COMMITTEE ON THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION CONSIDERS REPORTS OF SWEDEN
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has considered the seventeenth and eighteenth periodic reports of Sweden on how that State party is fulfilling its obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Carl-Henrik Ehrenkrona, Director-General for Legal Affairs in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Sweden, introducing the report, said that, in Sweden, as in many other countries, racial discrimination remained an area of concern, despite attempts to counter it. Recently, some indications pointed to an increase in racist attitudes and expression. The latest report on hate crime from the National Council for Crime Prevention, for instance, showed an increase in crimes motivated by xenophobia, islamophobia or anti-Semitism. The Government's initiative to tackle these trends and tendencies was the new Discrimination Act of June 2008. The Ombudsman offices were also being merged into one single national authority, called the Ombudsman against Discrimination. As a result of the Government's policy, remarkable improvements had been realized in the labour market, with participation of the foreign-born population, as well as other marginalized groups.
In preliminary concluding remarks, Anwar Kemal, the Committee Expert serving as country Rapporteur for the report of Sweden, welcomed, among others, the adoption of the National Action Plan for Human Rights, 2006-2009, with a focus on discrimination; the adoption of the new Discrimination Act; and the new Aliens Act of 2006, which provided for the right of appeal to an independent body, increased oral hearings, and extended the scope of the definition of refugees to include women fleeing from gender based violence. However, the plight of the Sami was noted as unfinished business and a complex one. Other areas of weakness noted included the fact that the Government did not ban hate organisations; that partial prejudice was present in the practice of the judiciary, specifically with regard to expression of rights in a language other than Swedish; that immigrants and minorities experienced hindered access to health and employment services; and that the Roma had not derived the same benefits as the native Swedes, and as such required special attention.
Questions raised by Committee Experts included precise figures on the ethnic composition of the population; that few hate crimes had led to actual prosecutions, as well as the lack of statistical information on prosecutions and penalties imposed for such crimes; an increase of racist crimes, racist propaganda and White Power music which was being spread openly, targeting vulnerable groups of youth; the lack of implementation by certain universities of the Act on Equal Treatment of Students; and disputed land rights of the Sami.
The Committee reviewed the report of Sweden over two meetings and will issue its concluding observations and recommendations at the end of the session on 15 August.
Sweden is one of the 173 States parties to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and is obligated to submit periodic reports on implementation of the provisions of the Convention. It is also one of the 53 States parties who have recognized the competence of the Committee under article 14 of the Convention to consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals claiming to be victims of a violation by States parties of any of the rights set forth in the Convention.
Sweden's delegation, which presented the report, also included representatives from the Swedish Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Justice, Integration, and Equality Affairs; as well as representatives from the Office of the Parliamentary Ombudsman and from the Permanent Mission of Sweden to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
When the Committee reconvenes on Friday, 15 August at 3 p.m., it will adopt its annual report and make public its concluding observations on the reports of States parties considered over the past three weeks, before publicly closing its seventy-third session.
Report of Sweden
The seventeenth and eighteenth periodic reports of the Sweden, submitted in one document (CERD/C/SWE/18), notes that more than 1.1 million people, or slightly more than 12 per cent of the country's population of 9 million, were born in another country. In addition, about 340,000 people were born in Sweden with two foreign-born parents. The Swedish immigration population is divided into three groups, of which 24 per cent were born in other Nordic countries, 17 per cent were born in Europe outside the Nordic countries and 59 per cent were born outside of Europe (including those whose country of birth is unknown). Sweden does not keep official statistics on people's ethnic origins other than citizenship and country of birth. As a main rule, under the Swedish Personal Data Act 1998, processing personal data that identify race, ethnic origin or religious belief is prohibited.
Sweden has undertaken legal reforms and outlined strategies to combat racism and discrimination. Under amendments that took effect on 31 March 2006, the Swedish Migration Board shall have original jurisdiction to rule on cases under the Act on Special Control in Respect of Aliens. Migration Board decisions in deportation cases may be appealed to the Government. Appeals must be submitted to the Migration Board, which is required to swiftly refer the matter to the Migration Court of Appeal. The new regulations strengthen rights of due process for the individual. Impediments to execution of a deportation order, such as the risk that the person will be subjected to the death penalty, corporal punishment or torture or other inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, are also more clearly considered in that the Government is bound by the opinion of the Migration Court of Appeal, as it must in such cases order that a deportation order cannot be executed until further notice. Moreover, since 2003, Swedish police and prosecutors have consistently prioritized hate crimes. The effort is on a broad front and covers everything from initiatives against unlawful discrimination in places of public entertainment to actions aimed at inducing estate agents and renters of commercial premises not to provide premises to e.g. Nazi organizations. Furthermore, on 9 March 2006 a National Action Plan for Human Rights 2006-2009 was submitted to the Riksdag (Parliament). The Action Plan contains a clear focus on measures against discrimination.
Presentation of Report and Response to Written Questions Submitted in Advance
CARL-HENRIK EHRENKRONA, Director-General for Legal Affairs in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Sweden, introducing the report and responding to written questions submitted in advance, said that the commitment of Sweden to uphold and respect its international human rights obligations remained unchanged. Promoting and respecting human rights was an important task for the Government, and also traditionally constituted a cornerstone of Sweden's foreign policy. The new Government had recently submitted a communication to Parliament on human rights in Sweden's foreign policy that identified the prevention of all forms of discrimination, racism and xenophobia as one of the central priorities. Preventing and effectively combating all forms of discrimination also constituted a main objective of Sweden's National Action Plan for Human Rights for the years 2006-2009. The National Plan included a long list of concrete actions that the Government planned to undertake in order to tackle discrimination and other human rights problems more effectively. Sweden also attached great importance to the reporting procedures and the regular hearings of the Committee and other human rights bodies, where dialogue, regular and constructive scrutiny by the Committee, and by concerned domestic parties, were crucial elements.
In Sweden, as in many other countries, racial discrimination remained an area of concern, despite attempts to counter it, Mr. Ehrenkrona noted. Recently, some indications pointed to an increase in racist attitudes and expression. The latest report on hate crime from the National Council for Crime Prevention, for instance, showed an increase in crimes motivated by xenophobia, islamophobia or anti-Semitism. Between 2005 and 2007 the number of such reported hate crimes rose from 2,400 to 2,800 annually. According to the National Council for Crime Prevention, this increase had been explained, to some extent, by the efforts of the police authorities to encourage victims of hate crimes to report the crime. There were, however, also reasons to believe that the figures reflected an actual increase in hate crime as well. These indications gave cause for serious concern.
Mr. Ehrenkrona identified the Government's most extensive initiative to tackle these trends and tendencies as the Discrimination Act, which was adopted by the Riksdag (Parliament) in June 2008, and which would enter into force on 1 January 2009. The new Act merged the current seven civil acts on discrimination regarding different areas of society and different grounds of discrimination in a single piece of legislation. The current four Ombudsmen against discrimination on different grounds, including the Ombudsman against Ethnic Discrimination, would also be merged into a single national authority, called the Ombudsman against Discrimination. That would ensure more effective and powerful monitoring of compliance with the Act.
The Discrimination Act included protection for the five previously protected grounds of discrimination: ethnic affiliation (which included racial discrimination); gender; sexual orientation; religion or belief; and disability. It also added two new grounds; age and gender identity. The Act also introduced protection in areas not previously covered by the legislation. The most important example was the general prohibition against discrimination for employees in the public sector. Mr. Ehrenkrona also underlined the importance of deterrent damages in cases of discrimination and changes that had been introduced in that respect, intended to substantially raise the level of damages awarded.
The damages awarded to victims of discrimination in the Member States of the European Union had recently been compared by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights as an indicator of the effectiveness of the legislation for fighting ethnic discrimination. Mr. Ehrenkrona said that, based on that indicator, Sweden and seven other countries were found to have implemented relatively effective legislation.
In Sweden, the Ombudsmen against Discrimination had 32 cases of discrimination pending in the courts. Of those, 26 cases fell under the scope of the Prohibition of Discrimination Act, and included cases of discrimination in nightclubs, housing, health care, social services, employment services and other goods and services. Of the six remaining cases, five were related to the Act on Measures against Ethnic Discrimination in Working Life and one was related to the Act Prohibiting Discriminatory and Other Degrading Treatment of Children and Pupils. Mr. Ehrenkrona added that, in one of the cases pending, the Ombudsman was arguing that a woman was a victim of multiple discrimination on the grounds of ethnic affiliation, gender and age.
Addressing concerns raised by the Committee with regard to the dismissal of a majority of complaints received by the Ombudsman, Mr. Ehrenkrona noted that, according to the Ombudsman against Discrimination, the primary reason for dismissing a complaint was lack of evidence. In some of the cases the Ombudsman suspected that the complainant had been discriminated against, but had not been able to establish enough facts or evidence to support a discrimination case, even when the shift of the burden of proof in favour of the claimant was applied. In many other cases, though, the lack of evidence had been explained by the fact that complaint actually was unfounded. Either there had not been less favourable treatment or the less favourable treatment apparently had no connection at all with the complainants' ethnicity or religion.
The average time the Ombudsman spent investigating a case had been more or less constant in recent years – under fourth months – which was considered acceptable. For 2007 to 2009, the Ombudsman against Discrimination had been allocated 10 million krona in additional funding annually, primarily to employ additional staff. The average investigation time had then increased to about six months in 2007. According to the Ombudsman, that was primarily related to new, more thorough, investigation routines in order to find evidence of discrimination in more cases. It was too early to tell what the impact of the new routines was.
Mr. Ehrenkrona noted that the Swedish Government greatly appreciated the work of committed non-governmental organizations against racism and xenophobia. While the legal obligations under the Convention naturally fell on the State as a subject of international law, that work could not have been successful without the contribution of such agencies. That thinking had given way to a new comprehensive approach regarding State funding for non-governmental organizations. Previously, a small number of organizations received more or less marked funding. On 1 April 2008 the new the Ordinance on State Grants for Activities that Prevent and Combat Discrimination came into effect, which aimed to make sure that Swedish Integration Board granted funds to the projects expected to give the greatest long-term effects.
With regard to the collection of hate crime data, Mr. Ehrenkrona noted that the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights had not only investigated the damages awarded, but also the Member States' collection and publication of comprehensive and reliable data on racist crime. In this respect the Swedish collection system was regarded, together with the systems of the United Kingdom and Finland, as the most comprehensive and progressive system in the EU. Further, hate crime data was collected from a computerized reporting system. A list containing about 265 specific search terms was used to automatically search for and identify police reports that contained a hate crime motive. Approximately 27,000 police offence reports were selected by means of that process for the year 2006. They were reviewed and assessed manually by two research analysts at the National Council for Crime Prevention.
Training in recognizing and dealing with hate crime was already established as an important part of the training at the Police College noted Mr. Ehrenkrona. Training and education was also necessary throughout society as whole. In 2007, the National Council for Crime Prevention published two instruction manuals for teachers that provided advice on to work towards changing and rebutting xenophobic and homophobic attitudes in schools. In addition, the Swedish police closely watched organizations whose members were engaged in racist activities.
With regard to Swedish policy on migration and integration, Mr. Ehrenkrona said that Sweden had a long history of recognizing its status as a country of immigration. Immigration had increased significantly, for instance, between 2005 and 2006, when a 47 per cent increase had been recorded. In 2006, almost 100,000 people had immigrated to Sweden and the number was about the same in 2007. The high rate of immigration in 2006 was explained by the temporary Asylum Act, which had come into effect that year. In 2007, the high numbers were explained by the immigration of close relatives to persons granted resident permits under the temporary Act; an increased number of asylum-seekers from certain countries, particularly from Iraq; and increased immigration from countries in the European Union.
The Government believed that the best path towards integration was through employment and knowledge of the Swedish language, Mr. Ehrenkrona continued. The Government's response to increased immigration was to strengthen Sweden's integration policy, focusing on combating exclusion by creating favourable conditions for employment and promoting the “work first policy”, which rewarded individuals from foreign backgrounds for working or starting up their own businesses.
As a result of the Government's policy, remarkable improvements had been realised in the labour market, with participation of the foreign-born population, as well as other marginalized groups. During the first quarter of 2007, the number of employed people in the 15 to 74-age group had increased by 97,000 persons, or 2.1 per cent, compared with the same period in 2006. The increase was particularly significant among the foreign-born population, representing an increase in 35,000 persons or 6.1 per cent. During the same period, the employment rate among the foreign-born people in the 15 to 74 age group was 57.8 percent compared with 68.2 per cent among the Swedish-born population. The persistence of this gap was worrying noted Mr. Ehrenkrona. Three different studies in 2006 and 2007, all using situation testing, had concluded that the difference, to some extent, was due to discrimination. The Government believed that the new Anti-Discrimination Act and other measures introduced would close that gap.
On the question of national minorities, especially the Sami and the Roma population of Sweden, Mr. Ehrenkrona said that, because of legal restrictions on gathering statistics by ethnicity, it was not possible to provide complete statistical information concerning the national minorities. However, the Sami Parliament had assessed the number of Samis at between 20,000 and 25,000, of whom 2,500 were involved in traditional livelihoods like reindeer herding.
Early in 2008, the Ombudsman against Discrimination had decided to take the first case of ethnic discrimination against a Sami village to court, Mr. Ehrenkrona noted. The Ombudsman claimed that the Municipality of Krokom had discriminated against the Jovnevaerie Sami village by neglecting to consult with the village regarding several building permits that influenced the Jovnevaerie reindeer pasture land. A more comprehensive study of how the Sami experienced discrimination had been completed by the Ombudsman just this summer. A national study was also going to be conducted on the health situation among the Sami in general. The reports of the Boundary Commission, the Inquiry of Sami Hunting and Fishing Rights, and the Reindeer Breeding Inquiry had been addressed in the Swedish Sami Policy bill, which was to be presented to the Parliament for adoption in March 2010.
The Swedish Government considered that ratification of International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention No. 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples remained complicated, and the Government was currently considering the matter, noted Mr. Ehrenkrona. The reason for such difficulties was that Swedish law on land rights did not concur with the provisions on such grounds in that Convention.
In 2008, there was new funding to support the development of Sami teaching materials, but difficulties had been experienced in recruiting teachers of Sami. The Swedish National Agency for Education was assigned by the Government to suggest how distance tuition in languages for children resident in Sweden was possible, which resulted in suggestions that had been presented to the Government in July 2008, said Mr. Ehrenkrona.
Mr. Ehrenkrona further noted that, in the autumn of 2006, the Government had appointed a Delegation for Roma Issues with the task of improving the situation of the Roma. The Delegation consisted of 10 members, half of whom were of Roma origin. A number of experts and a broad reference group consisting of representatives of the Roma organizations had also been appointed for permanent consultations. The Delegation was to present a final report in December 2009 with proposals on how the work of improving the situation of Roma in Sweden should continue.
Oral Questions Raised by the Rapporteur and Experts
ANWAR KEMAL, the Committee Expert serving as country Rapporteur for the report of Sweden, said that, in recent years, the composition of Sweden's population had begun to change. A small, growing percentage of the population belonged to other ethnic groups, comprising immigrants and workers form overseas, of which more than a third was of near Eastern or Arab origin. As such, when one spoke of racial discrimination, three groups were being focused on: the indigenous people known as the Sami, the Roma and the non-Nordic component of the immigrant population. It was worth examining whether those three groups were experiencing hardship, discrimination or any other impediment of an economic, cultural or legal/administrative nature.
According to the population statistics in Sweden, the largest groups of foreign-born persons in 2007 were the following: Nordics and Germans, 313,744; migrants from Poland, the former Yugoslavia, and Bosnia, 186,802; Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Lebanon, 215,154; and the rest, 72,542. Mr. Kemal observed here that it would have been more helpful if Sweden had provided more precise figures on its ethnic composition.
Sweden's efforts to combat hate crimes were welcomed, but Mr. Kemal also noted with concern that few of those reported hate crimes had led to prosecutions and that the relevant domestic legal provisions were rarely applied. It was recommended that Sweden's Office of the Public Prosecutor give priority to those kinds of crimes and that the relevant criminal law provisions be effectively applied. In addition, Sweden was requested to provide statistical information on prosecutions and penalties imposed. In that connection, the new Discrimination Act of June 2008, which would enter into force on 1 January 2009, was also welcome.
According to the United Nations Association of Sweden, Sweden was not in compliance with its obligations under article 4 of the Convention (prohibition of organizations or propaganda that spread racial hatred). Racist crimes were increasing, while racist propaganda and White Power music was being spread openly, targeting vulnerable groups of youth. Reportedly, 20 per cent of schools in Sweden were subject to racist propaganda. The United Nations Association had reported that, although 155 cases of agitation against ethnic minorities had been reported in 2007, the Attorney General had initiated measures in only six of them. The Association believed that requirements in the complaints mechanism had hampered complete access to effective remedies. Another problem was that the Attorney General was the sole prosecutor for offences concerning ethnic discrimination, Mr. Kemal said.
Mr. Kemal noted that certain universities were not implementing the the Equal Treatment of Students in Higher Education Act, and Sweden was requested to provide an assessment of the implementation of the new Act.
Another concern noted by Mr. Kemal was that the Swedish Constitution did not specifically recognize the Sami as an indigenous people, although Sweden had acknowledged their status as such. Given that the issue of the disputed land rights was a source of great concern to the Sami, the Committee recommended that Sweden define the boundaries of the reindeer breeding areas and introduce adequate legislation, in consultation with the Sami people, regarding the findings of the Boundary Commission, in order to remove the legal uncertainty relating to Sami land rights. Furthermore, according to reports received from the Sami, only minor areas of administrative responsibility had been transferred to the Sami Parliament. A Nordic expert committee in 2005 had submitted a draft for a Nordic Sami Convention. Sweden was asked to provide clarification on whether there had been any forward movement on that draft in the past two years.
On the Roma, Mr. Kemal, noting that, in November 2001, the Government had given the Ombudsman against Discrimination the task of conducting a two-year project to prevent discrimination against the Roma. Approximately 30 to 40 complaints by Roma were received annually, with between 5 to 10 cases such brought to court annually by the Ombudsman or resolved through a settlement. It was further noted that in most cases the lawsuits had attracted media attention which had in turn attracted new complaints from other victims of discrimination. That was important because historically the Roma were reluctant to report incidents of discrimination owing to a lack of knowledge and mistrust of State authorities. He also noted that it was encouraging that the Living History Forum had launched a special Roma initiative aimed at disseminating knowledge about that community.
Mr. Kemal said that, although Sweden was trying hard to address the situation of discrimination against foreign-born persons and ethnic minorities as a priority, discrimination persisted. Persons of immigrant origin had lower rates of employment, especially women. Immigrants also often lacked information about access to health care, and housing remained a serious problem for many. There was no doubt that Sweden would pursue and intensify its efforts in all these areas, including employment, housing, health and equal access to justice presently hampered by non-availability of interpreters. The participation of civil society during the preparation of the next report was recommended.
Committee Experts then raised questions on a number of issues, including several questions on the Sami indigenous population: did the Sami have to prove uninterrupted use of land for a period of 90 years to obtain land rights; what had been the results of the Inquiry on Hunting and Fishing in Sami territories; and did the Sami enjoy the right to study their ethnic languages. Many Experts also noted concern the high number of cases received from victims of discrimination which had been rejected because of lack of evidence; they noted that it was especially important in these cases to ensure the reversal of burden of proof, especially in cases involving housing and employment.
Further questions involved concerns about the increase in ultra racist and radical movements and their activities, and whether Sweden had an explanation for their proliferation. Also, regarding the judiciary and law enforcement, how were the various posts distributed? Was the quota system taken into account, specifically with respect to national minorities?
Response by Delegation to Oral Questions
In response to questions and concerns just raised, the delegation noted that, with regard to disseminating information on combating racism, documents had been published on the Government of Sweden's Human Rights website, which had had over 1.5 million of visitors in 2007. The Government continued to explore methods to communicate with the population and find new ways to inform the public on the developments of policies and practices of the Government.
With regard to criminalizing racist organizations, the delegation was doubtful that prohibiting such organizations constituted the best means to combat those values. The best way to address the issue was for the Government to react when racist acts were committed. Considering racial motives as an aggravating circumstance was noted as an effective measure Sweden had taken in this regard. It was further noted that racist groups were often very loose in structure, which meant that they were both hard to target with legislation and also were able to easily re-structure if banned. Such groups or organisations had also easily transformed into underground groups, making them yet more difficult to control and posing a larger danger to society. Criminal policy had developed since Sweden had acceded to the Convention, and in that light Sweden took the view that its obligations were met under article 4 of the Convention.
On the new Discrimination Act 2008, the delegation said that, to make anti-discrimination legislation more effective, the Government had consolidated the existing seven pieces into one single piece of legislation, which would come into effect in 2009. Ethnic affiliation, religion or belief, gender or sexual orientation, disability, age and gender identity comprised the areas covered under the new Act. The new Act applied to, among others, working life, businesses, professional organizations, public meetings and events, social welfare services, employment insurances, and compulsory military and civilian service. The new Act extended the scope in those areas and covered new areas that were not previously covered. For example, the new Act extended coverage to include not only employees, but also job applicants; the entire education system was covered regardless of the provider or level of education; and it also applied to all public service employees.
Regarding the burden proof, the delegation said that there were already provisions that provided a shift in the burden of proof if an individual brought a case alleging he/she had been discriminated against.
The Ombudsman against Discrimination had been established to combine all the current Ombudsman offices into one unit, with a broad mandate to work on discrimination, the delegation explained. . The first year of that new office's findings would be presented in the next periodic report of Sweden.
Concerning hate crimes, and alleged discrimination in the judiciary and law enforcement, and specifically with regard to reports received United Nations Association of Sweden, the delegation said that a number of studies had been conducted on this issue. All the studies had indeed found evidence of racial discrimination, and that discrimination was found at all levels of the justice system. In 2006, the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention had been mandated to investigate how individuals of a non-Swedish backgrounds were discriminated against in the criminal justice system and had recommended concrete measures to combat such discrimination, including the active recruitment of individuals with a non-Swedish background to positions within the justice system; improvement of education and training programmes in the judiciary; an increase in interpreters in various languages; closer ties with organizations that represented these individuals; and a review of anti-discriminatory legislation and the outcomes of the Ombudsman office.
Further Oral Questions Posed by Experts
In a second round of questions, a couple of Experts raised concerns that non-governmental organizations working to combat discrimination would have their funding cut under the new funding structure of the Government. An Expert, reverting to article 4 issues, noted that the judiciary had a very important role to play in the context of combating hate speech and organizations that spread racial hatred. A penalty should be imposed when freedom or expression became hatred and that had to be in conformity with the image that Sweden enjoyed in the world – a leader in democracy and famous for solidarity for justice.
Replies by the Delegation
With regard to the statistics on ethnicity, the delegation said that, as had been explained, for historical reasons Sweden did not collect such statistics. Despite the obvious advantage of such a system in providing guidance in formulating plans and programmes to combat racism, that law would not change. Moreover, when consulted about the possibility of such statistics gathering, Sweden's Roma community had strongly opposed being so registered. Nevertheless, Sweden had statistics on the country of birth of its inhabitants, which had been used to replace ethnic statistics.
As to situation testing and anonymous job applications, the delegation said that the National Action Plan for Human Rights included Sweden's intentions to implement national goals in that regard. Situation testing was one measure used with regard to the burden of proof. Situation testing was a useful tool in understanding the issues of discrimination. It involved a minority tester and a majority tester. In a situation test in the labour sphere, where job applications were sent out, on average a majority tester needed four applications to get one positive response, whereas the minority tester had to apply ten times to receive a positive test. The International Labour Organization's situation testing had been one proven tool in this area.
On the situation of the Sami, the delegation said that the Swedish Constitution did not include specific rights for the Sami. However, in 2004, a Constitutional inquiry was launched on the provisions for the Sami, which was set to conclude in December of 2008. When the Government acceded to international instruments protecting indigenous rights, the Sami people had declared their wish to be considered under those instruments.
On the issue of land disputes on reindeer pastures, it had been decided in 2006. The alleged property owners suit was dismissed and the courts had found the Sami community to be the rightful owners of the land. No legal disputes on land had occurred since 1998, and there were no indications that further legal action had been taken. In that connection, the Sami had the same right to legal aid as any other Swedish person. The cases of reindeer pastures were costly and the burden of proof was on the Sami communities, which was a heavy burden to carry.
The report of the Ombudsman on the Sami communities, completed in July 2008, had concluded that the Sami were discriminated against in all levels of society. It recommended, among others, that constitutional protection was necessary for the Sami's; and that the Sami needed more effective participation in the decision-making process in cases affecting them. The report was part of the Government's ongoing effort to address the issue, which was a priority for the Government.
Concerning the Roma population, the delegation said that the Government had put together a delegation on Roma issues, which had an important role to play in the development of the situation of the Roma. In spring 2008 a working group on educational issues had been created, which included educational agencies and Roma representatives. Sweden hoped that the working group would deliver proposals on how to improve the education system for Roma children. As a consequence of the European Charter for Ethnic Languages, the five national languages of Sweden were supported in the educational system, and one pupil present in a municipality was enough to grant the option for a pupil to be educated in their mother tongue.
Further Remarks by Experts
In a third round of remarks, Committee Experts asked for details about the Swedish Migration Board, and where and how it fit into the Government bureaucracy; what was the procedure for the appointment of the Ombudsman and how was its independence assured; and expressed concern again with regard to the burden of proof placed on the Sami in land rights disputes. An Expert also noted that interpreters for legal or administrative proceedings were integral for persons of a non-Swedish background to enjoy their rights.
Further Replies by Delegation
Replying to these and other questions, with regard to the funding of non-governmental organisations, the delegations noted that the figures were the same as in previous years. However, there had been a delay in funding this year because the new ordinance did not come into effect until May 2008.
The Migration Board was a special agency dealing with immigration or examining applications for asylum and residence permits, the delegation said. It was under the purview of the Ministry of Justice.
It was a practical problem in Sweden that there was a lack of interpreters available to accommodate the new emerging languages in the country. However, the delegation noted that interpreters had been provided for individuals of a non-Swedish background who had been charged for a crime in court proceedings.
With regard to the sharing of the burden of proof in dealing with land rights, the delegation said that in some cases the Ombudsman had shared the burden of proof with the Sami.
Preliminary Concluding Observations
ANWAR KEMAL, the Committee Expert serving as country Rapporteur for the report of Sweden, in preliminary concluding observations, warmly welcomed the frank and open manner in which the delegation had conducted itself with the Committee. Measures welcomed included the adoption of the second National Action Plan for Human Rights, 2006-2009, with a focus on discrimination; the adoption of the new Discrimination Act of July 2008; the new Aliens Act of 2006, which provided for the right of appeal to an independent body, increased oral hearings, and which extended the scope of the definition of refugees to include women fleeing from gender-based violence; and the merger of the different Ombudsman institutions into a single one. The sharing of the best practices of the Roma throughout the European network would be useful. The Committee also specifically welcomed Sweden's recent ratification of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, in 2005, and of the Convention on the Rights of the Child in 2007.
Mr. Kemal noted that it was an extremely positive point that the Swedish Government had openly acknowledged that discrimination existed within its society and that new forms of discrimination were rearing their ugly heads. He also welcomed the practice of anonymous job applications, and other situation testing of discrimination.
However, Mr. Kemal noted that the plight of the Sami was unfinished business and a very complex one. The indigenous population was likely to face difficulties in carrying out traditional customs in the industrialized society of Sweden, and as such the State had to protect those rights. Sweden was an advanced country with vast resources and there was no doubt that Sweden could achieve that goal.
The lack of data was one point where the Committee was at an impasse with the delegation, Mr. Kemal concluded. However, this was not a fatal weakness, and some methods could be devised to get an accurate picture of the population. Another area of weakness was the fact that the Government did not ban hate organizations. While noting the Sweden's argument that merely banning those organizations was not enough, the fact that such repulsive organisations with hateful ideologies were granted legal standing in society remained a dilemma for the Committee, which was guided by article 4 of the Convention. Another area of weakness noted was the partial prejudice present in the practice of the judiciary, specifically with regard to expression of rights in a language other than Swedish; this lack of equality was also found in the police forces in the country. With regard to the area of health and employment services, concerns remained with respect to hindered access to such services for immigrants and minorities. Lastly, the Roma had not derived the same benefits as the native Swedes and as such required special attention.
For use of the information media; not an official record
CERD08025E