International Service for Human Rights

Kazakhstan appeared before the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (the Committee) on 26 February and 1 March 2010.[1] The delegation, which included a number of mid and high level officials, was led by Mr. Gaziz Telebayev, the Vice-Minister of Culture and Information. The delegation included members from a wide range of departments and ministries including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the National Centre for Human Rights, the Ministry of Justice and the Committee for Migration, Ministry of Labour and Social Security. In his opening remarks, Mr. Telebavev emphasised the value placed on diversity within Kazakhstan, as demonstrated by investment in programs to ‘maintain and promote’ ethnic and cultural diversity. He then turned the floor over to members of the delegation to respond to questions previously submitted by Committee members.

The Committee thanked the delegation for their informative report and efforts to respond to submitted questions, and acknowledged Kazakhstan’s position as a newly formed State in its institution-building stage. However, Committee members expressed concern on a number of issues, particularly incidents of ethnic conflict reported by non-governmental organisations and other sources. According to reports received by the Committee, Kazak authorities failed to conduct proper investigations or prosecute culprits of violence. Committee members expressed concern that the delegation did not seem to view incidents of violence as a reflection of ethnic tension and emphasised that these incidents must be addressed in order to prevent more serious ethnic conflict. The Committee’s concerns about incidents of violence were compounded by a general lack of law enforcement or acknowledgement of discrimination by court officials and low reporting of cases of discrimination. Committee members encouraged Kazakhstan to make information on the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination widely available and ensure that court officials and law enforcement officers are trained to address issues of discrimination.

Many Committee members also commented on Kazakhstan’s lack of a comprehensive anti-discrimination law. Mr Thornberry recommended that authorities should review all legislation in light of the Convention and ensure that gaps do not exist. Mr Thornberry and others also raised questions about the language used in discussion of discrimination both legally and procedurally. They expressed concern about inconsistent, confusing and potentially damaging use of the terms ‘race’, ‘minority’, and ‘national minority’, by the delegation and in Kazak legislation.

Another key issue was the importance of multilingual education, and more generally, the importance of acknowledging the consequences of linguistic requirements in a multilingual society. Committee members commended Kazakhstan on progress in multilingual education and encouraged the continued development of opportunities for students to study in their mother tongues. They also recommended that Kazakhstan promote multilingual accessibility in all public forums and take other measures to ensure that all ethnic groups, including those living in specific regions, feel they have full citizenship. Finally, Mr. Diaconu and other Committee members commented on significant disparities in the socio-economic positions of different ethnic groups. They recommended that Kazakhstan study and address the underlying socio-economic causes of poverty, and avoid language that associates membership in a group with certain social roles and problems.

Other issues raised at the session included: congratulating Kazakhstan on its current position as the Chair of the Organisation for Cooperation and Security in Europe; concern about inconsistencies in granting refugee status; encouraging Kazakhstan to ratify the ILO Convention NO. 43 on Migrant Workers (Supplementary Provisions), concern that the Commission on Human Rights, Kazakhstan’s national human rights institution is not independent from the executive; recommending the implementation of protections of land ownership for ethnic groups; and encouraging Kazakhstan to improve efforts in human rights education and legal teaching.

The delegation engaged cooperatively with the Committee, and attempted to answer their questions through specific and informed answers prepared during the intersession break. However, their answers focused more on presenting Kazakhstan’s strengths than acknowledging problematic areas. In his concluding statements, Mr. Diaconu thanked the delegation for their positive dialogue with the Committee and expressed hope that they would focus their next report to the Committee on the areas of concern raised at the session.