COMMITTEE ON ELIMINATION OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN HOLDS INFORMAL MEETING WITH NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women this afternoon held an informal meeting with representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from the United Arab Emirates, the Netherlands, Egypt, Botswana and Panama. It also held a dialogue with the national human rights institution of the Netherlands.

Among issues raised on the United Arab Emirates, NGOs commended the United Arab Emirates for its progress with regard to education, employment and the increased participation of women in public life. However, racial discrimination was endemic against unskilled and semi-skilled migrant workers, with the gender bias of migration exacerbating that discrimination. The United Arab Emirates had further failed to provide effective support services to needy women, and female victims of violence and trafficking were effectively denied their right to support services with the shutting down of the one independent organization providing women’s shelters in the country.

On the Netherlands, NGOs remained concerned about the Government’s view on the status of the Convention in the domestic legal order. The Dutch Government also appeared to deny the intersection of various forms of discrimination causing multiple discrimination – what else could explain that its report paid no attention to older women or to disabled women? Instead of addressing forms of multiple discrimination, the Government was even reinforcing stereotypes. The Dutch Equal Treatment Commission, the Dutch national human rights institution, noted that although many cases of gender discrimination concerned pregnant women, that issue had not been sufficiently tackled by the Dutch Government. Muslim women, in particular, constituted a group that was discriminated against – not only because of their race and ethnic origin, but also on the grounds of religion, which was clearly forbidden by the Dutch law.

With regard to Egypt, NGOs said that violence against women in Egypt has been increasing in both the private and public realm and sexual harassment had reached alarming levels. Egypt had no law that protected women from violence inflicted upon them and provisions in the law even gave men the right to discipline their wives. Rural women in particular were not covered by any health insurance and social security schemes, and the services provided to them were worse than those offered to urban women. Moreover, illiteracy among rural women was significantly higher than among urban women, as was gender-based violence.

Among issues raised on Botswana, NGOs said that they were concerned that the Convention had not been fully integrated into domestic law, and that even where attempts have been made to incorporate some aspects, it had been done in a piecemeal fashion. The Government had also failed to recognize the non-enabling environment that had been created by the patriarchal socialization of Batswana on gender issues; the entrenched patriarchal attitudes discouraged women from participating in politics. As for sexual and reproductive health, statistics continued to show a disproportionate impact of HIV/AIDS on women.

On Panama, NGOs said that femicide was not recognized as a crime although there had been a real increase in cases. Women were also subjected to sexual stereotypes and the State had no ongoing policy for eradicating them. Furthermore, the Bill on Reproductive and Sexual Health had been withdrawn, which certainly had to be interpreted as a step backward. The State should guarantee the protection of indigenous women and should ensure intercultural and gender-sensitive provision of services.

The next meeting of the Committee will be at 10 p.m. on Tuesday, 26 January, when it will consider the initial periodic report of the United Arab Emirates (CEDAW/C/ARE/1).

Statements by NGOs

STEFAN TROEMEL, International Disability Alliance, said that his organization paid particular importance to the integration of disabled women’s rights into the activities of the Committee, notably in the preparation of States parties’ reports. Furthermore, the Committee had to examine the issue of forced sterilization of disabled women, wherever it occurred.

United Arab Emirates

NICHOLAS MCGEEHAN and NIAMH HAYES, MAFIWASTA, drew attention to three main areas of concern: the condition of domestic workers in the United Arab Emirates; the issue of equality before the law; and domestic violence and the absence of support services for victims. The United Arab Emirates was commended for its progress with regard to education, employment and the increased participation of women in public life. However, the Government was responsible for all the women within its territorial jurisdiction, and racial discrimination was endemic against unskilled and semi-skilled migrant workers, with the gender bias of migration exacerbating that discrimination. As for domestic work, by its very nature, it placed women in situations of extreme vulnerability to abuse, exploitation, isolation and seclusion, which facilitated physical, psychological and sexual abuse. As to equality before the law, both citizens and non-citizens alike faced discrimination in their treatment by law enforcement agents and the judiciary in the United Arab Emirates. Under Sharia law evidentiary standards, a women’s evidence in criminal proceedings was worth only half that of a man, and – on a social as well as a legal level – women might be discouraged or intimidated from accessing the legal system or approaching the police. As for the third issue, the absence of support services, the United Arab Emirates had not provided effective support services to needy women. Quite the opposite: figures had actively conspired to deny female victims of violence and trafficking their right to support services by effectively shutting down the one independent organization providing women’s shelters in the country.

The Netherlands

LINDA MANS and LEONTINE BIJLEVELD, Dutch CEDAW Network, remained concerned about the Government’s view on the status of the Convention in the domestic legal order; its views about the status of the Committee; and its views regarding communications under the Optional Protocol to the Convention. They were also concerned about the seeming negation by the Government of its obligation following from article 5 to combat actively gender stereotypes. In addition, the Government appeared to deny the intersection of various forms of discrimination causing multiple discrimination – what else could explain that its report paid no attention to older women or to disabled women? Instead of addressing forms of multiple discrimination, the Government was even reinforcing stereotypes. Another issue was the Services at Home Scheme. It was very questionable whether the long-existing exclusion of domestic workers employed by a family for less than three days a week from labour legislation and from social security was ever in accordance with the Convention. As to women’s income, poverty and economic independence, it was hoped that the Committee would request the Dutch Government to supply a complete picture of developments in women’s income before the next regular report was due.

Egypt

SEHAM ELSAID AWAD NEGM, Women’s Society Association Coalition, said that violence against women has been increasing in both the private and public realm in Egypt. Sexual harassment had also reached alarming levels, and the assault of journalists and the mass sexual harassment of groups of young girls in 2007 and 2008 in Cairo were condemnable. Unconstitutional violence, including the detention of women in police stations, was also on the rise. Egypt had no law that protected women from violence inflicted upon them and provisions in law even gave men the right to discipline their wives. Gender-based violence practices that usually accompanied the election process still posed a serious threat to all efforts to ensure women’s political participation and, despite the implementation of a new law, serious impediments still remained for women’s political participation. There were also numerous gaps in the Personal Status Law that jeopardized women’s legal rights in that respect, for example men’s unilateral right of divorce.

OSCAR CABRERA, O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, said that the risks of pregnant women’s exposure to water-pipe smoking remained an important health issue to be addressed in Egypt.

FATMA KHAFAGY, Alliance for Arab Women, said that discrimination against some groups of women persisted and particularly rural women were not covered by any health insurance or social security schemes, and the services presented to them were much worse than those offered to urban women. Illiteracy among rural women was also significantly higher than among urban women, as was gender-based violence. Young street women and refugee women without access to any services, and domestic workers, were also discriminated against.

Botswana

CHIGEDZE VIRGINIA CHINYEPI and MONICA TABENGWA, Botswana Council of Non-Governmental Organizations (BOCONGO), said they were concerned that the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women had not been fully integrated into domestic law in Botswana, and even where attempts had been made to incorporate some aspects of the Convention, it had been done in a piecemeal fashion. With regard to the dissemination of the Convention and all laws affecting the status of women, the Government had failed to ensure compliance with the provisions of Convention. Furthermore, regarding the substantive equality in power sharing and political representation of women, the Botswana Government had failed to recognize the non-enabling environment that had been created by the patriarchal socialization of Batswana on gender issues. The entrenched patriarchal attitudes discouraged women from participating in politics. Efforts made to address the issue of violence against women had been largely ineffective for a number of reasons, including the poor dissemination of information; because the Domestic Violence Act did not criminalize marital rape; and because the abolition of the Marital Power Act did not apply to customary and religious marriages. As for sexual and reproductive health, statistics continued to show disproportionate impact of HIV/AIDS on women and men with women recording higher levels.

Panama

MONICA DEL CARMEN BENSON NINO, CLADEM-Panama, said that recommendations had been made regarding violence against women, but Panama still had not provided a status report on the issue. Femicide was not recognized as a crime although there had been a real increase in cases. As for women deprived of liberty, there were no studies of the motivations leading such women to crime, meaning that the principle of rehabilitation was not taken into account. Women were also subjected to sexual stereotypes and the State had no ongoing policy for the eradicating such sexist stereotypes. There had been a Bill on Reproductive and Sexual Health, but it had been withdrawn, which certainly had to be interpreted as a step backward. There was discrimination in legislation regarding those in domestic service as well.

SONIA HENRIQUEZ and VENUS TEJEDA, The Voice of Panama’s Indigenous Women, said that Panama’s action regarding the situation of indigenous women remained insufficient. In fact, the lack of their integration in the public sector and the State’s migration and housing politics reflected real forms of insecurity for those women. Among recommendations were that intercultural education should be implemented; the State should guarantee the protection of indigenous women; there should be intercultural and gender-sensitive provision of services; and indigenous peoples participation should be visible.

Questions

Following these statements, Committee Members raised a number of questions and issues, including, on the United Arab Emirates, whether details could be given on the inclusion of domestic workers in the draft labour code; whether there were any safe environments for women to report violence against them, especially for female domestic workers, for example, special police units; and how the rights of migrant workers could best be protected.

On the Netherlands, Members asked, inter alia, whether the maternity allowance was only a public measure or also applied to the private sector; for more details on the number of complaints and mandate of the inspectorate, and how successful anti-discrimination policies were; whether contraventions and complaints were also recorded; whether NGOs in the Netherlands cooperated with NGOs in Aruba and the Netherlands Antilles; whether there was support by the Government for gender-equality mechanisms in Aruba; and what access rural, disabled, black and elderly women had to education?

With regard to Egypt, Committee Members asked, among other matters, for more information on the conditions that women had to meet to stand as candidates in local elections; and was it possible for them to remain candidates for the whole election process, despite the threats they suffered? What about women’s property rights upon divorce, and was there a difference between law and practice? As for female genital mutilation, what was the Government’s role in combating such harmful traditional practices? Further, while there was a memorandum on abortion, did that memorandum allow for abortion following rape? Did NGOs have a good relationship with the National Council of Women, and if so, did it help in finding solutions?

Concerning Botswana, Members asked what activities women’s associations and human rights associations could undertake to assist women who could not afford legal services, and whether the Government created obstacles in that respect; and what relevance the Optional Protocol to the Convention could potentially have regarding access to such services in Botswana? As for violence against women, Members wished to know how women could get access to justice, and what the NGOs’ role was in informing rural women about their legal rights. Further, were NGOs consulted by the Government in the process of preparing its periodic report? And could the relationship between the Botswana Council of Women and the Women’s Affairs Department be clarified?

On Panama, Committee Members asked for information on indigenous women’s struggle against the violence and discrimination.

Responses

Responding to these questions and issues, representatives from the United Arab Emirates NGOs said that the issue of domestic violence was not helpfully addressed by courts and was a societal issue that needed to be addressed not only by legal amendments but also by communications and advocacy; as for academic studies, one had been conducted in 2006, highlighting the high numbers of victims and the intergenerational, endemic nature of the issue. As for the role of NGOs in protecting migrant workers, that was vital, particularly in view of the absence of support services provided by the Government. On the draft Labour Code, NGOs said that the new version still did not cover domestic workers.

Representatives of NGOs from the Netherlands, responding to comments and questions, said, with regard to maternity allowance, that all female workers in the public and private sector were covered, which was now also the case for female entrepreneurs. As for the number of complaints regarding discrimination, no figures could be provided at this time. There had been attempts to establish contact with NGOs in Aruba and Antilles, but those NGOs did not respond. As for gender-equality institutions at the provincial and local levels, that infrastructure had crumbled, and the national Government had played a role in that regard.

Representatives from Egypt NGOs, in their responses, reported that NGOs had been consulted in the preparation of Egypt’s report, but that their input had not been appropriately taken into account. Female genital mutilation was banned in the Penal Code, unless for medical necessity, but de facto there was no medical necessity for female genital mutilation. On property rights, many women suffered from deprivation of the rightful shares of their inheritance, and the current law was inadequate. The gender equality office had been established in 2002, and the Ombudsman’s Office had received over 2,000 complaints a year, but today the office did not have any legal authority.

Representatives of NGOs from Botswana, responding, said that the Women’s National Council’s members were appointed by the Government. NGOs had not been consulted when the country report was prepared. NGOs were doing a lot to educate rural women in Botswana on their rights, and NGOs also had two shelters for needy women. Financial resources in Botswana were scarce which left many rural women without health assistance.

Representatives of NGOs from Panama, responding, said that NGOs had pushed for the implementation of the Bill on Sexual and Reproductive Health, which had finally been withdrawn. Withdrawing that bill meant that the concerned groups were denied access to health services. The suffering of indigenous people and discrimination against them was visible in enforced displacement of communities by police.

Statement by National Human Rights Institution of the Netherlands

L.J.L KOSTER and M. GRAVEN, Dutch Equal Treatment Commission, noted that the Committee had asked critical questions about the subsidies provided to NGOs, although NGOs had highlighted that obtaining the subject-matter expertise was challenging due to lack of funding. Further, although many cases of gender discrimination concerned pregnant women, as highlighted by reports by the Equal Treatment Commission, that had not been sufficiently tackled by the Dutch Government. As for women of non-Dutch origin, Muslim women constituted a very particular group that was discriminated against not only because of their race and ethnic origin, but also on the grounds of religion, which was clearly forbidden by the Dutch law.

Questions

Committee Members then asked a number of questions, including whether there were any special measures to protect maternity in the Netherlands; whether there was a collaboration between the Dutch Equal Treatment Commission and the anti-discrimination bureaus; whether they had any data regarding discrimination on the basis of pregnancy and on the headscarf cases; and if there had been any adequate responses to complaints made on those two issues.

Response

Responding, the Dutch Equal Treatment Commission said that the law offered significant maternity protection, but the de facto situation was evidently quite different. Anti-discrimination bureaus formed a network with which the Dutch Equal Treatment Commission strongly cooperated. Women wearing headscarves had normal rights to education, but would, for example, not be accepted in a Catholic school.


For use of the information media; not an official record

CEDAW10/008E