Experts of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Commend Guatemala on the Academy of Mayan Languages, Raise Questions on Forced Evictions of Indigenous Peoples and Efforts to Ensure Access of Indigenous Peoples to Education
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today concluded its consideration of the combined eighteenth to twentieth periodic report of Guatemala, with Committee Experts recognising the commendable initiatives of the Guatemalan Academy of Mayan Languages, while raising questions on forced evictions of indigenous peoples and ensuring equitable access to education for Mayan, Xinka and Garifuna populations, as well as people of African descent.
Verene Albertha Shepherd, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, said the Committee had read in the State party report that the Guatemalan Academy of Mayan languages promoted the development of the Mayan languages in the country through research, standardisation and dissemination of these languages. It received money from the State budget and had more than 200 employees nationwide. What had been the practical results of these commendable initiatives?
A Committee Expert asked about cases brought to the Committee on indigenous peoples who had been thrown off their land, such as for mining projects. Many prosecutions underway were reportedly lacking transparency. Could more information be provided? Did the State plan to adopt a specific law which ensured land rights and the right to have property for these populations? What specific measures were being taken by Guatemala to ensure these rights?
Ms. Shepard said that just seven out of 10 Mayan women could read and write, with this figure dropping to six out of 10 in rural areas. Indigenous peoples aged 15 or older had on average completed just up to third or fourth grade of primary school. What was being done to ensure equal access to quality education for indigenous peoples, Garifuna communities and people of African descent? What was the impact of bilingual education measures? Was the content of education culturally relevant to the multi-cultural school population? What was being done to ensure Mayan and Xinka girls in rural areas completed secondary education?
The delegation said eviction orders were implemented when requested, when it was necessary to comply with national protocols. A mechanism was in place for crisis care management and had been designed to comprehensively address cases of eviction for indigenous communities. A mechanism was being implemented to assist families who were subject to forced displacement and evictions, to help ensure their rights were upheld. Significant efforts were being made to ensure that police were deployed as little as possible during evictions, and to create humanitarian programmes to support the affected communities. The State recognised there were numerous challenges; however, Guatemala was committed to ensuring the dignity of those affected.
The delegation said under the new administration, 12,000 teachers had been hired within the Ministry with 48 per cent of these being bilingual posts. Wages and stipends had also been raised. There were 11 million textbooks, many of which were in Mayan. Infrastructure had been improved in around 18,000 schools, with around 9,000 of them in the Mayan area, and others in the Garifuna and Xinka areas. A nationwide effort was being undertaken to ensure education covered a broader swath of the indigenous population, as well as those on the move, and those no longer in school.
Introducing the report, Licentiate Miguel Felipe Pajarito, Presidential Commissioner, Presidential Commission against Discrimination and Racism toward Indigenous Peoples in Guatemala and head of the delegation, reaffirmed Guatemala’s commitment to advancing the rights of indigenous peoples and Afro-descendent communities. The State acknowledged a longstanding historical debt and the persistence of racism and structural discrimination, which had contributed to poverty and limited development among indigenous peoples.
As a historic milestone, the Government had created the National Assembly for a permanent dialogue with indigenous and ancestral authorities. This mechanism had produced national and territorial agendas focused on environmental protection, biodiversity, local economic development, improved health services, and strengthened bilingual and intercultural education. Despite these advances, the State recognised that major challenges remained.
In concluding remarks, Abderrahman Tlemçani, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, thanked the State party for its active participation in the dialogue, as well as all those who had made the dialogue possible. The Committee appreciated the frankness and openness by the delegation and hoped the dialogue would contribute to strengthening efforts already underway and identify new paths of action to confront existing challenges.
In his concluding remarks, Mr. Pajarito said Guatemala was still fighting against the effects of structural racism. In recent years, the Government had taken steps to respond to the urgent needs of indigenous peoples. The questions raised today would guide the State’s actions to support indigenous peoples.
The delegation of Guatemala consisted of representatives of the Presidential Commission against Discrimination and Racism against Indigenous Peoples in Guatemala; the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare; the Ministry of Education; and the Permanent Mission of Guatemala to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will issue its concluding observations on the report of Guatemala after the conclusion of its one hundred and sixteenth session on 5 December. The programme of work and other documents related to the session can be found here. Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, while webcasts of the public meetings can be found here.
The Committee will next meet in public on Thursday, 20 November at 3 p.m. to consider the combined twenty-fourth and twenty-fifth periodic report of Sweden (CERD/C/SWE/24-25).
Report
The Committee has before it the combined eighteenth to twentieth periodic report of Guatemala (CERD/C/GTM/18-20).
Presentation of Report
LICENTIATE MIGUEL FELIPE PAJARITO, Presidential Commissioner, Presidential Commission against Discrimination and Racism toward Indigenous Peoples in Guatemala and head of the delegation, reaffirmed Guatemala’s commitment to advancing the rights of indigenous peoples and Afro-descendant communities. The State acknowledged a longstanding historical debt and the persistence of racism and structural discrimination, which had contributed to poverty and limited development among indigenous peoples.
Indigenous communities continued to face obstacles in accessing justice, criminalisation of their leaders, forced displacement, and loss of territories. As a historic milestone, the Government had created the National Assembly for a permanent dialogue with indigenous and ancestral authorities. This mechanism had produced national and territorial agendas focused on environmental protection, biodiversity, local economic development, improved health services, and strengthened bilingual and intercultural education. This process enabled reforms to article 30 bis of the organic budget law, adopted in Congress.
In education, the State was expanding bilingual education, developing materials in all indigenous languages, and promoting local curricula rooted in each community’s culture and language. Early steps were also being taken to improve access to higher education for indigenous peoples. The Government was diversifying decision-making positions to include more indigenous representation, and restoring institutions linked to indigenous affairs.
In 2024, the Government signed an agrarian agreement with predominantly indigenous peasant organizations, addressing agrarian conflict, land access, the social economy, rural development, and the establishment of a space for political dialogue. It also approved a national policy for the protection of human rights defenders, including mechanisms to protect indigenous authorities and communities. In migration policy, the State had expanded culturally relevant services and implemented the “returns programme” to support reintegrating migrants and address root causes of irregular migration.
The judicial branch had a policy for access to justice for indigenous peoples, supported by a specialised secretariat. It provided interpreters in all 22 Mayan languages and had created more culturally relevant courts to reduce racial discrimination. It also coordinated with indigenous justice systems by establishing mediation and conflict-resolution centres.
The legislative branch had approved several significant laws, such as the decrees establishing the National Day of Indigenous Languages, an annual stipend for traditional midwives, and reforms enabling public investment in indigenous local communities. For the first time, Congress had conducted territorial dialogues with the Maya, Garifuna, and Xinka peoples, to hear their requests. It also institutionalised an indigenous peoples’ policy and was evaluating the creation of a department of indigenous affairs.
Despite these advances, the State recognised that major challenges remained. Guatemala reaffirmed its commitment to ensuring the rights of all indigenous peoples and Afro-descendant communities, and welcomed the recommendations from the Committee.
A representative of the Office of the Human Rights Ombudsman of Guatemala, the national human rights institution, said indigenous peoples represented 42 per cent of Guatemala’s population, yet the departments with the largest indigenous populations experienced poverty rates exceeding 80 per cent, and Afro-descendant peoples remained legally unrecognised. Government bodies tasked with indigenous affairs had shown limited impact, and the Public Prosecutor’s Office did not properly classify discrimination cases, weakening criminal accountability.
Land conflicts persisted due to the elimination of the Secretariat of Agrarian Affairs and weaknesses in the Land Fund; from 2019 to 2024, 88 collective evictions had occurred, mostly without humanitarian guarantees. Guatemala had made little progress in implementing the 2021 Inter-American Court ruling on community indigenous radio or establishing a clear process for free, prior and informed consultation.
In 2024, 378 children under the age of five died from acute malnutrition, with rural indigenous areas facing the highest rates and limited access to health services. Environmental sanitation failures further worsened gastrointestinal disease and child malnutrition in indigenous communities. Court-ordered implementation of bilingual intercultural education remained largely unfulfilled, with major gaps in materials and coverage.
Migration pressures remained high, with more than 376,000 people returned between 2020 and 2025 from the United States and Mexico, largely from indigenous regions that were affected by poverty, climate impacts and inequality. The dissolution of Peace Accord institutions had weakened transitional justice, and the replacement body still lacked sufficient capacity. Access to justice was further limited by shortages of interpreters and new community courts had not been set up since 1998, hindering coordination between State and indigenous justice systems.
Questions by a Committee Expert
ABDERRAHMAN TLEMÇANI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said the composition of the delegation reflected the importance that the State party attached to dialogue with the Committee. The Committee took note of the information provided based on the twelfth national population census and the eighth national housing census conducted in 2018 regarding the demographic composition of the population, as well as efforts undertaken to integrate ethnic, racial and descent variables into official data collection. Could updated and disaggregated data be provided on the demographic composition of the population, particularly regarding indigenous peoples, Garifuna, persons of African descent, migrants, refugees and asylum seekers? What steps had been taken to improve the data collection system, ensuring it covered all spheres of the Convention, to facilitate the analysis of the most vulnerable persons?
According to information received by the Committee, although the inclusion of a self-identification variable for Afro-descendant and Garifuna persons in the 2018 census represented progress, this variable had no legal effect and was not applied by all State institutions. Could further information be provided on the time frame to systematically integrate self-identification in data collection and administrative records maintained by public institutions?
Could the delegation provide information on cases in which the provisions of the Convention had been invoked before domestic courts or directly applied by them, specifying the nature of the cases, the articles concerned, and the outcomes of the proceedings? To what extent was the direct implementation of the Convention permitted by the judiciary? What training programmes had been launched relating to the Convention? What measures had been taken to increase awareness among indigenous peoples, Garifuna, persons of African descent, and migrants of their rights under the Convention?
Could detailed information be provided on measures taken to draft and adopt comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation containing an explicit definition of racial discrimination, applicable to all areas of public life? What current legislative initiatives aimed to strengthen the fight against racial discrimination and promote and protect the rights of indigenous peoples, Garifuna, and persons of African descent? What measures had been taken to give full effect to the Peace Accords?
Was racist motivation expressly recognised as an aggravating circumstance for offenses under the Criminal Code? The Committee had received worrying information regarding racist hate speech, hate crimes, and incitement to racial hatred and xenophobia, particularly in the media, on the Internet, and on social networks, targeting indigenous peoples, the Garifuna, persons of African descent, migrants, asylum seekers and refugees. Could information on legislative, administrative and policy measures adopted to prevent and combat this be provided? Could recent statistics be provided on the number of complaints, investigations and prosecutions, as well as reparations granted to victims? What measures had been introduced to facilitate filing complaints and conducting investigations into these offenses, including hotlines or online mechanisms?
The Committee remained concerned about persistent obstacles faced by indigenous peoples, persons of African descent, migrants, asylum seekers and refugees, as well as insufficient recognition of traditional indigenous justice systems. What measures had been taken to improve access to justice for these peoples? What was being done to recognise and respect indigenous traditional justice systems? What complaints had been made regarding acts of racial discrimination, and could specific figures be provided?
The Committee was closely following developments in the transitional justice process in Guatemala, particularly regarding grave human rights violations committed during the internal armed conflict. Could updated information be provided on investigations carried out, prosecutions initiated, and sanctions imposed on perpetrators of human rights violations committed during the internal armed conflict, as well as measures to ensure victims could obtain full reparations? What progress had been made in implementing the Peace Accords? What initiatives had been adopted to establish national plans for victims of the armed conflict and for searching for missing persons? What was the current status of institutions created under the Peace Accords, particularly in the area of transitional justice?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said in 2016, the State had adopted the Migration Code which created a new institution in Guatemala. The body on migration was comprised of officials from various sectors. Migrants were now recognised as rights holders. From 2020 to 2025, the State had received more than 6,800 requests for asylum and refugee status; 1,923 individuals had been granted refugee status. Those of Honduran origin comprised the largest percentage of applicants (more than 2,000).
The State had undertaken campaigns to prevent hate speech and xenophobia, including sharing the stories of refugees, campaigns against trafficking in persons, and commemorating the National Day of Refugees, among other measures. There were also positive perception campaigns for returnees within the media. From 2020 to 2025, there were 386 appeals on the decisions taken, with some individuals eventually being recognised as permanent residents.
Promoting higher levels of self-identification was complicated, due to the levels of racism in the country as well as methodology. The President of Guatemala was undertaking great efforts to carry out institutional activities to address poverty and the specific needs of children, youth and women.
Specific information allowing information to be broken down by indigenous groups was included in household surveys. More than 1,000 people had been trained between 2023 and 2025 on national statistics. The Office of National Statistics gave priority to the hiring of people who spoke indigenous languages.
A campaign had been developed to prevent trafficking in persons in migration, focusing on prevention, institutional liaison, and capacity building of civil servants, including community leaders.
The Guatemalan Congress included 160 lawmakers, with a 10 per cent representation of indigenous persons. This underrepresentation made progress complex. The National Day for Midwives aimed to increase access to public services for indigenous peoples. In 2024, the State held a dialogue with the Maya, Garifuna and Xinka, leading to the adoption of a policy on indigenous persons. Efforts were underway to bring forth initiatives on reforms to the Criminal Code, addressing higher sanctions for crimes of racial discrimination. The State was aware that the legislative body had many pending topics. All those in Congress should show greater political will toward the indigenous peoples in Guatemala.
The judiciary’s policy had established 120 interpreters with coverage across all competencies in the country’s 22 languages; 362 local judicial bodies had been established, in the areas with the largest indigenous population. Between 2022 and 2025, 8,500 cases were recorded relating to cases of racial discrimination, with data specifically focused on the ethnicity of those reporting the crime.
Questions by Committee Experts
ABDERRAHMAN TLEMÇANI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked for more information on training and capacity building on combatting hate speech, specifically online? What was the status of the initiative on the sacred sites of indigenous peoples which had been blocked in parliament since 2008?
VERENE ALBERTHA SHEPHERD, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, said the Committee had heard that self-identification was not always used in the collection of demographic information. Could the delegation comment on this, as well as information that census collectors did not allow for self-identification? What strategies were being used to combat racial discrimination against persons of African descent, as well as improve history education?
A Committee Expert asked what the ratio of women to men was in Congress? How were laws pertaining to indigenous peoples launched and heard in Congress? The Committee had heard it was almost impossible for indigenous peoples to have proper access to justice, due to a lack of interpretation in their language. Instead, a lawyer had to play the double role of lawyer and interpreter. Could the delegation comment on this? The Committee had heard that indigenous human rights defenders were criminalised by the justice system. Could clarification on this be provided?
Another Expert asked how the State party aimed to overcome the negative stereotypes harming indigenous peoples? Were there workshops taking place with the participation of the affected communities?
A Committee Expert congratulated the delegation on the presence with them of former Committee Chair, Jose Francisco Cali Tzay. The Committee had heard information about Xinka leaders who were murdered or sent into exile. How many murders had there been and how many exiles? Were there any avenues to repeal this? The Inter-American Human Rights Commission had highlighted a lack of independence in Guatemala’s judiciary. Could the delegation comment on this?
FAITH DIKELEDI PATSY TLAKULA; Committee Expert and Follow-Up Rapporteur, said the Committee had requested follow-up information from the State party within one year of adoption of the previous concluding observations. The Committee thanked the State party for submitting the follow-up report and appreciated the information contained within. Could the delegation provide an update on some of the bills which had been pending for more than 10 years?
A Committee Expert said the issue of racial discrimination was more important than ever and there was much to discuss over the next two days.
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the State had developed electronic forms for the reporting of cases of racial discrimination. Measures had been adopted to criminalise these acts in order to strengthen the documentation of these cases and the use of evidence. The State had made efforts to promote awareness of structural racism, including through the promotion of the Mayan and Xinka languages.
Since 2020, there had been a dismantling of key peace institutions, which was a setback. There had not been progress in transitional justice in the judicial system in recent years. There had been an effort to strengthen the Commission to coordinate the process of reparations. There was a plan validated by victims of the internal conflict. Follow-up had also been provided to cases of transitional justice, and rulings from the Inter-American Court. The Court had called for the State to search for individuals disappeared during the internal conflict. The Government was looking to relaunch the programme and was undertaking work in this regard. Guatemala aimed to comply with all recommendations issued by the Inter-American Court. This included some of the work carried out by the Presidency to address the historic debt of people from the internal conflict.
Coordination efforts had been undertaken to ensure people could freely express themselves, and training and awareness raising campaigns had been undertaken in self-identification, including on social media. This aimed to promote the right to self-identification among children and young adults. Work had been carried out to implement the use of indigenous languages within the educational system, including in the Mayan Languages Academy.
Only one indigenous woman was represented among all of the law makers in Congress. Women in total made up 20 per cent of the law makers body. The law on political parties aimed to bring about parity. Since 2019, efforts had been deployed to return to the discussion with spiritual leaders, and relaunch the law on indigenous jurisdiction, among others.
There were 120 official interpreters addressing 22 Mayan languages. New judges were trained in the Mayan languages in the justice system. Concrete actions were being taken to combat racial discrimination, including courses on identity, as well as a policy on allowing access to the judicial system for indigenous persons.
Education was the key tool for counteracting racial discrimination and promoting empathy with and respect of indigenous peoples. The Ministry of Education had a system which helped to map where students were located, broken down by language and indigenous groups. This year, the Ministry of Education had worked on protocols, including one on the prevention of discrimination and violence, which contained a linguistic component for students who were victims. Guatemala did not support any discrimination or criminalisation of civil society.
Questions by a Committee Expert
ABDERRAHMAN TLEMÇANI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked for more information about the Office of the Ombudsman? What specific information had been given regarding the fight against racism and xenophobia? What budget was given to the Office to tackle this issue? How did it cooperate with civil society organizations on the subject of combatting racial discrimination? To what extent were the recommendations of the Office implemented by authorities? What key measures had been adopted to strengthen institutions dedicated to fighting racial discrimination and xenophobia? What progress had been made following the implementation of the policy on racism and discrimination? What was the status of the consultation with indigenous peoples on topics relating to them? What activities had been organised in the first International Decade for People of African Descent and what steps had been made for the second decade?
To what extent were indigenous peoples represented in school curricula and textbooks? What mechanisms were in place to review textbooks and eliminate racial stereotypes and prejudices? What specific measures had been adopted to protect minors from violence and exploitation in the workplace? What investigations had been carried out and punishments handed down to perpetrators? Could information be provided on the bilateral agreement signed with the United States in 2019 regarding asylum? Were there other bilateral or multi-lateral agreements in this area with other States? What steps had been put in place to allow access to the asylum process?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the budget of the Ombudsman had been increased by 200 per cent, but there had been scarce support to combat issues of racial discrimination. The Ombudsman was an independent, autonomous organization. There had been increases in some of the budgets for the bodies responsible for combatting racial discrimination. A socialisation process which had been carried out on the public policy for peaceful cohabitation recognised that no implementation had been carried out over 10 years. There were six territorial dialogues in 2025, which aimed to see whether the pillars underpinning the policy responded to indigenous priorities, which raised serious questions.
The Guatemalan Migration Institute had worked on establishing several entities representing indigenous peoples in institutions. The Intercultural Unit on Indigenous Peoples had been established in 2024. Awareness raising campaigns had been conducted to ensure safe, orderly and regular migration, and to highlight the vulnerability of those engaged in irregular migration.
The Ministry of Education had trained 5,029 civil servants in the area of human rights, cultural identity and the rights of indigenous peoples, among other topics. The curriculum was currently being overhauled. Eleven million textbooks had been published this year and reviews indicated they did not contain any materials promoting racial stereotyping or discrimination.
Guatemala had a day for people of African descent, indigenous peoples and Garifuna peoples, which was currently awaiting approval. It was hoped it would be approved during this legislative cycle. The Ombudsman and Institute for Women underwent reforms in 2024, allowing these institutions to be strengthened.
Significant awareness raising had been carried out for indigenous peoples, and training and seminars were offered on cultural rights. Numerous activities had been held for the promotion of the rights of people of African descent.
Questions by Committee Experts
ABDERRAHMAN TLEMÇANI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked if there was a plan of action for people of African descent? What barriers were there to access basic services for those undergoing migration? Could an update be provided on the high-level dialogue with indigenous peoples?
VERENE ALBERTHA SHEPHERD, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, asked if the programmes and activities throughout the first Decade for People of African Descent were widespread across the country? To what extent did other ethnic groups participate in the activities?
A Committee Expert asked for more information about the mechanism adopted for the protection of human rights defenders?
Another Expert said the issue of the independence of the judiciary was broached in depth by the report of Human Rights Watch in 2024, which revealed concerning information. Was there any reform forthcoming regarding the selection of the judiciary?
A Committee Expert asked about cases brought to the Committee on indigenous peoples who had been thrown off their land, such as for mining projects. Many prosecutions underway were reportedly lacking transparency. Could more information be provided? Did the State plan to adopt a specific law which ensured land rights and the right to have property for these populations? What specific measures were being taken by Guatemala to ensure these rights?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the recently adopted mechanism on human rights defenders was aligned with recommendations from the Inter-American Court. This instrument was adopted last week and was published on numerous websites. The State was required to have an institution responsible for providing protection to human rights defenders, as well as access to justice. Several working groups had been established, including to address attacks against journalists, who were determined to be human rights defenders.
The were 36 judges and magistrates on the Commission responsible for putting through lists of candidates for judges. This list went to the Congress, which then made the final choice. Guatemala had challenges in bringing about deep reform to the justice and electoral system. In Congress, reforms were underway in the process of naming people for the Prosecutor’s Office; however, there had not been significant will to bring these matters forward.
Eviction orders were implemented when requested, when it was necessary to comply with national protocols. In cases of conflict, it was important to ensure the rights of people were respected. A mechanism was in place for crisis care management and had been designed to comprehensively address cases of eviction for indigenous communities. A mechanism was being implemented to assist families who were subject to forced displacement and evictions, to help ensure their rights were upheld. Significant efforts were being made to ensure that police were deployed as little as possible during evictions, and to create humanitarian programmes to support the affected communities. The State recognised there were numerous challenges; however, Guatemala was committed to ensuring the dignity of those affected.
The delegation said the executive branch shared the Committee’s concerns regarding the aggravated criminalisation of indigenous peoples, which was an issue which had been raised repeatedly with the State party. This had led to the exile of more than 200 journalists, human rights defenders and independent prosecutors, and led to some people being jailed. A Prosecutor’s Office was working specifically on cases where indigenous communities had received questionable eviction orders.
Indigenous peoples in Guatemala were concerned about the climate of deep persecution which reigned throughout the judicial system. This had led to an increase in attacks, with one of the primary bodies being the Prosecutor’s Office. This was breaking apart indigenous communities. There needed to be deep reform for the justice system, as well as the Prosecutor’s Office, to help prevent these attacks and eliminate this scourge.
Guatemala recognised there was a historic debt due to uncertainty around land tenancy which worsened the agrarian situation. An agreement had been signed which aimed to address cases of eviction affecting indigenous organizations.
Judges and magistrates were independent in the discharge of their duties. Those who undermined the judiciary were not permitted to hold public positions. The judicial body for the Secretariat for Indigenous Peoples had allocated adequate funds to ensure appropriate training for judges and judicial staff. Protocols were implemented when convictions took place.
Questions by a Committee Expert
VERENE ALBERTHA SHEPHERD, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, said according to information received by the Committee, 10 indigenous persons had been elected to the Congress, which was made up of 160 parliamentarians, with just one being an indigenous woman. What measures were being planned to guarantee the equal participation of indigenous peoples, Garifuna and people of African descent? What steps had been taken to identify and eliminate barriers rooted in racial stereotypes, which hindered the participation of these groups, as well as women?
There were reports about the recurrent use of the state of emergency in areas populated by indigenous peoples. What measures had been taken to prevent the excessive use of force and violence and provide adequate reparations to families? How was it ensured that the state of emergency fully complied with international standards? How was it ensured that indigenous peoples were not prosecuted for terrorism while practicing the right to peaceful assembly?
What steps had been taken to ensure indigenous peoples could operate community media? How were indigenous peoples consulted during this process? What was the State party doing to create space and ensure equitable practices for radio spectrum management? What measures were being developed to pass a community media bill and decriminalise indigenous community broadcasting?
What measures had been taken to protect journalists and human rights defenders and the leaders of indigenous communities from attacks and reprisals for their work, and to prosecute perpetrators? What steps had been taken to implement the Committee’s recommendation on a specific public policy on the protection of human rights defenders?
Could a list of all sacred sites which had been granted formal protection be provided? The Committee had received allegations of legislative initiatives which would have an impact on thousands of sites of cultural importance to the Mayan and indigenous peoples, and lead to the privatisation of sacred spaces. What steps had the State party taken to guarantee the right to freedom of religion for indigenous peoples, Garifuna and people of African descent and to protect their sites, including from extraction projects? What measures had been taken by the State party to facilitate regulations governing consultation of indigenous peoples in terms of projects which might affect their lands and communities, taking into account United Nations standards? What was Guatemala doing to protect the lands of indigenous peoples from the exploitation of resources? What reparations programmes were in place for indigenous peoples affected by infrastructure projects? Had the State party adopted any measures to protect community ownership of traditional lands of indigenous peoples and Garifuna communities?
What measures had the State party taken to prevent the forcible evictions of indigenous peoples from their territories? Would the State party consider declaring a moratorium on evictions? What was being done to punish excessive use of force against indigenous peoples in the context of land disputes? What reparations were provided to the victims and their families? What mechanism existed for indigenous peoples to obtain reparations in the case of a forcible eviction? What safeguards were being implemented to ensure indigenous communities could access timely justice in relation to these cases? Was a concrete action plan available to break the cycle of violence and provide reparations to communities in certain protected areas?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the current legislature had a firm commitment to the indigenous peoples and had overhauled the legislative agenda to focus on indigenous rights, including through the law on community radio. The current challenge was the lack of majority to pass the legislative agenda.
The State had trained 751 women leaders, with the majority being indigenous women. They were trained on the process of participation, including drafting acts, and participating in the budget process. The current government had also guaranteed the principle of parity in its cabinet.
Across the country, 14 dialogues were conducted which brought together representatives from 21 linguistic communities, including the Mayan, Xinka and Garifuna people, to hear the opinions of indigenous women.
Many communities were awaiting compensation rules under the Inter-American Court system. One of the main challenges was raising awareness to ensure that community radio was seen as a way of disseminating indigenous knowledge. Unfortunately, this issue had not received support from the Government, or in the form of a legal framework. Recent work resulted in two radio frequencies being dedicated to community radio, however, this was not sufficient to comply with the ruling of the Inter-American Court. A roundtable engaged directly with victim representation. While some progress had been made, the initiative must be properly tackled. There were certain powerful economic sectors which had pitted themselves against the initiative.
The issue of the use of a state of emergency in populated areas was historically thorny and there were many obstacles. Since the current administration came into force, there had been no use of the state of emergency. Rather, dialogue had been able to be facilitated between various indigenous groups, which was an unprecedented historic dynamic. It was hoped that the cosmovision of indigenous peoples was fully recognised. The lack of recognition was rooted in prejudice and racism.
A framework was in place for paying out damage and ensuring restitution. Technical and social rulings had been incorporated for the projects being rolled out in the electrical sphere, highlighting that those responsible needed to carry out a full social and environmental impact assessment. The Government maintained a space for dialogue right at the top with indigenous peoples, allowing indigenous peoples to address issues with the President and Vice-President of Guatemala, which represented a positive step forward.
Questions by Committee Experts
VERENE ALBERTHA SHEPHERD, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, said the Committee was aware that Guatemala had a new political regime, however, heavy was the head which wore the new crown. Many of the issues faced by Guatemala were due to colonialism and structural racism. It was the responsibility of the State and its agencies to overcome these issues.
ABDERRAHMAN TLEMÇANI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked if there was political will to reform the Electoral Code to tackle the underrepresentation of indigenous populations? Were there specific things which could be done to address the situation of community radio? Could more information be provided on the reform of the school curriculum to include the Xinka reality?
A Committee Expert asked about the independence of the magistrate; could more clarification be provided?
Another Committee Expert hailed the Government’s consultation with indigenous peoples. What efforts had been taken by the State party to implement the decision of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights regarding forced evictions and the restitution of ancestral rights?
Another Expert said the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers had visited Guatemala earlier this year. A review of the Special Rapporteur’s observations would provide a clear view of the pitfalls in the current procedure.
A Committee Expert asked what measures the Government was envisaging to provide the Mayan communities with reparations regarding the dam project in their area without their consent? The Government had been called on to declare a moratorium on evictions until land titles could be directly protected and resolved. What concrete steps did the Government set forth to protect the territorial rights of indigenous peoples and protect their eviction?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said according to the Peace Accords, Guatemala was categorised as a plurinational and multilingual country. However, structural racism and colonialism remained, and these deeply entrenched structures needed to be changed. The agenda of the people needed to reflect this multiculturalism.
Prosecutors had investigated at least two cases last year of community radios, which had indicated there was interference in communications from the international airport.
The State was looking at the possibility of enacting a moratorium on evictions. When persons were evicted and went into exile, some support was provided. Mechanisms were in place to address the challenges, which were perhaps insufficient.
Mayan languages and Xinka language and culture were cross-cutting throughout Guatemala’s national curriculum. Work was being carried out with the Xinka population on the curriculum, including drafting classroom materials at the local level. There were challenges, due to the fact that there were disagreements within the Xinka population, which inhibited progress.
Those wishing to become trial judges needed to go to a judicial school. This was governed by the Constitution and under the law of the judiciary. The Constitution also regulated the naming of magistrates of the Supreme Court and of appeal court judges. Universities, the Bar Association and independent lawyers formed the nomination committee, providing a technical aspect and expert component.
According to statistics from the census, 0.4 per cent of the population self-identified as people of African descent and 0.1 per cent self-identified as Garifuna. There were communities of these groups spread across the country. There were not many initiatives undertaken during the first Decade for People of African Descent, but significantly more work was being undertaken under the second one. Guatemala accepted that it had a lot to address in dealing with the rights of communities of people of African descent. Activities which had taken place in the past included festivals and workshops to empower representation. The Government had signed a document with the Garifuna and people of African descent, allowing for their better representation and inclusion.
Questions by a Committee Expert
VERENE ALBERTHA SHEPHERD, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, welcomed the willingness expressed by the delegation to try harder. Was there any person of Africa descent in the Government? What measures had been taken by the State party to put an end to the multiple forms of discrimination faced by the Mayan, Xinka and Garifuna people and people of African descent, including by adopting special measures? What measures had been adopted by the State party to involve these groups in the design of these measures?
What measures were being taken to reduce the levels of poverty disproportionately affecting indigenous peoples, Garifuna communities and people of African descent? What additional measures had been taken by Guatemala towards this end? What had been done by the State party to address food insecurity and access to water and sanitation, which mainly affected indigenous populations and people of African descent? What were budget prioritisations for water and sanitation in Mayan, Xinka and Garifuna communities? Had there been successful cases filed by these communities concerning water contamination?
What efforts were being made to mitigate the impact of natural disasters and climate change? What specific legislative and policy measures were being taken to provide legal certainty over indigenous lands and territories?
Just seven out of 10 Mayan women could read and write, with this figure dropping to six out of 10 in rural areas. Indigenous peoples aged 15 or older had on average completed just up to third or fourth grade of primary school. What was being done to ensure equal access to quality education for indigenous peoples, Garifuna communities and people of African descent? What was the impact of bilingual education measures?
The Committee had read in the State party report that the Guatemalan Academy of Mayan languages promoted the development of the Mayan languages in the country, through research, standardisation and dissemination of these languages. It received money from the State budget and had more than 200 employees nationwide. What had been the practical results of these commendable initiatives?
Why was compulsory education not extended to the second level? Was the content of education culturally relevant to the multi-cultural school population? What was being done to ensure Mayan and Xinka girls in rural areas completed secondary education?
It was understood that eight out of 10 women were engaged in unpaid care work; how could this situation be improved? How many cases had resulted in the punishment of employees for unpaid wages? What was being done to ensure indigenous peoples had access to higher paid jobs and were protected from unfair discrimination during the hiring process? How many indictments had been handed down for cases of forced labour?
What special measures were being taken by the State to ensure health services were accessible for indigenous peoples? How was the effectiveness of these measures being evaluated? What budget was allocated for the training of traditional midwives? How did the differentiated care model ensure that indigenous women and women of African descent had access to the full range of sexual and reproductive services in their own languages?
The Committee was alarmed by reports that the Garifuna people faced a cultural erosion. What urgent measures were being taken to guarantee their safety, reinstate their lands, and protect their cultural practices? What was Guatemala doing to protect the intellectual property pertaining to the textiles created by indigenous women?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said efforts had been made to have a more inclusive staff in the Ombudsperson’s office, with the participation of indigenous women, including Garifuna women. There had been difficulties when it came to self-identification, often to avoid being victims of discriminatory actions. Efforts were being deployed to create more inclusive mechanisms and care. This included the strengthening of the regional office of the Ombudsperson’s office by including indigenous women. A study had been conducted which looked at the high level of non-remunerated work faced by women, particularly affecting women in the Garifuna and African descent community. Garifuna and Xinka women had been hired to undertake work in the design of future policies impacting them.
An initiative had been developed aimed at protecting the collective rights of intellectual property for individual textiles and attire. Unfortunately, there had not been a favourable ruling on this initiative, but a new draft law was being built by the Committee on Women, with the participation of weavers.
Under the new administration, the Ministry of Education aimed to restore the strength of this institution; 12,000 teachers had been hired within the Ministry with 48 per cent of these being bilingual posts. Wages and stipends had also been raised. There were 11 million textbooks, many of which were in Mayan. Infrastructure had been improved in around 18,000 schools, with around 9,000 of them in the Mayan area, and others in the Garifuna and Xinka areas. A nationwide effort was being undertaken to ensure that education covered a broader swath of the indigenous population, as well as those on the move, and those no longer in school.
A multisectoral roundtable on the rights of female domestic workers had been established. While there was no law which provided protection, the actions of the Government sought to build support structures for this sector.
Questions by Committee Experts
VERENE ALBERTHA SHEPHERD, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, said if people of African descent did not wish to self-identify as such, Guatemala had a problem. The State needed to ensure that the history of the origins of African people was taught. Some of the initiatives undertaken in education were commendable.
A Committee Expert asked if Guatemala could track the global companies using the textile patterns designed by indigenous communities? What legislation had been adopted to protect these designs? Which authority was in charge of educating these communities on how to protect their intellectual property?
Another Committee Expert asked if concrete steps had been taken to ensure health policies reflected the specific situation of women and improved their access to healthcare institutions beyond midwives?
One Expert noted the State party was doing everything possible to answer all the questions.
A Committee Expert asked how many indigenous leaders had been prosecuted and on what grounds?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said new awareness raising and training campaigns had been launched for the Guatemalan population to counter hate speech in social networks and explain that indigenous peoples had the right to self-identify. It was hoped the State would take significant steps forward to bring about this change.
Activities had been undertaken to ensure the network of weavers had proper support within the Ministry of Education. Steps had been taken to bolster cross-cutting activities in this regard.
An inter-institutional campaign was being carried out with Mayan partners on the comprehensive health care of women, which aimed to ensure that actions were adapted to the various Mayan languages. There had been programmes focused on breast feeding and hygiene practices in municipalities with the highest rates of child mortality, as well as vaccination campaigns. The State was now trying to trigger a programme rooted in indigenous understanding.
The Atlantic region had the largest concentration of Garifuna and people of African descent, and 18 courts had been established to support these populations, particularly regarding cases of trafficking. November 16 was now recognised as the national day for Garifuna people.
Closing Remarks
FAITH DIKELEDI PATSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-Up Rapporteur, said the Committee would issue concluding observations containing a paragraph for urgent follow-up, which the State party was expected to respond to within one year.
ABDERRAHMAN TLEMÇANI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, thanked the State party for its active participation in the dialogue, as well as all as those who had made the dialogue possible. The Committee appreciated the frankness and openness expressed by the delegation and hoped the dialogue would contribute to strengthening efforts already underway and identify new paths of actions to confront existing challenges. It was regretful that some previous recommendations had gone unanswered. Mr. Tlemçani thanked civil society for their attendance and participation.
LICENTIATE MIGUEL FELIPE PAJARITO, Presidential Commissioner, Presidential Commission against Discrimination and Racism toward Indigenous Peoples in Guatemala and head of the delegation, said Guatemala was still fighting against the effects of structural racism. In recent years, the Government had taken steps to respond to the urgent needs of indigenous peoples. The questions raised today would guide the State’s actions to support indigenous peoples. Mr. Pajarito thanked all those who had made the dialogue possible.
__________________
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.
CERD25.012E