faroe Islands were subject to the international obligations binding upon the Kingdom and must ensure that their legal frameworks and administrative practices met those obligations. The limited resources of Greenland and the Faroe Islands affected their ability to implement international instruments and maintain their own human rights institutions. The territories’ strategies regarding implementation sometimes differed from those of Denmark, but it was their aim to establish human rights institution to the extent that they could with their limited resources.

Mr. Worm (Greenland, Denmark) said that Denmark usually issued reservations to international instruments in relation to Greenland and the Faroe Islands so that their respective parliaments could examine and then ratify them. The parliament of Greenland had legislative power in its areas of competence, and Greenland was usually exempt from Danish legislation, except when it was enforced by a Royal Order. That was the case with the law on the human rights institution. The 100 kroner fee covered the cost of the whole Greenlandic course, and Internet-based courses were available.

Mr. Murillo Martínez said that he would welcome information on the circumstances limiting minorities’ access to employment in the police force and on HIV/AIDS in minority communities. What indicators identified the structural dimension of racism and racial discrimination in Denmark?

Ms. Hohoueto requested clarification on the distinction made in the periodic report between cases in which investigations had stopped and cases in which charges were withdrawn.

Mr. Jørgensen (Denmark) said that, although the police attached great importance to diversity and sought to recruit officers from different ethnic backgrounds, the number of recruits of non-Danish ethnicity was limited. The police therefore sought to encourage members of minorities to apply and had introduced an individual mentoring system for such applicants. Beginning in 2015, police officers also received training in mentoring techniques. Initiatives were afoot in the country’s four largest cities to encourage cooperation with ethnic minorities and disseminate the idea that the police were for everyone, irrespective of ethnicity. The Danish Institute for Human Rights in 2012 had issued a report on ethnic diversity in the police, and the reports’ recommendations had been implemented.

Regarding the reasons why some cases were not prosecuted, he said that in certain situations, investigations were not begun because no offence was deemed to have occurred. In other cases, investigations were launched then stopped because it was considered that they would not achieve any worthwhile result. Cases in which charges were dropped were those in which, following investigation, there was not enough evidence to secure a conviction before the courts.

Mr. Staur (Denmark) said that he had no statistics regarding the prevalence of HIV/AIDS among specific ethnic groups, but the total number of new cases was not very high. As in other countries, certain categories of persons such as intravenous drug users and sex workers were at greater risk of infection. Those categories might include a greater proportion of foreigners, but the risks were more associated with lifestyle than with nationality. Everyone had equal access to treatment, although certain groups, such as people who were in the country illegally, could face additional barriers. The Danish AIDS Foundation tried to reach out to high-risk groups by offering anonymous testing. The Government tackled HIV/AIDS as a social problem affecting vulnerable groups in Denmark, but it was not a major social or health issue.

Mr. Thomassen (Denmark) said that problems of structural discrimination did exist. The National Integration Barometer was used to monitor problems in areas such as employment, housing and education, and its findings were available for public consultation on the Internet. Following a recent debate in the media about access to housing for persons with non-Danish names, the authorities had commissioned a survey on the subject, which had revealed that people with names assumed to be from the Middle East faced greater difficulties in finding accommodation. The Government was attempting to address the problem by informing landlords of their obligations to treat all applicants equally.

Mr . Vázquez requested clarification about the principle of objectivity in Danish law, particularly regarding article 266 (b) of the Criminal Code. He wished to know whether, when exercising the principle of objectivity, prosecutors made their judgements in accordance with article 4 of the Convention and the Committee’s general recommendation No. 35 on combating racist hate speech.

Ms. Dah recalled that the Convention had existed for 50 years, and the Committee for 45. She hoped that State parties would help to mark that anniversary by making the value of the Convention more widely known. She appealed to the Government of Denmark to participate in that initiative.

Mr. Jørgensen (Denmark) said that, in cases involving racist speech, prosecutors reviewed the evidence in order to decide whether or not to carry through with a prosecution. In so doing, they made reference to the relevant section of the Criminal Code, the wording of which derived from article 4 of the Convention.

Ms. Crickley said that the national action plan against racism should include targets and timelines for progress in reducing the number of victims of all kinds of racial discrimination in Denmark. The plan should also acknowledge the intersectionality between racism and other forms of discrimination, address structural issues in areas such as health, education and employment and incorporate the responses to the recommendations issued by the Committee in its concluding observations.

She wished to know how racial discrimination was addressed in the Danish integration strategy. Racism was insidious and could not be prevented only by preventing extremism. Denmark should reconsider ratifying the ILO Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189) and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.

Mr. Thomassen (Denmark) said that the Government was combatting racial discrimination as one of its seven main integration priorities. The authorities were currently mapping patterns of hate speech and hate crimes and would take action once the results were in.

Mr. Staur (Denmark) said that the Government currently had no plans to reconsider the decision not to ratify the conventions relating to domestic workers and migrant workers.

Mr. Bossuyt said that he was impressed by the Government’s efforts to carry out linguistic integration. He wished to know whether the three-year integration programme was compulsory, whether it involved a final test and, if so, whether failing the test had any consequences.

Mr. Thomassen (Denmark) said that the programme focused on two major themes, the Danish labour market and the Danish language, and was offered to new arrivals. It was necessary to take part in the programme in order to receive certain social benefits. There was no final test, but being in employment and possessing language skills were requirements for permanent residency in Denmark.

Mr. Bossuyt said that much progress had been made in the interactive dialogue. He cited a number of recommendations that the Committee would put forward in its concluding observations, including incorporating the Convention into national law, combatting discrimination against the Roma, developing an action plan against hate crime, training interpreters in the languages used by refugees and immigrants and intensifying efforts to recruit ethnic minorities into the police.

Mr. Staur (Denmark) said that no country was immune from racial discrimination. It took time to resolve the problems associated with attitudes and stereotyping, but the Government was meeting the challenge and was committed to improving integration. The incorporation of the Convention into national law had been given serious consideration twice over the previous 15 years. On both occasions it had been decided that incorporation was not a viable political option for the country. The Government did not share the view that racist discourse was on the rise. It was important to acquire reliable information and not base judgements on anecdotal evidence. The Government had decided to publish an annual human rights report incorporating all the conclusions and recommendations of treaty bodies. The report would be available to the general public.

The meeting rose at 1 p.m.