COMMITTEE ON THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION

Sixty-ninth session

SUMMARY RECORD OF THE 1773rd MEETING

Held at the Palais des Nations, Geneva,

on Thursday, 10 August 2006, at 10 a.m.

Chairperson: Mr. de GOUTTES

CONTENTS

CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS, COMMENTS AND INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 9 OF THE CONVENTION (continued)

Sixteenth and seventeenth periodic reports of Denmark (continued)

The meeting was called to order at 10.10 a.m.

CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS, COMMENTS AND INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 9 OF THE CONVENTION (agenda item 4) (continued)

Sixteenth and seventeenth periodic reports of Denmark (CERD/C/496/Add.1; HRI/CORE/1/Add.58) (continued)

At the invitation of the Chairperson, the members of the delegation of Denmark resumed their places at the Committee table.

The CHAIRPERSON invited members of the Committee to put their remaining questions to the delegation.

Mr. YUTZIS requested clarification of what was really understood by the term “non‑Western”, as there appeared to be a restrictive, non-exhaustive definition in the report, which referred to “countries outside Scandinavia, the European Union and North America”. Such a restrictive view could be problematic and might give the impression of being discriminatory.

Referring to paragraph 53 of the report, which stated that “the Government finds that it is neither legally necessary, nor politically appropriate to incorporate the Convention into Danish law”, he wished to know what was meant by “politically appropriate”.

Regarding the response given to question 10 in the list of issues on the position adopted following the publication of the caricatures of the Prophet Muhammed, and the argument that the cartoons had not directly harmed people, he pointed out that it was difficult to distinguish between religious symbols and the people themselves, as the symbols helped form their identity.

Finally, on the question of the distribution of refugees, he had been struck by the acknowledgement in paragraph 110 that there was “segregated housing”. It was therefore very important to carry out the proposed analysis.

Mr. CALITZAY, referring to the Inuit in Greenland, asked whether Greenlandic and Inuit were one and the same language and, if not, what status the Inuit language had and what measures were taken to protect and promote it. He requested statistics on the ethnic composition of Greenland and whether the Inuit culture was taken into account in the education and health systems there.

Ms. JANUARY-BARDILL asked to what extent immigrants themselves were involved in assessing the impact of the Integration Act on their lives, as there was a fine line between integration and assimilation.

Noting that the reasons given for unemployment being higher among non-Western immigrants than among Danish nationals were a lack of education, skills, work experience and incentive, she wondered whether any objective research had been carried out to verify those reasons, as they appeared to be based simply on stereotypes.

Regarding the cartoons, in her view, the attitude that freedom of expression was the very foundation of Danish society and democracy was worrying, and wondered whether the Government had any intention of setting its own standard with respect to incitement to racial hatred.

Ms. OLSEN (Danish Institute for Human Rights) said that the Government had undertaken a number of initiatives with a view to enhancing integration of ethnic minorities in education, cultural life and the labour market, and creating awareness of the principle of equal treatment. However, combating racism and discrimination represented a major challenge in a society that continuously stressed the majority way of life. Danish traditions and customs, norms and values were promoted and celebrated, and concepts such as inclusion, pluralism and celebration of differences were not made part of political rhetoric or reflected in media coverage. That perspective easily led to the establishment of requirements for persons of other ethnic backgrounds to fully adapt to the Danish way of living. In that way, the dichotomy between the Danish and “others” prevailed.

In the labour market, recently conducted, as yet unpublished, research showed that it was very difficult for immigrants to access the labour market, and, apparently, the person’s educational level had only a minor influence on the possibilities for placement. Moreover, many persons of ethnic origin had difficulty in accessing the labour market due to language inadequacies, health-related issues and discrimination on the grounds of a foreign-sounding name. Such discrimination was often difficult to pursue in a legal setting due to problems arising from insufficient evidence. Systemic discrimination had not yet been subjected to Government‑funded research. In general, not enough research was being conducted to identify the root causes of discrimination and exclusion mechanisms in the labour market and to assess the level of perceived discrimination.

The Ministry of Integration had very recently launched a diversity programme with the aim of enhancing the integration of ethnic minorities in the labour market. The programme encompassed activities such as informative visits to companies, a catalogue of best practice in diversity management and the handling of religious issues in the workplace.

Another problematic issue was the treatment of asylum-seekers in asylum centres, where they might live for up to five or six years without knowing whether they had a future in Denmark or not. Very often they were in rural or isolated areas and did not have the right to work or engage in social, cultural or political activities outside the centres, and their children were taught within the camp. Asylum-seekers could be moved from one centre to another up to 12 times during one asylum period. The rationale behind such treatment was that asylum-seekers should not create ties in order to be prepared to leave Denmark at any time. The treatment lacked respect for the dignity, integrity, rights and freedoms of persons, and lacked understanding of the core principles of non-discrimination and equality.

Mr. VINTHEN (Denmark), responding to question 21 of the list of issues, said that under article 30 of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, Denmark had specified that the German minority in South Jutland would be covered by the Convention, and the Government had no plans to change that specification.

Mr. MORTENSEN (Denmark), responding to question 22, said that under the Administration Act, the administrative authorities, for example in the health sector, had an obligation to guide and assist individuals who contacted them and to furnish the necessary information, which included the use of an interpreter if the individual who had contacted them did not speak Danish. Under the Administration of Justice Act, the language of the courts was Danish, but if a person did not speak Danish an interpreter could be called upon. In criminal proceedings the cost of the interpreter was borne by the State.

Mr. LARSEN (Denmark), in reply to question 23, said that all Danish nationals, including immigrants and descendants with Danish citizenship, who were over 18 and lived in Denmark, had the right to vote in all national and municipal elections and to run for Parliament or for a seat in the municipal local councils. Non-nationals had the right to run for a seat in the local councils and to vote in all local elections provided that they had had their permanent address in Denmark for at least three years. The number of immigrants and descendants among the elected representatives in municipal local councils and in Parliament had increased significantly, from 3 in the municipal and local councils and none in Parliament in 1981, to 67 in municipal local councils and 3 in Parliament in 2005. The Government saw the increased political participation of immigrants and descendants in political life as a good sign of improved integration of ethnic minorities into Danish society.

Mr. MORTENSEN (Denmark) said that 29 persons belonging to non-Western minorities and 27 from Western countries were employed in the judiciary. As for the police, 0.5 per cent of the employees belonged to ethnic minorities, or 68 out of a total of 14,613. The National Commissioner who recruited new police officers called for applicants with both Danish and ethnic backgrounds. Applicants did not require any particular educational background or prior training. In 2006, the National Commissioner had set a target that 4 per cent of new employees should belong to ethnic minorities. So far, 10 of the 270 recruited in 2006, or 3.7 per cent, had a non-Danish ethnic background, compared with 2.4 per cent in 2004.

Responding to question 24 on discrimination in accessing public places, he said that criminal offences must be reported to the police, and if a complaint was dismissed, it was possible to appeal. However, there were no statistics indicating whether there was a problem with police rejecting complaints or not. In March 2005, the Copenhagen police had run a two‑week campaign, in conjunction with several NGOs, to combat discrimination in accessing public places such as discotheques. The campaign was ongoing, and there was a web page through which complaints could be filed with the police. The Copenhagen police had also drawn up internal guidelines which stated that complaints of violations of legislation on the prohibition of discrimination on the basis of race must be given high priority and that when receiving a complaint the police should immediately appear at the scene of the crime in order to secure the identity of the perpetrator, witnesses and the injured party and test the grounds given for refusing admission. Recordings from surveillance cameras were also used as evidence. However, the charges were often withdrawn because of a lack of evidence that an act of discrimination had taken place or because the charge had been brought too long after the event.

Mr. LARSEN (Denmark) said that, in 2002, the Government had established the Danish Centre for International Studies and Human Rights to replace the former Board of Ethnic Equality. The Centre operated in conformity with the Paris Principles Relating to the Status of National Institutions. The Board of Ethnic Equality had been closed down to free up resources, simplify administration and improve accessibility. Denmark had also introduced additional legal safeguards against discrimination that went beyond the exigencies of international law. Parliament had given the Institute for Human Rights competence, for example, to review individual complaints. In order to carry out that task, the Institute had set up the Complaints Committee for Ethnic Equal Treatment in 2003.

The Government had increased its financial support for organizations and initiatives that fought against racism, discrimination and intolerance and promoted integration and equal opportunities. The Ministry of Integration alone had contributed more that DKr 230 million. The Institute for Human Rights received financial support in the order of DKr 6 million annually.

In 2004, legislation had been amended to give the Institute for Human Rights the power to review individual complaints inside and outside the labour market. Seeking recourse through the Complaints Committee for Ethnic Equal Treatment was free of charge. That avenue of redress had been established as an alternative to provide expeditious and inexpensive access to justice. However, there was no impediment to seeking remedy directly through the courts. If the Complaints Committee found a violation of the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of race or ethnicity, it could recommend that the complainant should be granted legal aid to bring his or her case before a court.

Since its inception, the Complaints Committee had received 213 complaints. It had adopted 35 decisions on merits; in seven cases it had found a breach of the prohibition of unequal treatment on the grounds of race or ethnic origin. In two cases, the Complaints Committee had recommended that the complainant should be granted free legal aid; one case had been brought to court and had subsequently been dismissed.

Ms. HOLSE (Denmark) said that an important objective of primary and secondary education was to provide children with an understanding of other countries and cultures. Social science curricula, in particular, were designed to create awareness and foster the ability to observe, analyse and evaluate national and international social conditions and conflicts. As part of the effort to instil a culture of respect for the integrity of the person, teaching materials addressed issues such as democracy, xenophobia and human rights. In order to ensure equal access to education, children in need of linguistic support were guaranteed assistance. For bilingual preschool children who required language stimulation, the offer of assistance was compulsory.

Mr. VINTHEN (Denmark) said that, after thorough consideration, the Government had decided against incorporating international conventions into domestic law. However, his delegation would communicate the Committee’s observations on the issue to the Danish authorities.

Mr. ENGBERG (Denmark) said that the Government had been requested to review the provision of the Danish Aliens Act that stipulated that both spouses must have attained 24 years of age to be eligible for spousal reunification. Other family reunification rules had also been criticized. The Government had nevertheless decided to retain the present restrictions, which were partly a response to the poor labour market integration of immigrants. Limiting the number of immigrants was expected to help address that problem. While Denmark was open to immigration, for economic reasons emphasis was placed on receiving migrants that could easily integrate into the labour market. In order to be eligible for spousal reunification, the spouse residing in Denmark must provide a bank guarantee of DKr 50,000 to cover any public expenses for assistance to the foreign spouse. That rule would remain unchanged, since it was thought to encourage immigrants to seek integration into the labour market. Family reunification was restricted to children under 15 years of age to avoid potentially harmful disruptions to the children’s lives. However, the Government was aware that existing rules might need to be reconsidered in the long term.

The Refugee Board was an independent court-like body composed of three members, including a presiding judge. One member was appointed by the Minister of Refugee, Immigration and Integration Affairs, the other by the General Council of the Bar and Law Society. The Refugee Board’s decisions were final. If the Immigration Service refused to grant asylum in the first instance, the files of the case were automatically transferred to the Refugee Board. The purpose of that procedure was to simplify and expedite appeals proceedings.

Mr. LARSEN (Denmark) said that the Council for Ethnic Minorities consisted of 14 members elected among local integration councils. It was a privileged partner in the development of integration policy. The Council met quarterly with the Ministry of Integration, which provided secretarial and financial support, to discuss issues pertaining to immigrants and ethnic minorities. In March 2006, officials of the Ministry had met with the Council and representatives of ethnic minorities and the Muslim community in an effort to initiate dialogue between different ethnic and religious groups. For 2007, the Government had allocated an additional DKr 500,000 to facilitate further dialogue initiatives.

The Ministry of Integration financed the awareness campaign “Show racism the red card” launched by the Danish Football Players Union and the NGO MIXEurope in April 2006. In that framework, professional football players visited companies to discuss racism and discrimination and to establish informal agreements for companies to increase recruitment of non-Danish nationals. The campaign further cooperated with the Danish Union of Teachers on the development of relevant teaching material. Professional football players visited schools to discuss issues relating to racism and discrimination.

The Danish Centre for Culture and Development had launched a campaign entitled: “Images of the Middle East” with a view to portraying a positive image of the Middle East and developing mutual understanding. In that context, the “Images of the Middle East” Festival would be held in Copenhagen and other major Danish cities from 12 August to 20 September 2006. The Festival focused on contemporary culture and the current changes taking place in the region and comprised theatre, music, dance and cinema events, among others.

The Ministry of Integration diverted European Union funds to support a campaign for diversity in the workplace conducted by the Danish Institute of Human Rights. In 2002, the Ministry had launched an internal campaign entitled “All young people are needed” in order to promote job-specific education for young people with an ethnic background other than Danish.

Mr. MORTENSEN (Denmark) said that police councils were independent monitoring bodies composed of a lawyer and two laypersons. Formal complaints of police misconduct were submitted to the regional public prosecutor, who had the duty to forward case files to the police council and to keep the council abreast of developments. The councils were competent to request further investigation into any specific case if necessary. The regional public prosecutor must communicate the final decision to the police council, which had the power to appeal that decision.

Mr. ENGBERG (Denmark) said that, pursuant to the Aliens Act, persons holding residence permits as foreign spouses normally lost their legal right of residence in Denmark on separation. However, the Act contained special provisions governing cases where the separation had resulted from domestic violence. In such cases, foreign spouses who had resided in Denmark for more than two years could obtain a permit to remain in the country. There were no restrictions as to the kind of evidence that must be produced to substantiate allegations of spousal violence. The Government was currently engaged in dialogue with relevant NGOs to establish whether those regulations might be too restrictive.

Mr. VINTHEN (Denmark) said that the licence of Radio Oasen had been extended until March 2007 on the condition that programmes must not express attacks or incite hatred against specific groups in society. The same conditions had applied to the previous licence and no complaints of violations had been received since 2002.

Mr. MORTENSEN (Denmark) said that Denmark valued the right to freedom of expression and imposed few restrictions on political and social debate. However, the Government considered that there was a need to provide legal protection against discrimination. Therefore, section 266 (b) of the Criminal Code prohibited the dissemination of racist statements or racist propaganda. There was ample case law illustrating the implementation of that provision. Section 140 of the Criminal Code afforded protection against the most serious offences of blasphemy. Since its adoption in 1930, only three cases involving alleged Section 140 violations had been brought to court.

With regard to the cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed published in a Danish newspaper, he said that the Director of Public Prosecutions had found that the cartoons did not amount to a violation of section 266 (b) or section 140 of the Criminal Code. That decision was based on detailed and thorough analysis of each of the drawings, which the Director of Public Prosecutions considered did not meet the requirements set forth in either of the aforementioned provisions.

Mr. VINTHEN (Denmark) said that his delegation had provided members with further information about the Thule case, which he hoped would answer Mr. Thornberry’s questions.

Ms. JØRGENSEN (Denmark), replying to a question from Mr. Sicilianos at the previous meeting, said that, since 2002, the Government had granted residence permits only to asylum-seekers who would be at genuine risk of incurring the death penalty or suffering torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment if they returned to their home countries. The main difference between the earlier “de facto” status and the new “protection” status was that asylum-seekers were unlikely to gain the right to remain in Denmark merely because they had escaped from a war in their own country.

Mr. ENGBERG (Denmark) said that the situation of asylum-seekers whose claims had been rejected had given rise to debate within the country in recent months. Claims were usually decided in about eight months, but rejected applicants who disputed the decision might stay in an asylum centre for much longer. People in that situation now received services such as education on the same basis as those whose applications were still being considered. In particular, adults received vocational training in subjects such as carpentry or information technology, which would help them when they returned to their own countries, and children received education in their mother tongue and took part in clubs and activities. In the light of an independent consultants’ report submitted in 2005, the Government had allocated the sum DKr 37 million to improvements in the conditions of asylum-seekers.

Mr. MORTENSEN (Denmark), referring to a question about an individual communication (No. 34/2004, Gelle v. Denmark, document CERD/C/68/D/34/2004), said that the Government had not yet decided what action to take in response to the Committee’s finding in favour of the petitioner. It would respond by the deadline, 11 September 2006.

Section 26 of the Liability for Damages Act provided for “compensation for injury to feelings or reputation”. However, the offence involved had to be of a serious nature: for example, compensation had been refused in a case where an individual had been denied entry to a discotheque, but had been awarded - on appeal - in a case where another individual had been subjected to racist statements.

Ms. HOLSE (Denmark), replying to members’ questions about education for minority groups, said that there were currently 60,000 children in Denmark - 10 per cent of all schoolchildren - whose mother tongue was not Danish. Half of them received support in learning the Danish language. In Copenhagen, one schoolchild in three had a mother tongue other than Danish. The Government had adopted guidelines on compulsory language stimulation for bilingual preschool infants: members had expressed concern that minority languages were banned in day-care centres whereas, in fact, the guidelines stressed the value of staff feedback in a child’s mother tongue in helping him or her to learn Danish.

Members had asked about the practice of sending children whose mother tongue was not Danish to schools other than their local school. That was done only after an assessment of the individual child’s needs and when the alternative school had particular benefits to offer, such as relevant expertise or bilingual teachers. There were plans to use bilingual teaching more extensively in the Folkeskole (public school for ages 7-16 years). New guidelines for the teaching of Danish as a second language were due to be published in the autumn of 2006, and an evaluation was planned for 2006/07.

The system for training teachers had been reformed in April 2006. All children would henceforth receive language stimulation, and the teaching of Danish as a second language was now a compulsory part of the teacher-training curriculum.

Ms. THOMSEN (Denmark) provided information on Greenland, a self-governing territory of Denmark. Some 50,000 people - 80 per cent of Greenland’s population - spoke the Inuit language, Greenlandic (Kalaallisut), as their mother tongue. In the Home Rule parliament, all but 2 of the 31 members of parliament, and all 8 of the ministers, were mother-tongue Greenlandic speakers. The use of Greenlandic in the administration of public affairs was encouraged. The language was widely used and could not be considered endangered. Recent educational reforms were intended to increase pupils’ awareness of Greenlandic and Inuit culture.

Greenlandic was one of a number of Inuit dialects spoken around the Arctic region. They had often been written down for the first time by missionaries, or influenced by the prevailing political system, and the written forms therefore varied greatly. There were two main writing systems: the Roman alphabet and a system called “syllabics”, developed in Canada. The interests of the Inuit peoples were represented by the Inuit Circumpolar Conference, a non‑governmental organization in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council.

Mr. LARSEN (Denmark), speaking on the integration councils (paragraph 14 of the periodic report), said that the Council for Ethnic Minorities (Rådet for Etniske Minoriteter) was the national body, while integration councils operated at the municipal level. There were currently 63 integration councils, covering 23 per cent of municipalities, although more were expected to be founded after the forthcoming restructuring of the municipalities. There had been no formal evaluation of integration councils, although the Council for Ethnic Minorities and the Ministry of Internal Affairs considered them very valuable and encouraged their establishment in as many municipalities as possible.

Members had asked about the “integration contract” which immigrants were expected to sign. The integration contract was an administrative agreement which entitled the immigrant to free Danish language teaching and employment training. Refusal to sign the contract did not affect the person’s right to live in Denmark, but would delay the issuing of a permanent residence permit.

Some members had questioned the use of the terms “Western” and “non-Western” in the periodic report. That classification was used purely for statistical purposes. Most resources were targeted at non-Western immigrants, since they generally suffered more difficulties in education and employment.

Refugees were allocated housing in an equitable and expedient manner, bearing in mind the need to prevent the segregation of foreigners and to promote their integration into society. Whereas in the past they might have been placed in temporary accommodation for up to two years, currently every effort was made to provide them with permanent housing as soon as possible.

Refugees were distributed equally among municipalities according to a quota system; they could request a specific municipality and if there was room in the quota the request might be granted. They could also cite special circumstances such as family ties to a specific municipality or employment, even if there was no room left in the particular municipality’s quota. The system helped municipalities budget their resources and promoted integration. Refugees could, however, decide to settle in a different municipality from that recommended and could request the municipality to assume responsibility for their introduction programme; if the municipality refused and the refugees moved anyway, there could be consequences for their introduction allowance and residency permit. Even if a municipality did not accept responsibility for his or her introduction programme, the immigrant still had full access to the labour market and health care.

The introduction programme lasted up to three years and immigrants retained eligibility for all social benefits after the programme ended. Review of the introduction programme had showed it to be very successful in encouraging immigrants to stay in the community to which they had been assigned, although some major centres still attracted many immigrants and had areas where more than 40 per cent of the population were foreign-born. Individuals living in those areas tended to be more isolated from the labour market and wider Danish society as a whole. He stressed that although there were no ghettos in Denmark currently, the Government’s introduction programme was aimed at combating any trend towards ghettoization.

The Council for Ethic Minorities played an active role in helping municipalities increase the effectiveness of their measures to meet the needs of immigrants and manage the introduction programme. The Minister of Internal Affairs met at least every three months, or as necessary, with the Council as well as with ethnic groups to discuss integration issues. A similar process occurred at the municipal level between the municipal authorities and local integration councils.

Mr. TAASBY (Denmark) said that, as noted in the report (para. 132), the higher unemployment rate for persons of foreign origin could be explained by factors such as a lack of skills or experience or even incentive to seek employment. Relatively few statistical data were available in that regard, although some surveys had been undertaken by the Public Employment Service. He noted that five information centres had been established in 2004 to provide free counselling and skills analysis to immigrants; funding for those centres was guaranteed until 2007. The centres also provided counselling and information to municipal and Public Employment Service employees.

Mr. SHAHI said the State party clearly took its human rights obligations seriously, and welcomed the important role played by the Danish Institute for Human Rights. However, noting the concerns expressed by the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), in its third report on Denmark, about the worsening situation with regard to Muslims in the country, he wondered whether the State party was considering measures to implement the ECRI recommendation that article 266 (b) of the Criminal Code be strengthened with a view to preventing hate speech. In that regard, he welcomed the clear statement by the Prime Minister of Denmark in March 2006 but said that, if a similar statement had been made earlier, that would have helped limit the damage done to relations between the Muslim world and Denmark.

He urged the State party to reconsider the incorporation of international human rights instruments, in particular the Convention, into its national legislation, as also recommended by ECRI. He wondered whether the decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions regarding the caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed would have been different if the Convention had been part of domestic law. He also underscored that the legal provisions relating to defamation applied to historical as well as to contemporary figures.

Mr. YUTZIS took note of the delegation’s explanations about paragraph 139 of the report but said the wording of the paragraph could have a negative connotation; it would be preferable to say that 29 per cent of immigrants were from Western countries, rather than highlighting the large proportion of non-Western immigrants. He welcomed the State party’s recognition of the need to prevent the ghettoization of immigrants and its introduction of a bill in that regard

(para. 149). He also noted the important role played by the Danish Institute for Human Rights in protecting human rights in Denmark and commended the State party for the active participation of the Institute in the Committee’s consideration of its periodic report.

The State party should undertake further research in four areas: the degree of participation by new arrivals in the everyday life of Danish society; the reasons for and consequences of segregated housing for immigrants; the reasons for the trend towards ghettoization, which was a barrier to integration, such as the sense of shared identity with neighbours; and the reasons for the elevated school dropout rates among ethic minorities, including possible links with discrimination. That research should take an interdisciplinary and intercultural approach and include representatives from all minority groups.

Mr. PILLAI said the State party should continue to strongly support the Danish Institute for Human Rights. The participation of national human rights institutions in the work of the various human rights treaty bodies was a welcome development which should be encouraged.

Mr. THORNBERRY said that although he agreed to some extent that, as stated in the report (para. 54), incorporation of the Convention into domestic law would be only symbolic since its provisions were reflected in various domestic instruments, symbols were nevertheless powerful and incorporation would increase awareness of the need to eliminate racial discrimination. It was especially important that agents of the State, such as the police, the judiciary and prosecutors, should be fully aware of the principles enshrined in the Convention, when for example taking decisions on whether or not to prosecute incidents involving hate speech. In that regard he recalled that the Convention’s treatment of the issue of racial discrimination was exceptionally thorough.

The CHAIRPERSON, speaking in his personal capacity, invited the State party to review the Committee’s general recommendation XXII on refugees and displaced persons, XXIII on rights of indigenous peoples, XXVII on discrimination against Roma, and in particular XXX on non-citizens and XXXI on the prevention of racial discrimination in the administration and functioning of the criminal justice system.

Mr. AMIR (Country Rapporteur) welcomed the State party’s obvious commitment to the elimination of racial discrimination and commended the Prime Minister for his expression of solidarity with the Muslim community. The State party’s commitment to solidarity with the peoples of the world was evidenced by its role as one of the most generous development partners of the developing countries, in particular the least developed countries.

The rights of minorities pursuant to international instruments were respected by the State party and he recalled the responsibility of immigrants to likewise respect their rights and obligations with regard to their host State. The important role played by the Danish Institute for Human Rights in the decision-taking process relating to minority policies and policies to put an end to racial discrimination provided an example for the entire world. He was sure the positive tenor of the Committee’s dialogue with the State party would be reflected in its concluding observations.

The meeting rose at 1 p.m.