Dear Nancy Pearson,

Thank you for mentioning our Human Rights Compliance Assessment tool (HRCA) and the free access Quick Check version as an example of how NHRIs can play a role as “convenors” engaging businesses in tackling discrimination issues. Feedback from companies, investment institutions and other users do indicate that the tool serves its function well in this regard. A Best Practice Guide to the Human Rights Compliance Assessment, published by the Dutch human rights organisation Aim for human Rights in collaboration with us, elaborates on the “convenor” role of the tool. The HRCA has been translated into several languages, including Chinese. You will find more on the abovementioned publications here: http://www.humanrightsbusiness.org/020_project_publications.htm

We are in the process of developing a China-specific version of the HRCA Quick Check, which will highlight discrimination in relation to the huge group of migrant workers in China. This is part of the DIHR programme RIGHTS OF MIGRANT WORKERS IN CHINA, which is approaching discrimination issues from a range of angles.

Recently we issued a tool to help businesses operating in India assess their policies, procedures and performances with regard to the complex issue of discrimination of Dalit. You can find more on that at: https://www.humanrightsbusiness.org/ in the “Check List” scroll menu.

Moreover, we are setting up a global programme for capacity building of NHRIs in developing Human Rights & Business strategies. The role of NHRIs as “convenors” of multi-stakeholder engagement is the core. We currently are in the process of convening a NHRI working group on that now.

Kind regards,

Christine Jesseman, Senior Researcher/Coordinator: Human Rights and Business Special Programme

South African Human Rights Commission

In developing more effective responses and proactive programmes and projects the SAHRC places emphasis on strategic partnerships with non-governmental organisations, various civil society groups and international organisations in addition to activities with local and national government departments and institutions. Supporting the activities of other Chapter 9 Constitutional institutions is also vital.The organisational structure of the SAHRC, necessitated by its mandate, allows for interactions with a variety of different organisations with varying objectives. For example, our Education and Training Programme may interact with our Parliamentary Monitoring unit (PLLTBM), the Senior Researcher/ Co-ordinator for Children and the Information and Communications Programme to conduct a workshop or seminar on children’s rights issues. The programmes would co-operate in aspects of the planning and execution in working towards their specific strategic objectives, and draw in their network of stakeholders.Interacting directly with the public – with individuals – in a more responsive manner can be facilitated through public hearings, or through complaints formally lodged with our Legal Services Programme. The SAHRC also provides an open platform and a safe space for civil society in that our training centre can be used free of charge for seminars and events. We therefore hope to encourage and facilitate civil society interaction even where we are not the initiator.The SAHRC also views businesses as community stakeholders. Consequently, we engage businesses directly and through various umbrella organisations, and debate their role in the fulfilment of human rights on both the level of legislative monitoring and compliance as well as awareness and education concerning corporate social responsibility.

At the Canadian Human Rights Commission, we are engaging civil society in our goal to prevent discrimination at different levels. As many of you may be aware, the Canadian Human Rights Act was studied by a Review panel a couple of years ago. This Review Panel made several recommendations to address the concerns expressed by civil society and other groups. As a result, the Canadian Human Rights Commission underwent a major realignment and review of its operations called the Quantum Project.

In a nutshell, Quantum was to bring about a shift in the Commission’s work - from a narrow complaint oriented focus to a broader approach aimed at "advancing equality for all in Canada and eliminating all forms of discrimination, including systemic discrimination."

Three main CHRC programs now support this vision:

1. The Human Rights Knowledge Development and Dissemination Program develops research, policies and legal analysis to foster understanding of , and compliance with the Employment Equity Act and the CHRA. The Program also provides leadership, support and tools both nationally and internationally. As far as this program goes, engagement with civil society is mainly done through consultations. The goal here is to support and stimulate constructive discussions with civil society to increase understanding of how human rights can be integrated into daily practice, as well as gathering intelligence of collective groups experience.

2. The Discrimination Prevention Program works with employers and other stakeholders on prevention and employment equity activities to prevent discriminatory behavior and ensure that there is reasonable progress in representation of the four designated group: Women, Persons with Disability, Aboriginal People and Members of Visible Minority Groups. Civil society are key players for this program in that they can help channel the CHRC efforts to work strategically with key organizations. In this regard, several NGOs and interest groups have been approached to comment and provide feedback on our educational material. Community bridging between employers and NGOs across Canada is now the way to connect and to exchange on common challenges.

3. The Human Rights Dispute Resolution Program works to resolve human rights disputes involving federally regulated employers, service providers and individuals and represents the Commission in public interest cases. The Program focuses on early intervention to settle disputes. Civil society are often representing complainants, sometimes even filing complaints on their behalf. The Commission is presently reaching out to them to hear their views on our processes and new approaches.

As you can appreciate, each of these programs offers different type of opportunities for civil society to engage with the Commission. Some options are perceived as less confrontational than others. This is why the new focus on community bringing seem to appeal to civil society and other prevention stakeholders.

Johanne Lelièvre for

Piero Narducci

Director

Canadian Human Rights Commission

At the KNCHR we acknowledge that  just as no man is an island, likewise no organization can effectively make a difference in society on its own. KNCHR therefore recognizes that involvement of civil society is paramount due to the uniqueness and expertise of the various civil society organizations. KNCHR engages civil society through

Collaborative work: The KNCHR is currently spearheading the compilation of a report on non-discrimination and equal treatment in Kenya. The report will among other issues identify the level of implementation by Kenya of existent legislation on non-discrimination as well as create awareness on how to deal with discrimination especially among various organizations and institutions working on issues on anti-discrimination. A committee has thus been established comprising of the KNCHR and members from different civil society organizations specializing on various grounds of discrimination including age, sexual orientation, disability, religion, women and children, to mention but a few.   

KNCHR also collaborates with CSO's in lobbying government to ratify key international instruments and also enact domestic legislation that will further enhance the principles of non-discrimination and equal treatment.

KNCHR also partners with CSO's in the organization of various workshops and seminars and in educating the public and members of other organizations and governmental institutions of the existence of laws catering for the plight of vulnerable groups such as the disabled.

Referral: One of the departments at KNCHR is involved in receiving complaints from members of the public, whose rights have been violated. The KNCHR in turn processes the complaints and in certain cases refers some of the complaints to the CSO that specializes in a particular field and which the KNCHR knows is better equipped and specialized to handle the particular case.

The KNCHR will this year be celebrating five years since its establishment and therefore recognizes the immense potential and expertise of CSO that have been in existence longer.  

Christine Njeru, Human Rights Officer, Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR)

Lisbeth Garly Andersen, Project Manager, National Department
Danish Institute for Human Rights (DIHR), Denmark

Qualitative interviews with vulnerable groups 

DIHR engages civil society in a number of ways, as we have described in the some of the other blog inputs. In relationt to documentation of human rights problems NGOs can do studies on the ground which NHRIs can bring forward, and this is of course very good. However I believe, that NHRIs need to do the studies themselves sometimes and take the time to do it, allthough it can be very time consuming.  It is important to get close to the ground and make interviews and get a feel of what is happening in the lives of vulnerable groups.

DIHR is currently carrying out an analysis on rejected asylum seekers in Denmark. The analysis has two parts: one part is a legal review of the Danish Aliens Act and the legal practice in relation to asylum seekers and the other part a qualitative study based on 60 interviews with asylum seekers. The main focus of the review is to analyse whether the Danish Aliens Act and the administrative practice comply with international standards. Following areas have been selected: right to health, right to a proper living standard, right to work, right to education and right to family life.

The qualitative analysis is based on interviews with rejected asylum seekers as well as key stake holders. Eighty interviews have been made all in all, each with a duration of about two hours! The size of the interview material is very big, and much bigger than the Institute would do normally. It is envisaged that the project preparation, interview period in the asylum centers and the analysis and reporting afterwards will take about 12 months all in all.

The analysis on the situation of rejected asylum seekers is an issue the Institute has decided to take up by itself. This means in this case, that it is something we are doing because we consider it as important from a human rights perspective– not because we have been asked by a particular donor, ministry or other to do the study.

The Danish Institute has been doing the interviews with the asylum seekers alone, without help from NGOs. NGOs have however been invited to take part of a review group which is supposed to come with inputs and ideas to the study. The reason why DIHR would like to do the study on our own, is that we think it is important sometimes to make our own data collection and have our own material. It is necessary to get close to the ground and devote time to talk to people and get their views on the consequences the law has on their lives. And it is a good point of departure for the advocacy which will be done in order to try to improve the living conditions of this particular group. It feels different when we have seen the problem with our own eyes and talked to people directly. We will make a report which has not only legal information in it, but which also contains accounts by asylum seekers about their daily lives, their mental state etc.

Lisbeth Garly Andersen, Danish Institute for Human Rights

Lisbeth Garly Andersen, Project Manager, National Department
Danish Institute for Human Rights (DIHR), Denmark
www.humanrights.dk)  At one point the debate in Denmark on conditions of asylum seekers in Denmark became very heated. Medical experts and a group of grand mothers (they call themselves grand mothers for asylum) kept reporting to the media, that a considerable group of the asylum seekers in Denmark, suffered from mental illnesses. The Danish Institute for Human Rights also participated in the debate, but only to a limited extent, as the Institute did not have the full overview over the enjoyments of rights in the area. In order to be able to participate fully in the debate and have a broader overview, than we already had, The Institute decided to make its own research.

Danish Institute for Human Rights has as a part of its work on a national basis shed focus on a range of key human rights issues, including matters of discrimination, through the use of documentation and analyses. Research, often together with recommendations for law reform, is one of the methods used to combat discrimination in Denmark, but also other forms of human rights abuse.

Some of the research projects the Danish Institute has made include: Analysis of rights of disabled, analysis on the Danish family reunification rules and the implication for especially ethnic minorities and analysis of the use of the special measures used on mentally ill criminals in a human rights perspective.

The mentioned analyses are just some examples of analyses which have been done, in order to document areas where there is a concern that Denmark may not comply with international human rights standards. The analyses usually contain recommendations for a law reform.

The law and administrative practices are most often in focus in the analysis, but the Institute is also at the moment using more qualitative methods for the data collection. The qualitative method includes interviews with the concerned groups suffering from the different problems in the society as well as compilation of relevant data from NGOs in Denmark.  In this way, not only the shortcomings in the law are documented, but the experiences of the individuals concerned are also included more clearly in the analysis as well as the effects the law has on their lives all in all.

As mentioned, in the start, The Institute is currently carrying out research on the livelihood of asylum seekers in Denmark. Some of the following blogs will tell more about this research. Apart from that, following analyses are planned:  

• Analysis on discrimination in the health sector.
• Analysis on the rights of homosexuals
• Analysis of discrimination in relation to trade unions

The analyses are so far only in Danish, but we would like to have them translated. In the next blogs we will tell more about how we do analyses, why we think they are important and how we use them. We will also tell more about the combination of a legal review with more qualitative methods. We would of course appreciate to receive comments, questions and inputs, so please feel free let us know what you think…

The Canadian Human Rights Commission works closely with employers, service providers, and other stakeholders to promote human rights culture change. The Commission shares the credit of its success with its partners who have demonstrated a real commitment to improve or help to improve working environments and delivery centers. One of our method in working towards common goals is to foster partnerships not only between the Commission and our stakeholders, but also amongst stakeholders themselves and civil society.

The Commission through its Prevention Initiative and Liaison Division introduced 2 new models in partnering with civil society:

1. The Prevention Forum

The Commission held its third annual Discrimination Prevention Forum in October 2007. This regular annual forum is an opportunity for the Commission, federally regulated employers and members of civil society from across the country to come together to identify and discuss emerging issues, share knowledge and experience, and develop tools to prevent discrimination. The 2007 forum explored accommodation of mental health issues and religious differences, disability management and return to work, medical information and functional assessments, and the role of community groups in preventing workplace discrimination.

2. The Employer Advisory Council (EAC)

The EAC is comprised of employers and service providers that have signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Commission to work collaboratively to prevent discrimination. Members benefit from a close working relationship with the Commission. In turn the Commission is informed of emerging issues-trends identified by partners. The Current EAC members are :

Canada Border Services Agency

Canada Post Corporation

Canadian Forces

Canadian Pacific Railway

National Bank of Canada

Penauille Servisair Inc.

Purolator Courier Ltd

Royal Canadian Mounted Police

Westjet Airlines

The diversity of the Council is incredible. The collective work of these institutions has the potential to reach and to influence every segment of the Canadian population. The Council facilitates broader communication on prevention-related matters, proven practices, tools and resources. The next step is to foster further community bridging between civil society and these members.

Johanne Lelièvre for  

Piero Narducci

Director

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Mexico City’s Human Rights Commission has a specific area within its Technical Secretariat that deals with civil society and NGOs and that has a specific program regarding non-discrimination. In the former, we have achieved lots of strategic alliances either to urge legislation with human rights standards, to promote press releases and statements congratulating or expressing our concern about certain attitudes and policies; to organize workshops and events in order to analyze good and bad practices so that we can have a better strategy to fight discrimination.  On the other hand, the “Permanent Campaign Program against Discrimination” has as its main objective the promotion and publication of different actions and strategies in order to make awareness of the right to live without discrimination through institutional work spaces whose main priority is the participation of the whole society. In order to achieve this, the Campaign has been developing in three phases: Phase One: to show the existence of discrimination both in the public and private sectors. Phase Two: To promote and publicize the universal principle of non-discrimination as a human right.Phase Three: To promote and demand legislation regarding the rights to equal treatment and to importance to live without discrimination. PHASE ONE: In order to achieve this objective, the Permanent Campaign Against Discrimination started Phase One on January 29th, 2003. This Phase showed the public the problem of discrimination as a prejudiced and stereotyped phenomenon which affects society both in its public and private environments. The first phase of the Campaign, promoted under the slogan “Yo no discrimino… ¿y tú?” (“I don’t discriminate… do you?), informed 1.491 public servers and 1.341 people of different social, civil, and open community organizations, who multiplied the message. The Permanent Seminar for Reflection and Analysis of Discrimination Matters was founded. This seminar intends to become a forum for analysis, reflection and study about discrimination and related subjects which brings together specialists, public servants and civil society members to approach - from a theoretical-philosophical perspective - the legalisation of the human right to live without discrimination.Along with other institutions, several spaces for reflection and debate were created: events, forums, seminars, fairs and lectures which reached 11.132 people. With help from mass media 24.608 impact sources were generated. In relation with informative material, 20 topic-related publications were edited, and a total of 134.350 copies were made.During this first phase of the Campaign, some discriminating acts which remained anonymous (and indifferent to the State, its institutions and the whole society) were brought to the public eye.  

Useful website: http://www.cdhdf.org.mx/index.php?id=nodiscri

The Commission is convinced that one of the better tools for preventing human rights violations –especially discrimination- is promoting those rights through publications. We have publicized several posters as well as pamphlets in order to promote the right to non discrimination. Amongst others, we have done several manuals:

• “Manual for awareness on non-discrimination, the respect for diversity and the exercice of tolerance” ("Manual de sensibilización para la no discriminación, respeto a la diversidad y ejercicio de la tolerancia");
• Manual for the elderly (“Manual sobre personas adultas mayores”)
• “Promotion and defense on the rights to equality for people living with VIH-AIDS” (“Promoción y Defensa del Derecho a la igualdad de personas que viven con VIH-SIDA”)

 We have also issued informative brochures entitled “All the rights without discrimination” (Todos los derechos sin discriminación) and “Disability free of discrimination” (“Discapacidad sin discriminación”); a Braille brochure called “Disabilities without borders” (“Discapacidad sin barreras”) The Commission also published a four-volume compilation of local, national and international standards regarding non discrimination and also a book called “Discrimination, equality and political difference” (“Discriminación, igualdad y diferencia política”) 

It must be said that all of our publications and services are free of charge.

María Alejandra Nuño Ruiz Velasco, Fourth Visiting General
Human Rights Commission of the

Maria Lourijsen, Policy Advisor
Equal Treatment Commission (CGB), Netherlands

The Dutch Equal Treatment Commission has a dual function. Some of its duties and competencies can be described as semi-judicial in the sense that the CGB gives its judgement about the lawfulness or unlawfulness of conduct, practices or regulations. Other duties and competencies are pro-active, in the sense that the CGB has a role in preventing discrimination or unequal treatment. The specific tasks of the Commission are laid down by the AWGB = Dutch equal treatment act . These involve:

Investigation of complaints and possible plaintiffs: The first and most important task of the Commission is to conduct investigations into complaints that a certain conduct, practice, procedure or regulation is discriminatory and to decide whether this is (legally) the case or not.Request for an assessment of one’s own practice or regulation:  Individuals or organisations may also want to know whether their own conduct, policies or regulations fall within the scope of the equal treatment laws.Investigation carried out on the Commission’s own initiative: The Commission does not have to wait for petitions to be filed. It is entitled to investigate on its own initiative in specific areas where systematic or persistent patterns of discrimination are suspected.Legal action by the Commission: The CGB may bring legal action with a view to obtaining a court ruling that certain conduct is contrary to the AWGB or other equal treatment legislation and is therefore unlawful.Advisory and consultative status: The Equal treatment act does not explicitly confer the right or duty on the Commission to advise the Government or others  in matters concerning equal treatment legislation or equal opportunities policies. However, this advisory role has been recognised in practice. This means the CGB has taken up this role as part of its general task to promote adherence to equality law and in fact has often been requested to give such advice.

Information and research:

In order to participate actively in the effort to combat discrimination, the CGB sees it as one of its remits to gather and disseminate expert knowledge in the field of non-discrimination and equal treatment laws, both at national and international levelFor this reason 9and others) the Commission  is part of the European network Equinet (www.equineteurope.org). Equinet  is established to ensure that equality bodies can benefit from each other’s experiences and expertise,  in their constant efforts to improve the enforcement of equal treatment laws, policies and practices,  and that the equality bodies united in Equinet can make their views heard at a European and, where necessary and opportune, national level.There are 28 specialised equality bodies, mostly on the basis of art. 13 Racial Equality Directive and/of art. 8a 2002 Gender Equality Directive and two with observer status.

Through workings groups on different themes the bodies can focus on enhancing the expertise within the network, on enforcement strategies, on  dynamic interpretation of EU equal treatment legislation. Furthermore the working groups support the dialogue between European institutions and the specialised equality bodies and supporting strategies for promotion of equality . Through this network we have input to better organise and implement the commsisions  work.

For citizens it’s also possible to get assistance bij filing a complaint. For this we have 35 antidiscrimnationbureaus in municipailities all over the Netherlands (www.art1.nl). At this moment a law for the organisation and coordination of these 35 bureaus is send to the Dutch Parliament. Through these bureas it’s also possible to file a complaint at Dutch policestations concerning discrimination mentionned in the Penal code (which subjects don’t fall under the Equal treatment act) by  It’s also possible to complain and aks for help about all forms of  discrimination on the internet (http://www.meldpunt.nl).  My question to others is what there view is on how several organisations in your country work together on dealing and tackling discrimination. And is this cooperationsubject of discussion? Is there interference by ministries on adressing discrimination issues?     

Our Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, acknowledges the fundamental rights and freedom of individuals and the need for protection from discrimination. The Constitution makes mention to various grounds from which discrimination upon which individuals should not be discriminated upon. Arguably however the list is not exhaustive. Further to making mention to the rights of individuals, the Constitution also provides for the establishment of a High Court which is mandated to interpret the provisions of the Constitution.

The High Court is therefore one of the mechanisms available to members of the public (individuals and organizations) to seek redress whereby their right to non-discrimination has been breached. The person seeking redress has to establish the existence of a violation of their rights as provided in the constitution; how the violation occurred and what section of the constitution has been violated resulting in the breach of their rights. 

Members of the public (individuals and organizations) may seek redress from the KNCHR’s complaints hearing panel. Once a complaint is lodged at KNCHR, and the KNCHR Commissioners (who are of the rank of High Court Judges), feel that after investigations, a complaint merits a hearing, the case is referred to a panel of Commissioners who hear the case and make a decision. The KNCHR complaints hearing panel, unlike the High Court does not charge members of the public therefore the whole process is free and pocket friendly to the public, many of whom live below the poverty line.

Christine Njeru, Human Rights Officer, Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR) 

Christine Jesseman, Senior Researcher/Coordinator: Human Rights and Business Special Programme

South African Human Rights Copmmission

In addition to the right to equality entrenched in the Bill of Rights of our Constitution, national legislation has also been enacted. This includes the Employment Equity Act and the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, commonly known as PEPUDA or the Equality Act. These Acts recognise our unfair past and aim to change the present inequalities and build a society wherein everyone is treated equally. The main objectives of PEPUDA are:

• To ensure that every person enjoys all rights and freedoms equally.
• To promote equality.
• To curb unfair discrimination and protect human dignity as contained in the Constitution.
• To disallow hate speech based on ones colour, religion, gender or ethnicity etc.
• Disallow harassment.
• To set out measures to redress historic inequalities.

As stated in our recent submission at the Universal Periodic Review Mechanism of the UN Human Rights Council: “South Africa deserves substantial praise for its creation of the Equality Courts. These courts hear complaints relating to discrimination and are designed to be accessible to the average South African acting without a lawyer. Unfortunately, whilst great strides have been taken on the legislative front and Equality Courts have been set up, it is now becoming apparent that these courts are grossly underutilized and that some appear even to have been closed without notice to the Commission or to the general population. The SAHRC calls on the South African government to commit to taking further measures to popularize these courts and ensuring that discrimination is redressed.” The SAHRC monitors the Equality Courts.

A further mechanism available is the lodging of complaints by individuals etc directly with the SAHRC’s Legal Services Department. The SAHRC is also proactive though and can initiate a complaint and investigation in its own right and the process is therefore not only complaints driven.

Finally, another point raised at the UPRM was that: “Most disappointing, in light of South Africa’s history, it is substantially delayed in the completion of its reporting requirements under the Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD). Thus, the SAHRC calls on the South African government to commit to putting procedures in place to ensure that reports are submitted in a timely manner.”

The National Human Rights Comission of Mexico is facing the challenges of discrimination and other human rights: such as stigma, discrimination, machism, homophobia, racism, calssism, among other prejudices that foster discrimination and other forms of human rights violations, by creating especial progrmas such as the program that helps victims of crime, the program for families and childhood, the program for HIVAids, the program for missing persons (probably adbucted by the agents of State), the program for gender equality , the program to prevent torture, the program for people in jail, teh program for indigenous people, the program to defend defendors of human rights and journalist from and the program for migrants.

One successful strategy for implementing non-discrimination public policies that the Mexico City’s Human Rights Commission has used is the elaboration of special reports regarding groups or sectors that are in a vulnerable situation or have had plenty history of being discriminated against (indigenous populations, people with disabilities, elderly, etc.). These reports include a wide description on the human rights situation of those persons and groups and then it has a plethora of recommendations for different authorities. 

Also the Commission has finished the draft of the first Diagnosis of the Human Rights situation in Mexico City, in collaboration with the local government, tribunal and parliament, as well as with civil organizations, NGO´s and the Office in Mexico of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (which has signed a technical cooperation and training agreement with the Mexican government and issued in 2004 the Diagnosis of the human rights situation in Mexico). In this particular, NGO participation and information had been of the greatest importance: they have nurtured both the diagnosis and the recommendations for the implementation of public policies that respect, promote and guarantee all human rights.

María Alejandra Nuño Ruiz Velasco, Fourth Visiting General
Human Rights Commission of the

Myriam Montrat, Director General, Discrimination Prevention Branch
Canada

Moving from participation to real engagement and commitment on the part of federally regulated organizations.  We have been quite successful with the Employer Advisory Council (EAC) which allows for information and proven practices sharing.  It is an ideal forum to put forward challenges being faced by employers in trying to encourage a respectful work environment.  The EAC also looks at issues of common interest via its subcommittees and provides valuable insights to all of its members.

 We are limited with our resources and as a result we have to find innovative ways to promote human rights and secure stakeholders engagement.  One area we are currently exploring is the development of a maturity model for human rights.  We are hoping to achieve greater commitment from organizations as they take the required steps to achieve the next level of maturity.

 We are also embarking on a major outreach initiative to build and sustain relationships with all relevant stakeholders.

As the supreme human rights organ of the state, KNCHR is specifically mandated to advise the government on ways to enhance the promotion and protection of human rights in Kenya. The KNCHR Research, Policy and Legislation programme is involved in the review of domestic legislation and making recommendations. The KNCHR has been successful in that many of the recommendations including recommendations on review of legislation and protection against discrimination made to Parliament have accordingly been incorporated in the amendment of the legislation. Further the KNCHR is engaged in creating awareness and has succeeded in resettling women who were discriminated against on grounds of culture. These women were evicted from their homes when their husbands died but due to the efforts of KNCHR some of the women have been resettled. The KNCHR is still very new in its work and has not received full support from governmental institutions.

Christine Njeru, Human Rights Officer , Kenya National Commission on Human Rights

Being Mexico a federal country, the first issue to address is the jurisdiction that both ombudsman´s office and other specialized institutions have. At the national level, there is the  National Commission on Human Rights (Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos), but there is also a National Council to Prevent Discrimination (Consejo Nacional para Prevenir la Discriminación). The two institutions have mandate to investigate complaints regarding violations alleging discrimination. The former has a restricted mandate regarding violations committed by federal public or government officials (as well as suggest public policies to prevent discrimination) whereas the later can also investigate complaints against individuals and companies.  There are also other specialized institutions in charge of designing, implementing and evaluating public policy vis-à-vis certain topics (such as women’s rights). At the local level, there are also bodies similar to the ones just described: The Mexico City’s Human Rights Commission (Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Distrito Federal) has the mandate, inter alia, to investigate complaints regarding local authorities. But it can also elaborate publications, emit press releases, give training to authorities or organizations, etc. On the other hand, there is the Mexico City’s Council to Prevent and Erradicate Discrimination (Consejo para Prevenir y Erradicar la Discriminación en el Distrito Federal) which has a limited mandate compared to the federal Council because it’s mandate is to deal with public policy regarding non-discrimination.  In short those mandates have to be seen as complementary between them and not as exclusion to analyze the situation of discrimination with wide and integral vision. However, nowadays there isn’t an institution that coordinates the work and activities done regarding non-discrimination.  Useful websites: http://www.conapred.org.mx, www.cndh.org.mx, www.cdhdf.org.mx

María Alejandra Nuño Ruiz Velasco, Fourth Visiting General
Human Rights Commission of the

Myriam Montrat, Director General, Discrimination Prevention Branch
Canada

The Canadian Human Rights Act protects people living in Canada against discrimination from federally regulated employers or service providers, such as:

• federal separtments, agencies and crown corporations

• banks

• airlines

• television and radio stations.

Under the Canadian Human Rights Act, it is against the law for any employer or provider of a service that falls within federal jurisdiction to discriminate on the basis of:

• race
• national or ethnic origin
• colour
• religion
• age
• sex
• sexual orientation
• marital status
• family status
• physical or mental disability
• pardoned criminal conviction

The Canadian Human Rights Commission investigates and tries to settle complaints of discrimination.  It also fosters the respect of human rights by using different mechanisms such as Memorandums of understanding, training, advisory councils, discrimination prevention forums, etc. 

Provinces and territories have similar laws prohibiting discrimination in their own jurisdictions.

The KNCHR's core mandate as outlined in its constitutive act, is broadly to enhance the promotion and protection of all human rights and this no doubt incorporates issues of discrimination. In addition to the KNCHR, the law courts also receive complaints from members of the public who allege human rights violation on the grounds of  discrimination, among other complaints. 

The KNCHR often engages the court as  amicus curiae (friend of the court) on issues relating to human rights including aspects of discrimination, and particularly on issues that are of particular interest to the KNCHR.

Christine Njeru, Human Rights Officer, Kenya National Commission on Human Rights

South African Human Rights Commission

Given South Africa's legacy of apartheid it is unsurprising that the right to equality is one of the key democratic values underlying our Constitution as well as the first right articulated in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. Racial discrimination is an issue which is quite rightly focussed upon in our society, but the nature of discrimination is complex, comprises various layers and exists in various dynamics. It is because of this recognition of the systematic and complex nature of discrimination in our society that the SAHRC's equality section of the Research, Documentation and Policy Analysis Department has senior researchers/ co-ordinators whose specialist areas are: Disability; non-nationals; HIV/AIDS; children; and older persons. Following a minor restructuring, it is my understanding that a specialist senior researcher/ co-ordinator for racism will soon be recruited to replace our equality co-ordinator. Gender is an integral part of all considerations and the goal should be to mainstream gender issues into all portfolios. There is however also an independent Commission for gender Equality established in terms of Chapter 9 of the Constitution, like the SAHRC. The structure of our equality section reflects our practical experience that simply focussing on one aspect of discrimination does not adequately address the reality of discrimination in society. We also recognise that specific vulnerable and marginalised groups require specific attention. I hope to speak more in another section of the blog about the underlying economic and social rights and specific issues which other specialist researchers focus on.

That having been said, recent events in South Africa which have been widely covered in the media have emphasised the fact that racial discrimination is very much alive in our society, even among some of the younger "post apartheid" generation. While we need to acknowledge progress and change where it occurs, we cannot be complacent or forget the lessons of our past.

Christine Jesseman, Senior Researcher/Coordinator: Human Rights and Business Special Programme

Mrs. Huriye Aydemir Varisli, Legal Policy Officer, Complaints Committee for Ethnic Equal Treatment
Danish Institute for Human Rights (DIHR)

DIHR has in its national strategy to combat discrimination as well as in the carrying out its mandate as a specialised equality body to promote and protect equal treatment chosen specific areas to focus on such as:

- the rights of vulnerable persons (victims of traficking, asylum seekers)

- homophobia

- the inclusive society

- discrimination in the health sector

- lecturing at the Danish Police Academy

- Multiple discrimination

- and many more.

In its work to promote equal treatment and non- discrimination DIHR works with the horizontal approach in all of its focus areas.

As mention one of DIHRs focus areas is lecturing at the Danish Police Academy in the subject of Internaional Relations and Human Rights with special emphasize on equal treatment and non-discrimination legislation. DIHR teaches every class for 8 hours in areas such as the international human rights conventions, the UN and EU system, national penal code concerning discrimination, national civil law concerning equal treatment, etc. 

The reasson for DIHR to choose especially the Danish Police Academy as a specific focus aresa is because the police often play a key role in cases concerning discrimination, whether it is on grounds of race or ethnic origin or disability or some other ground. It is therefore crusial when combating discrimination that the ones who are empowered to protect people against discrimination is fully aware of the law and how to use the law effectively.

Another area that DIHR has choosen as a focus area is homofobia. DIHR is right now preparing a comparative study on homophobia in discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in the EU for the EU agency for fundamental rights. DIHR is also engaged in the Outgames which will be held in Copenhagen in 2009.

Huriye Aydemir Varisli, DIHR.

Myriam Montrat, Director General, Discrimination Prevention Branch
Canada

In Canada we promote employment equity for the following 4 groups: visible minorities, people with disabilities, aboriginal people and women.  We are still witnessing discrimination for the 3 first ones.  The challenge is not the same for the public and private sector.

The work regarding defense, protection and promotion of human rights of the Mexico City’s Commission (CDHDF) has contemplated, amongst others, people living with HIV-AIDS. Therefore, it has implemented institutional and inter-institutional strategies, as well as alliances with civil and social organizations for over a decade in order to advance activities regarding promotion, defense, investigation and study in this subject.  The result of the above-mentioned is different courses; work-shops and round tables regarding the situation lived by people with AIDS. There have also been publications involving these persons’ testimony and we have a special publication with local, national and international standards too. Moreover, the CDHDF has worked jointly with the HIV-AIDS Program within the local Health Minister with the aim of training and making awareness of the discriminatory actions that this sector suffers. 

Last but not least, the CDHDF will have a significant role in the XVII International AIDS Conference which will be held in Mexico City next August. Because of the importance of this event, we will be participating in different activities included in the Conference’s Program and the CDHDF will also participate in a civil society’s forum before the Conference takes place.

María Alejandra Nuño Ruiz Velasco, Fourth Visiting General
Human Rights Commission of the

Douglas A. Johnson, M.P.P.M.
Executive Director, Center for Victims of Torture, Minneapolis, MN, USA

A number of participants have addressed the importance of partnerships with civil society and the work of the national institute, as Margaret Donaldson did here describing a good example of such a partnership with the Muslim community. Lisbeth Garly Andersen described how the Danish Institute relies on civil society organizations for information on many issues.

I would be interested if you could elaborate about the kinds of competencies and skills that civil society organizations have or should develop that would make their contribution most useful to you? Have you found certain skillful actions from civil society that have stimulated learning or action within your institute that might not have occurred otherwise? What are the competencies that make some civil society organizations more welcomed than others, not as a matter of policy but rather in the practical human and institutional reactions that inevitably play out? How do those competencies make your institutions more permeable and accessible to civil society organizations?

Essentially, please comment on those practices within civil society that best help you recognize or carry out your mission, and your advice to those of us in civil society on what has the more helpful impact on you and for you.

Douglas A. Johnson, M.P.P.M.
Executive Director, Center for Victims of Torture, Minneapolis, MN, USA

You ask an interesting and difficult question which I hope this group will struggle with you to answer. In some situations the establishment of a national human rights commission is definite progress in response to an issue; yet it might also be an attempt by a government to pretend that something is improving when it is actually creating a mechanism to limit damage to its authority. I don’t have any idea what the situation is in Bangladesh, but it seems to me that, regardless of these specifics, the formation of national commissions has largely permitted the creation of new political space where issues can be raised and where the weight of civil society can eventually have an impact.

In the immediate practical questions you asked, I would first ask what issues and political forces led to the move to establish a commission and which forces led to constraining it as you describe? The interests behind both actions may well be legitimate and very practical from your point of view, once you understand them. But I would want to know what the major pressures were and if the players in that push were satisfied with the result (and why) or dissatisfied (and why). There is where I would look for potential allies with whom to build a strategy to make the institution more transparent and permeable to civil society as you envision.

I think the experiences of our experts in this dialogue could help illuminate the issues, even if they have not been involved in the initial founding of their institutions. As they all deal with difficult social justice issues, there are always pressures to augment the authority or limit the authority of the institution to act. (See my earlier question to Piero Narducci of the Canadian Human Rights Commission on the story behind expanding the mandate of his institution). There is always room for improvement in questions of mandate, tactics, and governance. It would seem that one of the key questions is how those improvements are seen to the benefit of broader and more powerful forces within every society, and how you can act to make that happen.

The question if there is useful/better to have an ombudsperson and/or an equality commission is a million dollar question. I could share an experience of my country, Macedonia, which in order to fulfill the necessary standards in the field of respect of human rights for achieving its goal - membership with the EU, had to resolve this dilemma.

First of all, I must clarify that we have a functioning Ofiice of the Ombudsperson, which is responsible for its work to the Parliament, in sense of sending a year report and budgeting.

However, even having in mind this accomplishment and reatively high level of respect of human rights in the country, just recently, on eof the Reccomendations of the Human Rights Commitee of the UN, upon the consideration of Second Periodic Report of the Government of the Republic of Macedonia on the implementation of the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rigts, was  - to establish the Commission, whose competencies would not overlap with the competencies of the Office of the Ombudsman, which has been functional for more than ten years .

Apart from that, for more than five years, we have a Governmental body called Inter-Ministerial Body for protection of Human Rights,  consisted of representatives of differrent ministries involved in the processes. Thanks.