Experts of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Note Portugal’s Adoption of a National Plan to Combat Racism and Discrimination, Ask Questions on the Census and Discrimination against Roma and Persons of African Descent
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today concluded its consideration of the combined eighteenth and nineteenth periodic report of Portugal, with Committee Experts noting the adoption of the National Plan to Combat Racism and Discrimination, and asking questions on the 2019 census and discrimination against Roma and persons of African descent.
Chinsung Chung, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Portugal, said the adoption of the National Plan to Combat Racism and Discrimination made Portugal the first member of the European Union to adopt such a plan.
Ms. Chung regretted the decision made to not include racial and ethnic issues in the census, and asked what measures were in place to remediate this and gather updated and comprehensive statistics on the population’s demographic composition, including information on non-citizens. She noted that when accessing public and private services and when looking for work and being at work, Roma respondents reported the highest discrimination rates, and asked for an explanation for these findings. She also asked what steps had been taken to initiate a national dialogue regarding the colonial past aimed at renegotiating Portuguese identity by recognising and acknowledging past wrongdoings and addressing today’s lingering effects in the form of systemic and institutional racism against people of African descent.
Ms. Chung said the Committee was concerned about the prevalence of racial discrimination in Portugal. It noted the initiatives and emerging discourse on systemic racism, and was concerned about the shortcomings in addressing the legacies of the colonial past and the trans-Atlantic slave trade. Racism and racial discrimination were endemic in Portugal, particularly in law enforcement and the judiciary.
Ibrahima Guisse, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Portugal, said the Committee was concerned about the information that indicated that the excessive use of force by police officials continued and was a deep-rooted practice against people of African descent. What measures had the State taken to prevent racial profiling by the police and discrimination in the administration of justice, Mr. Guisse asked. He also asked for detailed information on specific measures taken to combat prejudices and stereotypes that led to racial discrimination of protected minorities, in particular Roma, people of African descent, migrants, asylum seekers, and refugees.
Isabel Almeida Rodrigues, Secretary of State for Equality and Migration of Portugal and head of the delegation, said she recognised the importance attached to statistics, and why the 2021 census questions were not satisfactory. Portugal was doing everything it could to obtain information. This data was fundamental so that the State was able to understand its own reality and better design public policy measures. However, the National Statistical Institute in Portugal was an administratively and technically independent body: the Government could issue it recommendations, but could not replace any decision made by the body.
Ms. Almeida Rodrigues said Portugal had promoted de-colonisation, and had welcomed all persons coming from former colonies, regardless of whether they had Portuguese citizenship, and the democratic forces that overthrew the Portuguese dictatorship had supported these de-colonisation efforts. Portugal continued to be open to dialogue, believing this was the only path it could take. The Constitution of Portugal led one to extrapolate that the State considered itself a community of citizens from diverse origins, having come together in a united political community, and established principles which included equality and non-discrimination, and drew inspiration from humanism. Portugal recognised that there was a lot remaining to be done, and a long road to travel.
The delegation said that in 2018, the Government reviewed the National Strategy for Integrating Roma Communities, extending its lifecycle and aiming to improve the situation for the Roma population. The reviewed strategy focused on five basic principles: inter-culturality, non-discrimination, public participation, community-based action, and gender equality. The education programmes for the Roma communities were rolled out in partnership with the Roma communities, including secondary school and higher education. Local action plans had been developed for integrating Roma communities, and there were inter-cultural mediators working at the municipal level.
On persons of African descent, the delegation said there were three publications aiming at raising awareness of their presence in Portugal, including one on women of African descent, one which covered the scope of historic discrimination, and a historic road map on African presence in Lisbon. A number of events had been held celebrating the presence of persons of African descent and explaining the relationship through civil society and local authorities working with young people.
Ms. Almeida Rodrigues said more had to be done to fight racism in security forces, and there was a tightening in hiring procedures, an improvement in the handbooks, and a strengthening of staffing and funding of the General Inspectorate of Home Affairs. An Observatory on Racism and Xenophobia had been established, allowing for greater production, treatment, and dissemination of knowledge on racism, racial discrimination, and xenophobia in various areas. Amendments were being made to ensure that sporting associations and clubs had greater means to combat racism and sanction its expression. Over the past 10 years, the State had delivered over 10,000 hours of training on fighting racism, including in schools, the police force, journalists, and other social groups. Training was not enough, but this showed that Portugal was committed to fighting racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, and was ready to implement all measures in this regard, relying on the Committee to recommend safe paths to this end.
In concluding remarks, Ms. Chung thanked the delegation and the national human rights institution for the honest and constructive dialogue. The Committee would prepare recommendations aimed at supporting Portugal in fulfilling its human rights obligations.
Ms. Almeida Rodrigues, in concluding remarks, said the recommendations would be looked at in the greatest detail, very seriously, and implemented as far as possible. Racism was a scourge affecting Portuguese society, a structural and integral phenomenon, and Portugal needed a better grasp, with more and better data, and it was aiming to gather this data. Once this was obtained, the phenomenon would be combatted through further national programmes and plans at various levels and in various bodies. Portugal would strive to guarantee a life free from discrimination for all, including Roma, persons of African descent, migrants, refugees and the stateless, who would see their rights fulfilled and completely protected in all areas.
The delegation of Portugal included representatives of the Ministry for Equality and Migration; the Presidency of the Council of Ministers; the Ministry of Home Affairs; the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; the Ministry of Justice; the Ministry of Youth and Sports; the Ministry of Education; the Ministry of Labour, Solidarity and Social Security; the Ministry of Housing; and of the Permanent Embassy of Portugal to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will issue its concluding observations on the report of Portugal after the conclusion of its one hundred and ninth session on 28 April. Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, while webcasts of the public meetings can be found here. The programme of work of the Committee’s one hundred and ninth session and other documents related to the session can be found here.
The Committee will next meet at 3 p.m. this afternoon to start its consideration of the combined twenty-first to twenty-fifth periodic report of the Philippines (CERD/C/PHL/21-25).
Report
The Committee has before it the combined eighteenth and nineteenth periodic report of Portugal (CERD/C/PRT/18-19).
Presentation of Report
ISABEL ALMEIDA RODRIGUES, Secretary of State for Equality and Migration of Portugal and head of delegation, said the dialogue would aid Portugal in combatting racism and discrimination. The National Human Rights Committee of Portugal, established in 2010, coordinated the drafting of the periodic reports. This Committee was made up of representatives of 22 different areas of governance. The national human rights institution had a permanent seat on the Committee as an observer.
When Portugal re-established democracy in 1976, it adopted a Constitution enshrining the principle of equality, and explicitly banning racist organizations. Fighting racism was a battle for human rights, and must be fought at home and on the international stage, where Portugal firmly supported the crucial role of the United Nations, recognising the work of the treaty bodies, the Human Rights Council, and its various mechanisms and procedures. A strong multilateral system must make all efforts to eradicate racial discrimination a priority. It was in this spirit that Portugal, in 2021, co-facilitated the General Assembly’s general declaration allowing to commemorate the anniversary of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. Portugal hoped to see progress on the adoption of a United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons of African Descent, and had worked to this end. Portugal urged all States, on the seventy-fifth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to make commitments to ensuring racial equality.
Since the last review in 2016, a number of advances had been made that deserved to be highlighted. In 2017, Parliament had adopted an act to prohibit and combat discrimination on the basis of, among others, colour, descent, and place of origin, aiming to follow up on various recommendations issued from international bodies, including the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Portugal had a Plan for Migration, aiming for respect for migrants’ rights, and promoting their reception through education, health and social protection. It had recently focused on fighting the pandemic, automatically regularising all outstanding applications by migrants and asylum seekers, and providing a model for access to vaccination and health testing by all, regardless of regular or irregular status. Portugal was the first European Union Member State to have national plans adopted, aiming to deconstruct stereotypes and ensure intersectorality on fighting racial discrimination, recognising that there was endemic and systemic racism in Portugal, and that social exclusion had increased due to a growth in hate speech and incitement to violence. Although many measures were still being rolled out, an interim assessment was being prepared.
More had to be done to fight racism in security forces, and there was a tightening in hiring procedures, an improvement in the handbooks, and a strengthening of staffing and funding of the General Inspectorate of Home Affairs. Greater transparency and scrutiny was ensured by the use of bodycams by police officers. Portugal was hosting a number of Ukrainian refugees, who received social benefits, including family allowance and the minimum social income. An Observatory on Racism and Xenophobia had been established, allowing for greater production, treatment, and dissemination of knowledge on racism, racial discrimination, and xenophobia in various areas.
Amendments were being made to ensure that sporting associations and clubs had greater means to combat racism and sanction its expression. At the end of 2023, Portugal hoped to obtain data disaggregated by ethnic origin, with the aim of characterising the diversity of persons living in the country. Over the past 10 years, the State had delivered over 10,000 hours of training on fighting racism, including in schools, the police force, journalists, and other social groups. Training was not enough, but this showed that Portugal was committed to fighting racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, and was ready to implement all measures in this regard, relying on the Committee to recommend safe paths to this end.
RAVI AFONSO PEREIRA, Office of the Ombudsman for Human Rights, said the Office had been since 1999 the national human rights institution, in compliance with the Paris Principles, and it had submitted a shadow report. The report reflected situations that were brought to the attention of the Office of the Ombudsman through complaints made by citizens. As per its mandate as a national preventive mechanism, the Office of the Ombudsman carried out regular visits to places where persons were deprived of their liberty. It was important to ensure that there was a greater level of dissemination of the national plan to combat racism and racial discrimination, and it was important to have an independent assessment of the results of this plan. There was still housing insecurity for a considerable portion of the Roma community, and it was hoped that the upcoming plan for the integration of the Roma would remedy this. There was concern for the various areas of detention of migrants, as existing areas were already at maximum capacity: there should be alternative measures for administrative detention of migrants, which should be a last resort. The Office approved of the adoption of the plan for reducing racial discrimination among law enforcement, but was concerned that this was taking place through administrative proceedings, resulting in a low number of disciplinary proceedings: there should be an increase in the number of inspectors in this regard.
Questions by Experts
CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Portugal, said the adoption of the National Plan to Combat Racism and Discrimination made Portugal the first member of the European Union to adopt such a plan. The Committee also appreciated the submission of the updated common core document, but regretted the lack of participation of non-governmental organizations and other organizations in the preparation of the State report. The Committee was concerned about the prevalence of racial discrimination in Portugal, and hoped for a constructive dialogue. It noted the initiatives and emerging discourse on systemic racism, and was concerned about the shortcomings in addressing the legacies of the colonial past and the trans-Atlantic slave trade. Racism and racial discrimination were endemic in Portugal, particularly in law enforcement and the judiciary.
On statistics and socio-economic indicators, the Committee regretted the decision made to not include racial and ethnic issues in the census, and asked what measures were in place to remediate this and gather updated and comprehensive statistics on the population’s demographic composition, including information on non-citizens? The Committee also required further information regarding economic and social indicators relating to ethnic minorities and non-citizens in the State party, particularly Roma, people of African descent, migrants, refugees, asylum seekers and stateless persons, including information on their access to health care, education, housing, and employment.
Regarding the status of the Convention in domestic law and its implementation, while taking note of paragraph 3 of the State party report, which referred to the Constitutional Court ruling 106/2016, Ms. Chung asked if there were other concrete examples where the Convention had been invoked before or applied by domestic tribunals in the State party, including in lower courts and by administrative bodies. Further, she asked for more detailed information on the human rights training for judges, prosecutors and lawyers, including information on the content of the training provided, the number of trainings carried out during the reporting period, and the number of people participating in the training.
Ms. Chung also asked the delegation to provide information on the main challenges, obstacles or reasons that would explain the underreporting of complaints for racial discrimination; information on the measures taken to strengthen the Commission for Equality and against Racial Discrimination and its impact in combatting racism in dealing with complaints related to racial discrimination; and information on the steps taken and their impact on strengthening governance integration and the territorialisation of the National Plan to Combat Racism and Discrimination, including information on any initiative implemented to raise awareness among municipal administrations on their role in addressing racism and combatting racial stereotypes. How many complaints of racial discrimination had been made by the Roma population, and what data had been compiled regarding the difficulties faced by the different ethnic groups in the country in accessing housing?
IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Portugal, said it was recognised by the delegation that there was structural racism in Portugal, as was seen in many countries. Article 240 of the Criminal Code set forth penalties for certain public acts involving racial hatred, religious hatred, and hatred based on colour, ethnic or national origin. Furthermore, the report from the national human rights institution indicated that the Commission for Equality and against Racial Discrimination and the Ombudsperson had registered an increase in the number of complaints between 2018 and 2021. Was this increase the effect of the Criminal Code? In this regard, he asked for updated information on the number of complaints, investigations carried out, trials, and convictions where article 240 was applied, and the remedies provided to victims.
Mr. Guisse also asked the delegation to provide further information on the steps taken to simplify and speed up complaint procedures related to racial discrimination, and the measures taken to broaden and facilitate access to legal aid for victims of racial discrimination, including data on the number of beneficiaries. The Inspectorate General of Home Affairs, which was the entity responsible for independent inquiries into cases of police brutality, was currently understaffed, with only 36 out of 55 posts filled, which in turn affected the filing and proceedings of the investigations. What measures was the State party implementing to remediate this situation? What measures had been taken to implement the recommendations made by the Working Group of Experts of People of African Descent to create an independent oversight mechanism to address allegations of police misconduct?
What measures had the State party taken to strengthen the mandate of the Ombudsman to discharge its mandate effectively and independently in full compliance with the Paris Principles, and did it have the mandate to receive, investigate, provide legal advice on, and prosecute individual cases of racial discrimination? What measures had been taken by the State party to prevent and combat racist hate crimes and acts of racist violence against persons belonging to ethnic minorities, in particular persons of African descent, Roma and migrants? What measures had the State party taken to combat racist hate speech and incitement to racial discrimination, including in political discourse? What measures had been taken to prevent and combat racist and xenophobic messages on the Internet? Had the State party worked with Internet providers and the media in this regard? What measures had the State party taken to protect human rights defenders and other persons belonging to civil society organizations working against racism, from any form of violence.
GUN KUT, Committee Expert and Follow-up Rapporteur, said an interim report had been expected and received in November 2017, and an evaluation sent to the State party in May 2018. Portugal was commended for its punctuality in sending this report. Portugal had been advised to provide training to police officers, security officers and the judiciary on the implementation of the Convention. Portugal had been requested to send further information on racial content in community-involvement projects by police officers. This information had been provided. The Committee had recommended that the State party continue to work on the integration of Roma communities, and the periodic report addressed the request for further information on these details. The State party had made sincere efforts to address all the issues raised by the Committee and to respond to its recommendations. The tone of the report and the interim report were satisfactory in form. Did the State party, given all these efforts, policies and initiatives, have any instruments available to evaluate their effectiveness, or was it developing these mechanisms? Having programmes was one thing, Mr. Kut pointed out, but the success of the programmes in reaching their intended consequences was another thing.
In further questions, a Committee Expert regretted that the 2021 census did not include ethnic details, as such disaggregated data was needed in order to monitor the results of targeted action, or even to determine what targeted action was required for certain groups. Realistically, for certain States, there was an ulterior motive in not providing such information, although the Expert pointed out that he was not saying this was the case in Portugal. He asked whether this was a policy in dealing with racial discrimination, or would it not be a question of politics?
What was the relationship between the Office of the Ombudsman and the Commission for Equality and against Racial Discrimination, another Expert asked. Had the mandate of the Office of the Ombudsman been broadened to cover formerly public and now privatised entities, had it conducted any investigations of private entities, and if so, how many, and what was the outcome?
On combatting hate speech, one Expert asked for more concrete information on the legal framework and instruments through which the State party addressed hate speech. How far was racist hate speech prohibited, and was it in line with the Convention; what was the situation for victims of hate speech and could they initiate administrative and judicial procedures in that regard; could information on data on hate speech be provided; and how was racist hate speech on the Internet handled, and what could victims do in this regard?
Portugal was one of the powers involved in the trans-Atlantic slave trade, and was also a colonial power, an Expert said: countries in Africa were forced to create independence movements in order to gain greater freedom and dignity. This was one of the reasons for racism and discrimination around the world. Had Portugal considered reparations for those who were still suffering the consequences of slavery and racism around the world? Had the delegation anything to say on its position as a former colonial power and the struggle against colonialism?
Regarding hate crimes, one Expert noted that there was a stable rise in the number of these recorded, and asked whether hate crimes recorded by the police included hate speech alongside other crimes; what was the State party’s assessment of this increase; and what was its policy for reducing these crimes. Another Expert raised a question regarding what was the meaning of frogs in the context of excluding members of the Roma communities from shops.
Response by the Delegation
ISABEL ALMEIDA RODRIGUES, Secretary of State for Equality and Migration of Portugal and head of delegation, said she recognised the importance attached to statistics, and why the 2021 census questions were not satisfactory. Portugal was doing everything it could to obtain information. This data was fundamental so that the State was able to understand its own reality and better design public policy measures. However, the National Statistical Institute in Portugal was an administratively and technically independent body: the Government could issue it recommendations, but could not replace any decision made by the body. Between February 2018 and April 2019, prior to the 2021 census, the Government had created a working group that was tasked with reflecting on the inclusion of ethnic considerations in the census, and with producing recommendations on the issues that should be included in the survey to accommodate how the ethnic composition was determined in Portugal.
The National Statistics Institute considered that the census was not the right time or place to consider this issue, and it suggested as an alternative that in 2022 there be a pilot project survey with a sample of 2,400 people involved, the results of which were currently being processed. This year there would be a survey of 35,000 people, ensuring that there would be a proper statistical sample, allowing for a better answer to the questions relevant for the design of public policies, including socio-demographic issues such as history, schooling, origin, including historical origin, and access to health care. The Government considered that this survey would provide a very relevant body of information.
Portugal had promoted de-colonisation, and had welcomed all persons coming from former colonies, regardless of whether they had Portuguese citizenship, and the democratic forces that overthrew the Portuguese dictatorship had supported these de-colonisation efforts. It was through this that Portugal had been able to build the Community of Portuguese-Language Countries. Portugal continued to be open to dialogue, believing this was the only path it could take.
Responding to other issues and questions, the delegation said a bill would be submitted to amend the Criminal Code to make sure that it lived up to the recommendations made by the Committee and by the Council of Europe body, which had recommended a new range of amendments on discrimination. Language, nationality, territory of origin, gender expression or sexual characteristics, level of education or social condition would all be among those factors added to the prohibition of discrimination. An extra behaviour would also be criminalised: producing, preparing, disseminating or publicising documents whose contents incited violence and hatred towards certain categories of the population. There would also be an expansion of the concept of aggravation of certain crimes. In any type of crime, the sentencing of the judges had to take into account the feelings and the motivation behind the crimes, in case these were an aggravating circumstance when sentences were handed down. The Cyber-crime law of 2009 also covered covert crime on racist or racially-based motives.
As part of the list of crimes of priority prevention were those motivated by racist, racial, or racially-motivated hatred, and the Government was working to strengthen priority prevention on crimes based on ethnic, territorial, or other origin. On case law, in addition to Constitutional Court rulings in which the Court handed down a ruling on the right to nationality, including a specific reference to the Convention, there had been two recent opinions from the Higher Judiciary Council, the governing body of the judiciary, which had handed down decisions on bills in which it referred to the impetus given to the Portuguese legal reform of 1995 by the Convention and subsequent amendments of the Criminal Code. When Portugal adopted an international instrument, it also adopted laws which would give substance to its international obligations, and Portugal adopted laws to ensure that these international obligations were respected. Thus, courts would not necessarily refer to the Convention, but rather to the relevant domestic laws giving it substance. Databases of cases online only referred to the higher courts.
The Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court had condemned a political party leader for remarks made during a public campaign about persons of African descent living in a social housing estate: the case led to the politician in question having to make a public apology and refraining from making further remarks - a cash fine would be imposed for every day that he did not observe the courts’ rulings. The Government was currently reviewing the law on access to justice, with the aim of extending coverage of legal aid on a means-tested basis. Anti-racism organizations did not have to pay court fees, the speaker pointed out, if they wished to provide victim support as civil parties in criminal proceedings concerning a discrimination case.
On the role of the Commission for Equality and against Racial Discrimination in administrative proceedings, it received complaints of racial discrimination, and could launch administrative proceedings and impose administrative fines. It also provided education and training in combatting racial discrimination, as well as preventing and punishing discrimination based on land and origin when it came to access to a range of social services and in personal conflicts, such as in cases of harassment. The new legal framework which came into force on 1 September 2017 strengthened victim protection, particularly by changing the burden of proof: whenever a report was made to the Commission containing evidence of racial discrimination, this would lead to a launch of administrative proceedings, so that the Commission would investigate without requiring further evidence being provided by the victim. Further, the proceedings for launching such investigations had been simplified. There had been an upward trend in the number of complaints received by the Commission due to an increase in the knowledge of discrimination, training and awareness raising, including among the Roma and migrant associations, and for civil servants and police officers.
There were many complaints regarding access to goods and services, followed by discrimination expressed on the Internet. In these cases, the Commission could undertake administrative proceedings if it could identify the author of the remarks, after which it could refer the case to the Prosecutor’s Office or other competent entities which could allow it to block the offending remarks. Organizations aided victims to make complaints, and also reported situations of racial discrimination themselves to the Commission.
On fighting hate speech, the Commission had undertaken a number of campaigns to raise awareness by individuals and civil society organizations, media outlets, civil servants and police officers, of the situation, and about how it was disseminated on social media. The slogan was “Freedom of speech does not mean verbal violence”. In 2018, the Commission adopted a recommendation calling upon the media to not refer to skin colour, origin, ethnic status or others in reporting on crimes that could promote stereotypes and give rise to hate speech, and whenever the Commission heard that a report in the media reported these facts and associated them with negative facts or behaviour, it invoked this recommendation and called for the information to be removed from the news item in question.
Anti-racism and other associations played a critical role, the delegation said, as did non-governmental organizations in combatting racism and racial discrimination. A working group had been established to draft a report on recommendations for public policy to combat racism and racial discrimination, resulting in the adoption of a National Plan to Combat Racism and Discrimination, which had the contributions of public hearings and the private sector. There was thus a multi-dimensional and inter-sectoral approach to racism in the plan, which was in line with other Portuguese programmes and strategies on the more vulnerable groups. It was the first such national plan that was based on knowledge of the challenges posed to Portuguese society, and it placed combatting racism and racial discrimination high on the political agenda and that of relevant stakeholders. The plan also designated a coordinating entity and a monitoring team which collected data and used advanced data analysis techniques, setting out the competencies of each of the areas of Government with regard to the various aspects of the plan. Evidence of its implementation also had to be reported.
On discriminatory practices in the judiciary and law-enforcement services, there was a working group that included three human rights officers, from the National Republican Guard, one from the border force, and a representative of the public security forces. A range of trainings would be carried out to combat racism and racial discrimination and to examine the criminal and legal consequences of such behaviour, as well as the possible discriminatory and emotional consequences for victims.
The Ombudsman’s Office was the national human rights body in Portugal. It could act on complaints, but also could take its own initiative to deal with complaints of acts by public or private bodies. The Government profoundly respected its independence, actions and reports. The annual reports produced by the Office were then submitted to Parliament, which made recommendations in line with fundamental human rights that had to be respected and upheld by the Portuguese State. This information was vital as far as the Government was concerned. There were also thematic reports produced by the Ombudsman. The principle of universality governing access to housing had to be taken into account when allocating housing, particularly when regarding access issues; there was no form of discrimination when it came to accessing public housing. The Government had recently approved a raft of programmes which aimed to, among other things, fund housing built by municipalities.
Questions by Committee Experts
CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Portugal, said she still did not have a clear idea about statistical data, but welcomed the explanation of why the census did not include racial and ethnic data. The delegation had not provided data on remedial actions on this in any upcoming census, and she asked whether the question would be included in the next census. She asked for a whole picture of the plan for disaggregated data. She also referred to the National Plan to Combat Racism and Discrimination and asked for more information, in particular how it could be implemented without accurate data. What was the mechanism of community-based approach, and how did it work?
IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Portugal, thanked the delegation for the answers provided so far.
Other Experts asked further questions, raising again the issue of the census, saying that in any part of the world information on ethnic make-up was derived from the census, which bore the stamp of officialdom. The census could not, an Expert said, on the basis of claimed independence, stymie the need of the State to obtain such information.
Another Expert referred to article 8 of the Constitution, which made international conventions that had been ratified applicable through national legislation, and asked whether these properly implemented the Convention, and how were the capacities of judges and lawyers developed to ensure that national legislation was not contrary to the provisions of the Convention?
Responses by the Delegation
ISABEL ALMEIDA RODRIGUES, Secretary of State for Equality and Migration of Portugal and head of delegation, said Portugal went through decades of dictatorship, and had had to protect itself from this trauma through new institutions, including on statistics. There was no area in Portugal that escaped oppression or the imposition placed on them by the dictatorship, and the institutions that served that dictatorship, with terrible consequences for those who sought to combat the regime. The independence of the statistical institution was a characteristic which the State thus had to confer upon an institute of such nature, and the Government could not change the decisions that it made. Given that the Government was not able to get this data through the census, this was why it had sought to find an alternative way to get information regarding its citizens through a different survey, as mentioned earlier. The Government could not replace the Office of the Ombudsman, and could not give it instructions with regard to the cases and proceedings it was involved in in the context of private institutions, Ms. Almeida Rodrigues said.
Questions by Committee Experts
CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Portugal, requested further information on the measures taken and their impact in implementing the National Roma Communities Integration Strategy, in terms of activities executed, budget and human resources allocated, and concrete results and lessons learned in its execution, including information regarding special measures implemented to combat structural discrimination against Roma. She also requested detailed information on the measures taken and their impact in implementing the 2021 collaboration protocol between Portugal's High Commission for Migration and the Public Security Police to provide training to police officers working in community police.
Ms. Chung noted that when accessing public and private services, and when looking for work or being at work, Roma respondents in Portugal reported the highest discrimination rates, with 38 per cent of respondents experiencing discrimination when accessing public and private services, another 47 per cent when looking for employment and being in the workplace, and 32 per cent reported it in accessing health services, due to their ethnic origin. She asked for an explanation of these findings.
With regard to persons of African descent, Ms. Chung asked what steps had been taken to initiate a national dialogue regarding the colonial past aimed at renegotiating Portuguese identity by recognising and acknowledging past wrongdoings and addressing today’s lingering effects in the form of systemic and institutional racism against people of African descent in Portugal. She also requested information on the measures taken, if any, and their impact in addressing housing segregation and access to health by minorities, in particular people of African descent, Roma and migrants, and information on the measures taken to ensure the protection of these groups against forced evictions or to provide them with remedial solutions.
Further, Ms. Chung requested information on the measures taken and their impact in addressing the racial discrimination in the education system and ensuring access to education for children belonging to ethnic minorities, in particular children of migrant origin, children of African descent and Roma children. With regard to intersectorality, Ms. Chung also asked for information on the measures taken and their impact in combatting the multiple forms of discrimination against minority women, in particular Roma, women of African descent, migrant women and women asylum seekers and refugees.
According to the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, 23 per cent of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transexual and intersex persons in Portugal had been physically assaulted in the last five years, and felt obliged to hide their sexual orientation and gender identity, for example at school, in the workplace, and even when dealing with healthcare personnel. In this regard, Ms. Chung requested information on any special measures or initiatives aimed at addressing multiple and intersectional discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transexual and intersex persons, and on any measures taken to address, comprehensibly, the intersectional and multiple discrimination experienced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transexual and intersex persons.
Finally, Ms. Chung took up the production of the report itself, inquiring if Portugal conducted consultations with civil society organizations for the writing and preparation of the report, and how civil society organizations were integrated into the development of programmes and strategies aimed at addressing systemic racism in Portugal, in particular on their engagement in the implementation of the Strategic Plan for Migration. She noted that the Committee did not receive any alternative reports from civil society organizations, and asked for an explanation for this, inquiring whether there were any challenges present for the engagement of these organizations on anti-racism issues.
IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Portugal, said the Committee would like to know the results of the implementation of measures to promote the social integration of migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, and stateless persons, including access to employment, education, and an adequate standard of living. He congratulated Portugal for being among the first countries to adopt the Global Compact for Migration, and asked for information on the administrative, programmatic, or public policy measures foreseen to continue implementing the goals envisioned in the plan after 2020. In this regard, he also inquired whether the State party had considered ratifying the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrants Workers and Members of Their Families.
The Committee had recommended, Mr. Guisse said, that Portugal take effective measures to prevent the excessive use of force by law enforcement officials in its previous concluding observations in 2017. The Committee was concerned about the information that indicated that the excessive use of force by police officials continued and was a deep-rooted practice against people of African descent. What measures had Portugal taken to prevent racial profiling by the police and discrimination in the administration of justice? Had any legislative or administrative measures been taken to prohibit and sanction racial profiling by law enforcement officials?
Mr. Guisse requested information on the measures implemented to prevent the excessive use of force, ill-treatment, and abuse of authority against persons belonging to ethnic minorities, in particular persons of African descent and the Roma. He also requested updated information on the new legal framework on access to justice and its impact in terms of facilitating and ensuring access to justice for victims of racial discrimination, the use of excessive force by law enforcement actors, or cases of racial profiling.
Mr. Guisse also raised the issue of frogs, and asked for detailed information on specific measures taken to combat prejudices and stereotypes that led to racial discrimination of protected minorities, in particular Roma, people of African descent, migrants, asylum seekers, and refugees, and for information on measures taken to raise awareness among the public, public officials, and law enforcement officials on the importance of cultural diversity, tolerance, and inter-ethnic understanding. Finally, he asked for information on measures taken or envisaged to promote knowledge and awareness of the cultural heritage and history of minority groups and their contribution to Portuguese society and culture.
One Expert, speaking on persons of African descent, referred to the statement by the delegation that Portugal had supported the liberation movements in its previous colonies, but pointed out that genocides committed by Portugal in its colonies had never been recognised as such. Portugal needed to acknowledge its slave-trading past, make apologies to those still affected, and set in place restorative or reparative justice.
Another Expert said that the issue of the Roma had not been addressed at length by the Rapporteurs, and this was a problem that was not exclusive to Portugal, but affected Europe. There was an European Union budget for Roma issues, and European Governments received a specific budget in order to address these, and he inquired whether Portugal received this budget. When there were racist acts perpetrated against the Roma, he inquired whether and how they could then make a complaint. Referring to slavery, he urged Portugal to acknowledge its historic responsibility, wondering what caused a country that had gone through a slavery and colonial history to not recognise its crime, perpetrated against a whole people.
Did the delegation have information on who were the victims of hate crimes, an Expert asked, pointing out that it was important to have figures on which groups were the most targeted, and asking what monitoring the State was carrying out on such attacks and aggressions.
Responses by the Delegation
ISABEL ALMEIDA RODRIGUES, Secretary of State for Equality and Migration of Portugal and head of delegation, said Portugal appreciated that the Committee recognised the work it was doing to combat racism and racial discrimination every day.
Responding to questions, the delegation said article 8 of the Constitution stipulated that ratified treaties were part of domestic law. Laws were then adopted to bring the text on board. Judges were given compulsory human rights training, including on the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. These courses were delivered by the Centre for Training of the Judiciary, and over 500 judges had taken part in over 400 hours of training on racial discrimination issues, including hate speech. Answers would be provided at a later date with regard to human rights training of police officers.
On statistics on cases of incitement to hatred as recorded by police, there was a gradual increase which reflected greater awareness of people of their rights and the prohibition of such behaviour. Some 135 cases had been referred to the Public Prosecutor’s Office in 2021, and up to 252 in 2022. There was disaggregated data on prison inmates as per nationality, but not on ethnicity.
In 2018, the Government reviewed the National Strategy for Integrating Roma Communities, extending its lifecycle and aiming to improve the situation for the Roma population. The reviewed strategy focused on five basic principles: inter-culturality, non-discrimination, public participation, community-based action, and gender equality. One of the strategic objectives was to improve the efficiency of its implementation and strengthen cultural intermediation to promote equality in measures between the sexes, promote access to education, the labour market, and adequate housing, and ensure there were positive health outcomes at all stages of life. By 2021, the implementation rate had risen to 74.22 per cent. The implementation of the strategy was monitored through an advisory body which supported the High Commission for Migration, which was the body responsible for implementation.
The education programmes for the Roma communities were rolled out in partnership with the Roma communities, including secondary school and higher education. Local action plans had been developed for integrating Roma communities, and there were inter-cultural mediators working at the municipal level.
With regard to frogs, the delegation said for the most traditional Roma communities, frogs were linked to witchcraft practices from the Middle Ages. The Roma communities that had been in Portugal for a long time tried to avoid any contact with frogs or toads for that reason. The Government had therefore undertaken knowledge campaigns and an exhibit that toured the country to raise awareness about the fact that batrachians were seen as something very negative by Roma communities.
On persons of African descent, there were three publications aiming at raising awareness of their presence in Portugal, including one on women of African descent, one which covered the scope of historic discrimination, and a historic road map on African presence in Lisbon. A number of events had been held celebrating the presence of persons of African descent and explaining the relationship through civil society and local authorities working with young people.
The Choices programme was the broadest national programme for persons from under-privileged backgrounds. It promoted initiatives for these people, using community leaders and young youth leaders who were chosen for their dynamic approach, and this year these leaders would be highlighted and how they had conveyed their message and how important the Decade for Persons of African Descent had been. A brochure would be disseminated on how communities could take up a stronger position. A cooperation protocol had been signed with the network of school libraries, promoting them and training teachers on this subject.
There would be joint initiatives that would cover the main topics of the Decade for Persons of African Descent. Work had been done with civil society organizations in this context. In 2020, efforts had been made to combat the effects of the pandemic, and to support students of African descent who were from under-privileged backgrounds. Work was also done to promote the situation and role of migrant and refugee women and women of African descent. Opportunities were given to such women to study the development of their own businesses, which had produced very interesting data on female entrepreneurship.
There was a Strategic Plan for Migration in place, in line with the Global Compact for Migration. This national plan was approved in 2019, the delegation said, strengthening Portugal’s recognition of the importance of migration. It had 23 goals. Portugal was one of the first countries to approve an implementation plan of the Global Compact. On integration measures for migrants in irregular situations, there were National Centres for the Support of Migrants, structures created to cover the different needs and challenges faced by migrants, providing a range of services for refugees and migrants, including legal support, legal aid, access to health services, and advice on inclusion. There were also local centres for supporting migrants, including advice on regularising their situation, work and integration. These local services could reflect the partnership between municipal services and other bodies, including Universities, that provided specialised care.
On education, the delegation said in 2017-2018, Portugal changed its legislation, including a student profile which underpinned its citizenship for education plan. There were 17 areas, including gender equality and inter-culturality in this plan. There was also a law on inclusion and a law on changing the curriculum to provide what Portugal called “essential learnings” in order to provide a multi-system approach that was applicable to all students. There was a profile on the Roma communities which indicated that there was a frequency rate of 72 per cent and a success rate of 78 per cent, and given these figures a recovery process had been launched. Inclusive schools made a difference for Roma children, and an external approach had been taken to improve integration and success for these children in Portuguese schools.
Portugal included Portuguese-speaking authors from the Portuguese-speaking world in the national curriculum. Colonialism, slavery and the consequences of memory had been translated into the national curriculum: children had to be aware of these notions and reflect on them. Students had to study the transgressions of the past and be aware of the colonial heritage, to combat any form of discrimination, enhance diversity, and support freedom and equality. School textbooks could contain no form of discrimination, by law, and the Ministry of Education carried out audits in this regard, ensuring that they addressed the consequences of colonialism and slavery. There was a national plan to promote culture in each and every school, including diverse cultural identity.
The greatest concentration of Roma were in and around Lisbon and Greater Lisbon, and the greatest area of precarious housing was in the South and border regions. The State did not discriminate when it came to access to public housing. However, public housing policies needed to focus on providing housing with positive discrimination criteria, as well as looking at persons suffering from domestic violence, single-parent housing, and other criteria.
On the plan to prevent any manifestation of discrimination by law or security officers, there were many different interlinked areas of the plan. Portugal was now in the second year of the plan, and progress had been made on recruitment, training, interaction with citizens, promoting the image of security and police, and preventive, mechanisms including oversight and monitoring. On racial profiling, the plan had strengthened things in that area, ensuring that at the recruitment stage personality traits, beliefs and attitudes were spotted where they clashed with human rights and racial discrimination criteria. This strengthened the existing mechanisms that existed before the plan.
There was a personality test which aimed to discover these traits, and interviews were done that included new assessments, including how far the individuals were open to new ideas or were complacent with regard to their attitudes. Aggressiveness, frustration, intolerance, radicalisation, feelings of non-acceptance and complacency were also assessed, and selection criteria were perfected to ensure the adoption of a preventive approach right from the moment of candidacy. This continued through training after employment began. This had allowed Portugal to beef up efforts to combat discrimination and unequivocally uphold human rights.
Police officers were given life-long training, including on contemporary police issues, police and diversity, gender, mental health, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex plus issues, and others. The General Inspectorate of Home Affairs carried out consciousness-raising and training on human rights. With regard to combatting prejudices and stereotypes, law enforcement officers played an important role, which could be seen through the very direct relationship with citizens through specific programmes, including a Safe Schools Programme, which played a crucial role. The National Police Force had a training system which focused on detained and other persons and took the recommendations of the Committee into consideration in this regard.
A specific guidebook had been produced for schools to combat racial discrimination, containing the input of various migrant communities, pupils, teachers, and parents, as well as persons of various levels of education that had at various times been the victims of racial discrimination. This aimed to provide teachers with the tools for tackling various forms of racial discrimination that they might encounter in a school setting. The constitutional principles of universality and non-discrimination meant that access to social justice and benefits were universal and provided to all within Portuguese territory. The Government provided social benefits, including legal aid such as legal counsel and representation, on a means-tested basis, based on income and family size, among other criteria.
Due to a common European Union position on ratification, Portugal had not ratified the Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers, the delegation said. Nevertheless, domestic law already encompassed a number of the provisions in the Convention. The International Labour Organization had a vast array of texts to protect the rights of migrant workers, and Portugal had ratified several of these.
On civil society organizations’ involvement in preparing the report, the National Mechanism for Implementation, Monitoring and Reporting had a list of over 200 non-governmental organizations, including a vast array of organizations which combatted racism, and the State used the list to inform them of the preparation of the report and the ways in which they could submit information to the Committee. The State would disseminate the Committee’s conclusions to civil society. It regularly shared information with the organizations that combatted racism. It was also national practice to debate efforts to combat racism with civil society organizations.
ISABEL ALMEIDA RODRIGUES, Secretary of State for Equality and Migration of Portugal and head of delegation, said with regard to national identity, the Constitution led one to extrapolate that the State considered itself a community of citizens from diverse origins, having come together in a united political community. The Constitution established principles which included equality and non-discrimination, and drew inspiration from humanism. Portugal recognised that there was a lot remaining to be done, and a long road to travel. The entire national and political community had shown its solidarity with victims of racial discrimination through absolute condemnation of such events.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert raised the issue of Brazilians who above all appeared to face migration problems and whether the problems were due to their nationality or the colour of their skin. Some aspects of Portugal’s colonial past had been described in school textbooks, the Expert said, but it appeared that there was a whole generation of schoolchildren who could go through schooling without learning of this past. On the adoption of specific legislation on Portugal’s past involvement in slavery, he asked what the Government intended to do in this regard.
Another Expert said that the delegation had said that school textbooks were not obligatory, and asked whether this meant that students and pupils did not have these books or did not even consult them? On access to justice, she noted that the delegation had re-stated that the international conventions were directly applicable, but asked what judges and prosecutors did in practice in order to implement them, and were they able to do so when they realised that such conventions were applicable, or could lawyers invoke them before the courts so that they would be taken into account in judgement.
Response by the Delegation
Responding to these questions and comments, the delegation said the data collected on complaints of racial discrimination contained the data provided by the victims, and should this be based on the colour of their skin, that would be invoked as a discriminatory ground. A distinction was made between the curriculum and school books: the former was everything that had to be learnt. All levels of education had areas of knowledge that must be taught and learnt, and this curriculum included colonialism and slavery; 98 per cent of schools did have the textbooks referred to, but there were other resources that could be used in order to teach the curriculum.
On the implementation of international law by the courts, the delegation said that the State was duty-bound to have the legislation in line with the ratified conventions - at the moment of ratification, national legislation was immediately in compliance with these obligations. Courts did not therefore need to invoke that instrument, as national legislation was the same. Courts did not tend to invoke these texts, but they could do so directly if they felt the need to do so.
ISABEL ALMEIDA RODRIGUES, Secretary of State for Equality and Migration of Portugal and head of delegation, said the Government was assuming its past, and looking squarely at it with a view to overcoming the consequences of this past. When it came to freedoms and guarantees in the light of the political system, this was purely in the competence of the Parliament.
Questions by Committee Experts
CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Portugal, said she still had questions with regard to whether there was a colonial legacy problem in the context of Brazilians in Portugal, and asked Portugal to consider their situation and take appropriate measures to deal with their complaints, making their community more secure and comfortable, which would make Portuguese society more peaceful in terms of racial discrimination.
IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur for the report of Portugal, thanked the country for the answers provided, saying that issues had been clarified, and figures been provided. The only comment he had was with regard to racial profiling, and he noted that there was a direct link between police violence and racial profiling, asking for clarification as to what Portugal was doing in this regard.
Another Expert asked which conventions on statelessness Portugal had adopted, and whether it had adopted a national programme to eradicate this phenomenon.
Response by the Delegation
The delegation said that Portugal had ratified both the 1954 and 1961 conventions on statelessness in 2012.
Concluding Remarks
CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur for the report of Portugal, thanked the delegation and the national human rights institution for the honest and constructive dialogue. In the next periodic review, the Committee expected a non-governmental organization report and their presence at the review. The Committee would prepare recommendations aimed at supporting Portugal in fulfilling its human rights obligations.
ISABEL ALMEIDA RODRIGUES, Secretary of State for Equality and Migration of Portugal and head of delegation, in closing remarks, said the delegation came in a frank and open spirit, ready to address all questions and concerns, even the thorniest, aiming to answer them as best it could. The recommendations would be looked at in the greatest detail, very seriously, and implemented as far as possible. The delegation had tried to be faithful in painting a portrait of how Portugal combatted racial discrimination. It was the State that was primarily responsible for combatting racism, xenophobia, and intolerance. There was a discrepancy between the goals it set itself and the cold, harsh reality of results, which often fell short of what it wished to see. An awful lot still remained to be done, as she had repeated several times.
Racism was a scourge affecting Portuguese society, a structural and integral phenomenon, and Portugal needed a better grasp, with more and better data, and it was aiming to gather this data. Once this was obtained, the phenomenon would be combatted through further national programmes and plans at various levels and in various bodies. Portugal would strive to guarantee a life free from discrimination for all, including Roma, persons of African descent, migrants, refugees and the stateless, who would see their rights fulfilled and completely protected in all areas. Abolishing dictatorship meant throwing off the yoke of colonialism, espousing a truly equal society. Portugal was currently witnessing with concern an increase in xenophobic and right-wing movements: its response had to involve better education, training, and oversight, and better sanctions, adopting an inter-sectoral approach and never forgetting economic, social and cultural rights, building a fairer and more equal Portugal.
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
CERD23.005E