Intergovernmental Working Group (IGWG) on the Effective Implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (DDPA) 6th Session (21/01/08

Tuesday 29th January 2008

Introductory speech by the chairperson, his Excellency the Ambassador of Sri Lanka, Mr. Dayan Jallatileka:
We should be able to resolve collectively the issues putted at forward at Durban. He appeals for consensus and compromise on these 4 days meetings. The chair reminded that the mandate of the IGWG has been extend for 3 years, until June 2009 by the Human Rights Council. And also that consultations had been hold by the different regional working groups so delegations within a same regional group should speak on one voice.

The main issue is the scope of the working group’s mandate:
- implementation of the DDPA.
- Set out : recommendations; prepare international instruments to fight racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

He highly warned that the recommendations adopted would not be subject to discussion. The chairperson then gave the floor to the delegations.

Their were 2 tendencies:

Slovenia speaking on behalf of the EU (holding presidency for 6 month since January the 1rst) proposed that IGWG be postponed until the end of the Review Conference in 2009 and reminded that EU had already asked for it at the end of the 5th session of the IGWG. They said experts should have been present in this session. Slovenia added that it won’t agree to discuss issues that haven’t been dealt before, at the 1rst prep com, but only after the second one in April 2008. The delegate ended her speech saying that the programme of work wasn’t acceptable in its present form. EU member states comments are the following:
- the secretariat should brief delegation on the national implementation of the DDPA (Slovenia)
- there is a difference in the interpretation of the language of the recommendations. Seeking for interpretation from the chair (Belgium)
- clarification of the scope of the WG (Slovenia)
- how is it possible to have recommendations for future work (item 6) without even having had the prep com nor the Durban Review conference it self? (Sweden)
- one should not make a difference between item 3: Review of recommendations and 4 : Contribution to Durban review Conference (Austria)
- UK said that delegations should concentrate on issues were they have concensus.
- One should not politicize the issues (Belgium)


Egypt speaking on behalf of the African group declared that they do not understand why EU member states are asking the put the IGWG on hold as they are the one who asked the WG to participate to the review process of the implementation of the DDPA. Therefore they do agree that it would have been wise to have expert in this session. The substantive session of April 2008 is meant to summarize all the contributions made during previous consultation. So if we postpone this session, we won’t having nothing to do in April. African member states comments:
- the programme of work doesn’t meet the expectation of the group.
- Don’t agree to deal with issues that are not in the DDPA.
- IGWG is not an standing Committee, it just meets annually so it must not be postponed (South Africa)
- It would be advisable to come with clear proposal to the programme of work instead of jamming it (SA)
- One should bear in mind that there is a large volume of work that has not been done from the DDPA
- EU is trying to slow down the implementation process fainting to work on the matter of consensus. They are the one who politicize the issue (Zimbabwe).

Brasil Speaking on behalf of Grulac considers that the work of the WG should concentrate it self on his contribution to the preparation of the Review. Analyses and contribution of the WG should start from the work already done without excluding to discuss any issue related to the DDPA that are valuable. One shouldn’t ignore recommendations and views of the IGWG on the preparatory process. Comments by Grulac member states:
- It is not valuable to postpone the session (Argentina and Mexico).

All delegation of all groups agreed to say that recommendations should not be renegotiated but concretized and updated.

The matter of the programme of work led to the end of the session early in the afternoon. Some delegates went with the Chair and the secretariat to make up another one. The Chair then informed that he would come tomorrow with a new programme of work.


Faye Ismaila Pedro