Source: United Nations – Geneva
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today concluded its consideration of the combined twenty-fourth to twenty-sixth periodic reports of Ukraine. Committee Experts congratulated the State party for appearing before the Committee despite prevailing circumstances, while raising questions on the treatment of Ukraine’s indigenous peoples and the Roma population.
A Committee Expert congratulated the Ukrainian delegation for making a laudable effort to assess the implementation of the Convention in the country, despite prevailing circumstances. Ukraine should be praised for this effort.
Chinsung Chung, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, said the Committee noted that the State party adopted the law on indigenous peoples in 2021. However, according to information before the Committee, the law only recognised Crimean Tatars, Karaims and Krymchaks as indigenous peoples in Ukraine, while excluding other groups, such as Hutsuls, Lemkos and Gagauz peoples. Could the delegation provide clarifications on the law on indigenous peoples and how it aligned with international standards? What measures were in place to preserve and promote the identity, language and culture of all indigenous people under the jurisdiction of the State party?
Ms. Chung also said that according to the representative of the Office of the Ombudsman of Ukraine, around 100,000 Roma became refugees, and around the same number of Ukrainian Roma became internally displaced persons. Were accurate statistics available? Did the State party find durable solutions for internally displaced Roma and take measures to ensure that they benefitted from assistance? What were the State’s plans to include Roma people in recovery and reconstruction programmes?
The delegation said in 2021, the Ukrainian Parliament adopted the law on indigenous peoples in Ukraine, which was developed through extensive consultations with indigenous groups and civil society, and represented the aspirations of these groups. In addition, a draft law was developed on the status of the Crimean Tartar people which would be registered in Parliament in the near future.
Officially, Ukraine recognised three indigenous groups of peoples, including Crimean Tartars, Karaims and Krymchaks. The Lemkos people were not considered a national minority group, but rather a cultural group. The public broadcaster of Ukraine produced programmes for national minorities in their national languages, across broadcast, radio and digital formats.
Mr. Lossovskyi said in 2021, the Ukrainian Government approved the Roma strategy, and every two years action plans were prepared for its implementation. The Roma community was a young community, one of the youngest among the national minorities in Ukraine. It would be beneficial to use their innovation and abilities in the process of renovating Ukraine when the war was over. The State was working on providing the Roma with more education. There were many grants provided to Roma for studying in universities.
Introducing the report, Ihor Lossovskyi, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said during the reporting period from 2014 to 2019, fundamental tragic changes took place in Ukraine, in particular the beginning of the Russian aggression. At the height of the Russian invasion, in April 2022, Ukraine applied for membership in the European Union, and in June 2022, it received candidate status along with seven relevant recommendations in all spheres of human activity, including recommendation no. 7 on completion of the reform of legislation in the field of national minorities and interethnic relations.
To implement these recommendations, Ukraine developed and approved three laws, including the new law on national minorities (communities) of Ukraine, as well as 16 subordinate regulatory legal acts (bylaws) approved by the Government.
In concluding remarks, Ibrahima Guisse, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, thanked the delegation for the dialogue held, particularly given the context. War was ended through negotiation and diplomacy, not capitulation. It was hoped this would happen with Ukraine. The fact that Ukraine was here before the Committee was an example of the State’s willingness to cooperate.
In his concluding remarks, Mr. Lossovskyi thanked the Committee for their time and interest in the situation in Ukraine. The Committee’s recommendations were very much appreciated.
The delegation of Ukraine consisted of representatives of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience; the Coordination Centre for Legal Aid Provision; the State Committee for Television and Radio Broadcasting of Ukraine; and the Permanent Mission of Ukraine to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will issue its concluding observations on the report of Ukraine after the conclusion of its one hundred and fifteenth session on 9 May 2025. 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 Friday, 25 April at 3.p.m for a half day general discussion on reparations for the injustices from the transatlantic trade of enslaved Africans, their treatment as chattel, and the ongoing harms to and crimes against people of African descent.
Report
The Committee has before it the combined twenty-fourth to twenty-sixth periodic reports of Ukraine (CERD/C/UKR/24-26).
Presentation of Report
IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said during the reporting period from 2014 to 2019, fundamental tragic changes took place in Ukraine, in particular the beginning of the Russian aggression, Russia’s brazen destruction of international law, the occupation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, the occupation by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and terrorist organizations supported by it of certain parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, as well as the financing by the Russian Federation of terrorist organizations of the occupation administrations.
Due to these circumstances, collecting information in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine was difficult. As a result of the temporary occupation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol by the Russian Federation, and the aggression of the Russian Federation in eastern Ukraine, ensuring the rights of minorities in these areas, especially Crimea, had sharply deteriorated. Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars, and those who adhered to pro-Ukrainian views, were subject to discrimination in Crimea.
During the reporting period, important changes also took place in the religious sphere in Ukraine. On 15 December 2018, the Unification Council was held, at which representatives of the three Orthodox Churches of Ukraine united into a single church structure, which was called the “Orthodox Church of Ukraine”, and the Metropolitan Epiphany of Kyiv and All Ukraine was elected as its primate. As of the beginning of 2021, this church jurisdiction had 7,097 religious organizations on the territory of Ukraine, handled by 4,537 clergy.
The principles of preventing and combatting discrimination were defined by the 2012 law on the principles of preventing and combatting discrimination in Ukraine. In May 2014, amendments were made to the law, which improved the legislative definition of discrimination. In 2019, the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience was established to deal with State policy in the field of national minorities and interethnic relations, freedom of conscience, and freedom of religion.
At the height of the Russian invasion, in April 2022, Ukraine applied for membership in the European Union, and in June 2022, it received candidate status along with seven relevant recommendations in all spheres of human activity, including recommendation no. 7 on completion of the reform of legislation in the field of national minorities and interethnic relations. To implement these recommendations, Ukraine developed and approved three laws, including the new law on national minorities (communities) of Ukraine, as well as 16 subordinate regulatory legal acts (bylaws) approved by the Government.
The first stages of the negotiation process with the European Commission regarding Ukraine’s membership in the European Union took place, in particular, the screening of Ukrainian legislation for its compliance with European legislation. The screening was provided under four subsections on judiciary and fundamental rights: freedom of conscience, freedom of religion; racism, xenophobia, hate speech; racial and ethnic discrimination, including Roma; and rights of national minorities.
Based on the results, the European Commission prepared a positive report on the state of Ukrainian legislation and its compliance with European legislation in October 2024. The next stage of the negotiation process was the preparation of strategic documents, including an action plan to ensure the rights of national minorities in Ukraine, which were in the final stage of preparation.
Questions by Committee Experts
IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, welcomed that Ukraine had a diverse and high-level delegation. Ukraine’s presence before the Committee despite the difficult context in the country highlighted the country’s commitment to appear before the treaty bodies. Mr. Guisse then paid tribute to Pope Francis who had been a man of peace.
During the period under review, Ukraine had experienced deep upheavals, including the large-scale invasion in 2022, which had given rise to large-scale destruction, human loss and mass displacement. According to information before the Committee, the last census conducted in 2001 showed that the main minority groups included Russians, Belarusians, Moldovans, Crimean Tatars and Bulgarians. Ukraine also has smaller populations of Poles, Romanians, Armenians, Hungarians, Roma and other nationalities. A subsequent census was supposed to be conducted in 2011, which was postponed until 2020, and had not taken place until now.
Other data was also not provided, and the Committee emphasised that the lack of statistics limited the ability to evaluate the enjoyment of different groups of their economic, social and cultural rights. Were there plans to conduct the census based on the principle of self-identification? What were the measures planned to collect data on the enjoyment of economic and social rights by the different groups under the jurisdiction of the State party?
The Committee noted that the legal framework, particularly on principles of preventing and combatting discrimination in Ukraine, did not prohibit discrimination based on all grounds listed in the Convention, particularly national origin and descent. Were there plans to amend and align the national legislation framework with article 1 of the Convention? What measures were taken to ensure that the legislative framework prohibited intersecting forms of discrimination?
Could the delegation inform the Committee on the implementation of the national human rights strategy for 2015–2020 in 2015 and its action plan? Was there a timeframe for developing and adopting a strategy on combatting racial discrimination?
Could the delegation provide information on the mandate and activities of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience? What were the measures to ensure the consultation and participation of groups vulnerable to racial discrimination in the work of the State Service? Was the State party planning to establish a central mechanism to coordinate and monitor the implementation of measures designed to combat racial discrimination?
The Committee was concerned that the legislative framework, including the Criminal Code, did not include a definition of all forms of discrimination, or a specific definition of hate speech or sanction for hate speech and crimes. What measures were being undertaken to review and amend the legislative framework to prohibit all forms of racial discrimination, hate speech and hate crimes in accordance with the Convention?
Was the State party planning to amend its Criminal Code, particularly article 161, to remove the requirements and restrictive approach as recommended by the Committee in 2016? What was the status of the draft law no. 5488 before the Parliament? How were its provisions in line with the Convention?
Could information be provided on the legislative framework on combatting racial discrimination in political discourse, as well as information on complaints received, investigations initiated, and imposed sanctions in this field? The Committee noted that the law on media included provisions on discrimination and incitement to hatred. Could clarifications on the law and how its provisions aligned with the Convention be provided? Could the delegation inform the Committee about measures taken to combat hate speech in the media and over the Internet? Was there a designated entity to monitor hate speech or avenues to submit complaints by victims?
Responses by the Delegation
IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said unfortunately, the last census of Ukraine had taken place in 2001, which was 24 years ago. There were several reasons for this, including two Ukrainian political revolutions during this time and the beginning of the war with Russia in 2014. The next census had been planned for 2023, but this had been postponed due to the full-scale invasion by the Russian Federation in 2022. It was impossible in current circumstances to hold another census.
Significant work in combatting racial discrimination had been undertaken in the past three to four years. The State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience was established in 2019 and began its work in 2020. The institute directly dealt with issues of national minorities and ethnic policies and consisted of around 40 people.
Over the past couple of years, three laws had been adopted by the parliament, including the new law on national minority communities of Ukraine. This new law was revolutionary, as it described the ethnic policy for Ukraine and prescribed tasks for the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience. According to the law, all those who considered themselves to be national minorities would be recognised by the State as such. Ukraine had 130 national minorities, and the State took responsibility for all these communities.
There was a lack of strict definitions in Ukrainian laws around hate speech and hate crimes. Ukrainian institutions were working hard to integrate these into Ukrainian legislation. There was an interagency working group dealing with issues of discrimination, hate speech and hate crime.
Questions by Committee Experts
IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, appreciated the answers given, noting the circumstances within the country.
CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, asked for more details on the interagency working group to be provided? Could more information on the national human rights institution be provided?
A Committee Expert said Ukraine’s non-compliance with article 4 was an ongoing issue. It was strongly recommended that the State follow up on this.
Another Expert asked how effective the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience had been in protecting minority rights in Ukraine? What was the level of participation of national minorities in consultations on State decisions? Had there been any improvements based on these discussions?
A Committee Expert said the situation in Ukraine was incomprehensible. What could be done about hate speech? Did Russian people hate Ukrainian people? Personally, the Expert did not feel this was the case. How could this explain why not everyone opposed the war which continued to take more lives? While there was hatred, men would continue to wage war.
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-Up Rapporteur, expressed gratitude to the State party for responding to the Committee’s request in the one-year time frame, however, many questions by the Committee were not addressed, nor were they provided in the current State report. Could the State party provide the Committee with the previously requested information in paragraph 16 of the concluding observations?
Responses by the Delegation
IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said the questions about the war were philosophical. This was an existential war for the Ukrainian nation. According to the Russian dictator, Ukrainians did not exist and needed to be re-educated. To stop the war, the Russian dictator should provide a decree to forces to stop the fight and withdraw from the territory of Ukraine.
The Commissioner of Human Rights had a special department focusing on discrimination. After the screening exercise with the European Union, Ukraine understood there were some gaps in its legislation, particularly when it came to definitions. Many new laws and bylaws had been approved to fill these gaps, and this was a key focus of the State Service for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience. Communication with national minorities was a key step in this regard.
Around seven million Ukrainians had left Ukraine as refugees or moved around Ukraine as internally displaced persons. Many people treated the Roma community differently. The national action plan for the Roma strategy to 2030 was evaluated every two years. Every year, many different roundtables and conferences were organised by the State on the Roma community.
Two forums had been organised for the different minorities to discuss any issues they had and how to address them. A forum was organised in Kiev with Polish national minorities, and another one with Greek national minorities. There was a strategy on the development of the Crimea Tartare language. This year, work had also been finished on the new spelling of the Crimean Tartare language.
Questions by Committee Experts
CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, asked about concrete cases of racially motivated violence and racial profiling, and the measures taken to respond to these cases? What measures had been taken for increasing public awareness-raising campaigns and other measures to counter incitement to hatred and hate crimes? The Committee would also like to receive information on measures to prevent discriminatory violence by the police and other law enforcement officers; measures to ensure accountability for incidents of discriminatory violence; and data on these kinds of incidents?
The Committee was concerned about racist hate speech and discriminatory statements in the public discourse, including by public and political figures and in the media. How did these victims address their cases, and how effectively were these cases treated? How many complaints had been received in the last five years, and what was the number of investigations initiated, cases considered before courts, and sanctions imposed on perpetrators? Could detailed information be provided on complaints registered with the courts, or any other national institution, including the Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights, concerning acts of racial discrimination, racist hate speech and racist hate crimes?
According to information before the Committee, there were gaps in the implementation of the legal framework, including the lack of specialisation among law enforcement officials and lack of operational standards to handle, register and investigate complaints of racial discrimination and hate crimes. What measures were being taken to address these concerns, particularly to enhance the capacity of law enforcement officials in handling and investigating complaints related to racial discrimination and hate speech?
Information before the Committee indicated that there was a lack of awareness on the rights of victims of racial discrimination and fear of approaching law enforcement officials on this topic. What measures were being taken to address these issues? Could a reason be provided for the low rate of complaints at the National Human Rights Commission? What measures were being taken to enable victims to make complaints more effectively?
The Committee welcomed the adoption of amendments in 2024 on the law on free legal aid to allow victims of hate crimes on specific grounds to benefit from secondary legal aid. However, the information before the Committee indicated that the victims were only entitled to the legal aid at the secondary stage and not to initiate a complaint. In addition, the implementation of the amendment was postponed until one year after the martial law was abolished. Could the delegation provide information on these two concerns?
Could disaggregated data be provided on complaints by ethnic origin such as by Roma, Jews, Africans and other minorities, as well as by national origin and gender? Had the complaints changed during the armed conflict, in terms of quantity, nature and results? What measures were being taken to promote human rights education, including on racial discrimination, in university programmes and teacher training?
What measures were being taken to raise awareness of the public, civil servants, and law enforcement officials in order to combat societal prejudice against certain minority groups, including the Roma?
Could accurate statistics of ethnic minorities, including Roma, be provided? The Committee remained concerned at the persistence of discrimination, stereotypes and prejudices against Roma, including reports of physical attacks and killings.
Recent research also demonstrated that the level of antigypsyism in Ukraine was still very high. According to the social cohesion study, 35 per cent of the Ukrainian population did not want Roma to be in their community at all. What measures had the Government of Ukraine taken to fight antigypsyism?
Could data on the education conditions of Roma be provided? What measures had been taken for improving the situation of education for Roma children? Were they educated in their mother tongue without discrimination?
The Committee noted the various measures taken by the State party to improve the situation of Roma, including the strategy for the protection and integration of the Roma national minority to 2020 and its action plan. Could information on the progress and results of strategies and programmes directed at the Roma be provided, particularly the allocated resources to ensure the effective implementation of the strategy and action plan and monitoring of its implementation? How were members of the Roma ethnic minorities involved in the implementation and monitoring of these policies? Had the Government consulted with Roma communities when planning and implementing such integration measures, including at the local level? How were the low levels of funding for these plans being addressed?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the issues affecting the Roma community were a problem, not just for Ukraine but for all European countries. Prejudices still existed, however, during the war, many Roma men had served in the Ukrainian armed forces and in some cases sacrificed their lives, which had changed the attitude of Ukrainians towards Roma people. A unity and diversity programme was implemented last year, which was a Ukrainian national cultural programme, with training for Ukrainian police officers.
The lack of documents in Roma communities was an issue but this was being addressed through regular visits to regions where the Roma community lived. Thousands of Roma people had been provided with new documents.
In 2023, around 60 consultations were organised with different national minority groups. Permanent consultations and meetings were held with Roma communities. The consultations included members of all relevant ministries. The next meeting had been planned for the end of April. April 8 was International Roma Day and a large event had been organised in Kiev, including a roundtable and an all-day conference with the participation of ambassadors and the diplomatic corps. On the same day, several regions also organised International Roma Day celebrations with different events.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert said the implementation of the Committee’s recommendations were lacking. How were the stakeholders in the consultations selected? The Expert expressed hope that the war would end soon with a fair and sustainable solution. It was important to remember that the unity towards Roma people should be sustained after the war, and that the stereotypes did not return.
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-Up Rapporteur, said the Committee’s recommendations regarding measures taken to conduct training to raise awareness on the amendments to article 161 of the Criminal Code had not been addressed, and urged the State party to provide this information.
Another Expert asked what existing mechanisms were in place to receive complaints from victims of hate crimes? Were they user friendly?
A Committee Expert asked whether the education system in the State party allowed for the type of education help to prevent hate crimes and racial intolerance for children? Were there any significant numbers of people of African descent in the State party? Would Ukraine support the Second Decade for People of African Descent?
IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, asked if Ukraine’s desire to align itself with the European Union’s legislation on hate speech was to address hate speech, or to bring its legislation into line with that of the European Union?
An Expert asked if the outcome of today’s dialogue would be brought to the attention of the media?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said if the Committee approved, Ukraine would provide information to the media about the meeting. Regardless of the ethnicity or culture of any citizen, they could contact the police and make a complaint. There were special school curricula on tolerance and education. There should be more education in schools, from the youngest level possible.
There was an African community in Ukraine; it was not very big but its members were consulted on many issues. The African community had never informed the Government about any issues when dealing with the Ukrainian community.
The legal aid system of Ukraine provided several services, including primary and secondary legal aid and access to alternative dispute resolutions. Regular targeted information campaigns were conducted on the right to legal aid, to provide empowerment for vulnerable groups and build trust in the legal aid system in Ukraine. There had been only 91 cases of requests for legal aid during the past three years. There were 500 legal aid centres across Ukraine, as well as an online service.
Six months ago, the Government adopted the list of the languages of the national minorities of Ukraine which were under threat of disappearance, and this included the Roma language. Currently, there was a special working group of experts who were familiar with these languages working on initiatives in this regard.
In a brief comment at the end of the first meeting, MICHAL BALCERZAK, Committee Chair, said the dialogue was public and it was up to Ukraine if it wished to produce information on the discussion.
Questions by Committee Experts
IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, asked if measures were planned to assess and review the law on national minorities (communities) of Ukraine that aimed to eliminate all discriminatory provisions? What measures had been taken to consult and ensure the participation of all ethnic and national minority groups in the process of developing and drafting the law and its amendments?
While noting the measures taken by the State party to protect Crimean Tatars, in particular those who fled Crimea after 2014, the Committee remained concerned about reports that Crimean Tatars in regions under the authority of the State party faced difficulties in accessing employment, social services and education, and did not receive assistance. What mechanisms had been developed to ensure consultations with ethnic minority groups?
Did the State party have information concerning the National Council for Interethnic Harmony? What measures had been taken by the State party to support women belonging to ethnic or national minority groups in exercising their political rights, including participation in public affairs and raising awareness on their rights and the vital impact of their participation? What measures were being taken to mitigate the impact of the ongoing conflict on the participation of women in politics?
According to information received, legislative amendments relating to religious organizations entered into force on 23 September 2024, invoking “national security” as a ground for restricting freedom of religion or belief and freedom of religious association. However, this was not considered a permissible grounds for restriction of freedom of religion under the Convention. What were the measures restricting freedom of religion and belief and their impact on the ethno-religious communities concerned? Information received referred to practices tending to prohibit the activities of religious organizations, specifically the activities of the Russian Orthodox Church. Could information be provided on the necessity and proportionality of such punitive measures?
The situation of migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, and stateless persons in Ukraine had been significantly impacted by recent legal and practical developments, particularly since the introduction of martial law in February 2022. The current legal framework and its implementation presented several challenges that were inconsistent with the Convention.
The refugee status determination process in Ukraine did not align with international standards, leading to inconsistent application of legal interpretations and time limits for lodging asylum applications. This often resulted in the rejection of asylum claims. New practices had restricted access to asylum and statelessness determination procedures, especially for individuals with ties to the Russian Federation and Belarus. The State Migration Service often issued oral refusals for asylum applications without official decisions, citing martial law as a reason. This practice had been recognised by courts as illegal, yet it persisted, leaving applicants in legal limbo.
How would Ukraine address the inconsistencies in the asylum procedures to ensure alignment with international standards and the Convention? What legal amendments were introduced under martial law and what was their impact on the rights of refugees and stateless persons? What procedural safeguards were in place to protect individuals from forcible deportation? What steps were being taken to improve access to the asylum and statelessness determination procedures, particularly for individuals with ties to the Russian Federation and Belarus?
How was the Government addressing the challenges posed by the suspension of diplomatic relations with Russia in verifying nationality in statelessness determination procedures? What plans did the Ukrainian Government have to develop an integration strategy for refugees and improve reception conditions for asylum seekers? What steps were being taken to address the unlawful practice of issuing verbal refusals for asylum applications and ensure that applicants received official decisions?
The Government of Ukraine had made significant strides in addressing statelessness since 2020, including the introduction of a statelessness determination procedure. Despite these efforts, several challenges remained, particularly in the implementation of the procedure and the accessibility of necessary documentation for applicants, which was further exacerbated by the conflict.
On 22 January 2024, draft law no. 11469, titled “on amendments to certain laws of Ukraine on ensuring the right to acquire and preserve Ukrainian citizenship” was registered in the Ukrainian Parliament. The draft law, if passed, could result in the loss of Ukrainian citizenship for residents in Russian-occupied Ukrainian territories, who often had to obtain Russian passports to access basic services, employment, and social benefits. How did the Ukrainian Government plan to address the potential risk of stripping Ukrainian citizenship from residents of occupied territories who acquired Russian citizenship under duress or due to essential needs, such as access to basic services and employment?
MICHAL BALCERZAK, Committee Chair, said Kiev had been under attack the night before and there had been casualties. This was a serious and sad situation. The Committee understood the situation and was very concerned about these tragic events.
Responses by the Delegation
IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said many members of the delegation had barely slept the night before. Russia had launched missiles from the Black Sea and inside Russia and had bombed Kiev. Up to now, there were 10 citizens who had been killed and 100 wounded, including children. Every day, there were peaceful victims of this tragic and bloody war. The delegation in Ukraine had lost contact with the Committee at the beginning of the session and missed some questions.
Regarding the law on ethnic minorities, several meetings had been organised with national minorities during the development of the law, predominantly online due to the war. In December 2022, Parliament adopted the law. At the request of some national minority organizations, the State used the term “communities” instead of minorities. The law encompassed all groups of ethnic peoples, which was around 130 according to the most recent census.
Ukraine did not have many new asylum seekers as the situation in the country was not sustainable for a peaceful life.
The Ombudsman’s Office was referred to as the Parliamentary Commission of Human Rights. The independence of this Office was guaranteed, ensuring it could function without undue influence from any external entities. This enabled the Office to effectively address human rights and issues of non-discrimination. Its annual report outlined steps taken to combat discrimination. It was a large institution with around 500 employees. There were branches located across 24 regions of Ukraine. In 2024, there were 454 complaints received by the Office. The Office monitored all issues of non-discrimination. All reports of the Office were public and could be found online.
Questions by Committee Experts
IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, expressed sorrow at the recent shocking events which had wracked the Ukrainian capital. What was the impact of martial law on asylum seekers, refugees and stateless persons?
CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, asked about the situation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons belonging to minority groups, as well as the situation of elderly people belonging to these groups? What was the situation of migrant workers, particularly in this situation of armed conflict?
A Committee Expert asked how far Ukraine had gone in implementing the decision of the European Court of Human Rights on a case versus Ukraine?
Another Committee Expert congratulated the Ukrainian delegation for making a laudable effort to assess the implementation of the Convention in Ukraine, despite prevailing circumstances. Ukraine should be praised for this effort. The Expert was concerned about allegations of racism at the Ukrainian Polish border. Had there been any follow-up on such reports? How many cases had been brought to court?
There had been allegations of racism in sport, including with a Brazilian footballer who was banned for one game after reacting to crowds calling him monkey. How had this case been handled? Ukraine should be congratulated for adopting the law on stateless in 2021. How many individuals had benefitted from the enforcement of that law? How did the State party plan to provide Roma with national documents?
Another Expert said African nationals had been facing discrimination at the borders.
What measures were being taken by the State party to ensure the protection, safety and security of all persons living in its jurisdiction?
Responses by the Delegation
IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said Ukrainian legislation underscored equal rights for men and women. Half of the ministers of the Government were women. Many women in Ukrainian society occupied high-level positions. Women from Roma communities were among the most vulnerable. The State had organised several events, including roundtables, which assisted Roma women to find their place in society.
Due to the war, Ukraine no longer had many migrant workers. It was hoped that this would change after the war. The country would need many workers for innovation and to help rebuild Ukraine. It was hoped workers from many countries would come to Ukraine after the war and help rebuild the hundreds of cities which had been destroyed or partially destroyed.
Mr. Lossovskyi said he had not heard of cases of discrimination on the border between Ukraine and Poland. The case of discrimination regarding the Brazilian football player was an awful occurrence which was not typical for Ukraine. There had been a police investigation, but he could not recall the exact outcome.
The delegation said the aggression by the Russian federation had led to a huge influx across Ukraine’s borders. The Government took all accounts of discriminatory treatment very seriously. Despite difficult conditions, the Government had managed to keep all checkpoints on the borders open.
Mr. Lossovskyi said in 2022, a pilot project was launched to provide documents to Roma people in a more effective way. This was organised in a region where the majority of Roma people lived. Every year, the State continued this work and made several visits to these places.
The delegation said the draft law 5488 was being considered before parliament. It was hoped the law would be adopted during the current session of Parliament. The draft law provided for the term “intolerance” and addressed issues under this topic. All law enforcement agencies were currently working together to introduce the necessary amendments to the Criminal Code. Police officers had completed specialised human rights training. Outreach activities, including in schools, were carried out to combat negative stereotypes on the Roma population.
Questions by Committee Experts
CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, said the Committee believed in the necessity of investigating and documenting all human rights violations and abuses committed in the context of the ongoing armed conflict and invasion initiated by the Russian Federation against the State party on 24 February 2022. What measures had been taken to ensure prompt and impartial investigations? Could the delegation provide information on investigations and prosecutions into allegations of human rights violations and abuses during the armed conflict with the Russian Federation?
On 11 October 2018, the Holy and Sacred Synod of the Istanbul-based Ecumenical Patriarchate granted autocephaly to a new church, the “Orthodox Church of Ukraine”. This led to tensions with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. The Church was formerly linked to the Russian Orthodox Church under the Patriarch in Moscow, but stated that it severed those ties in May 2022, following the full-scale invasion by the Russian Federation.
It was reported that on 23 September 2024 in territory controlled by the Government of Ukraine, new legal provisions regarding religious organizations entered into force, prohibiting the activities of foreign religious organizations based in a State responsible for armed aggression against Ukraine or occupation of its territory, and specifically prohibiting the activities of the Russian Orthodox Church. Could detailed explanations be provided on this and on measures to ensure the respect of the rights to freedom of thought, conscience and religion?
According to media reports in January 2025, the State party announced the capturing in Russia of two soldiers from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and indicated that they were detained and provided with medical care. Could the delegation provide information on the situation of these two prisoners of war? What were the legal measures taken against them? Were there more prisoners of war captured by the State party from other nationalities, including mercenaries?
The Committee noted that the State party adopted the law on indigenous peoples in 2021. However, according to information before the Committee, the law only recognised Crimean Tatars, Karaims and Krymchaks as indigenous peoples in Ukraine, while excluding other groups, such as Hutsuls, Lemkos and Gagauz peoples. Could the delegation provide clarifications on the law on indigenous peoples and how it aligned with international standards?
Were there plans to assess and review the law? What was the situation of the Hutsuls, Lemkos and Gagauz peoples? What measures were in place to preserve and promote the identity, language and culture of all indigenous people under the jurisdiction of the State party? Could information be provided on the situation of internally displaced Crimean Tatars, and measures to ensure their access to education, housing, employment, healthcare services and humanitarian assistance? Was the State party taking measures in consultation with the Crimean Tatar community to find durable solutions for an appropriate settlement of Crimean Tatars in Ukraine?
The Committee was concerned that during the war, persons belonging to minorities, such as Roma, had difficulties in registering as internally displaced persons and having access to social assistance. According to the representative of the Office of the Ombudsman of Ukraine, around 100,000 Roma became refugees, and around the same number of Ukrainian Roma became internally displaced persons. Were accurate statistics available on the Roma? Did the State party find durable solutions for internally displaced Roma and take measures to ensure that they benefitted from assistance? What were the State’s plans to include Roma people in recovery and reconstruction programmes?
What efforts were being made to restore linkages between displaced children and their families? What efforts were being made to ensure access to education and basic services for displaced children?
Ukraine’s inadequate response to hate crimes against migrants, African and Asian students and other foreigners had previously attracted international criticism. What was the situation of non-citizens, particularly migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, and people of African and/or Asian descent during the armed conflict? Could the delegation provide clarification on the situation of detained undocumented migrants and non-citizens? Could the delegation also please provide information on measures to ensure their access to education, housing, employment, healthcare services and humanitarian assistance?
Responses by the Delegation
IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said Ukraine did not refer to what was going on in Ukraine as conflict. This was a bloody, existential, colonial war with Russia, not simply a conflict. In 2018, the Ukrainian Church received independence from the Patriarchal Eastern Christianity Church based in Istanbul, Türkiye. This was a revolutionary decision, as Ukraine was a big country and did not have an orthodox church. Now there was an independent church of Ukraine, like all other Christian Orthodox countries. No other activities of other churches were forbidden in Ukraine. The only restrictions were for the Russian Orthodox Church, which had restricted activity on the territory of Ukraine. This was because it was an accompaniment of the Russian aggression which had destroyed the country and killed hundreds of thousands of people.
Ukraine provided the international standard for prisoners of war in their prison facilities, which were regularly visited by the Ukrainian Ombudsman. In 2021, Ukraine adopted the law on indigenous peoples and consulted with many minorities on this law. Indigenous peoples were defined as those who lived on the territory of Ukraine and did not have a mother country. The Lemkos people were not considered a national minority group, but rather a cultural group.
In 2021, the Ukrainian Government approved the Roma strategy, and every two years action plans were prepared for its implementation. The Roma community was a young community, one of the youngest among the national minorities in Ukraine. It would be beneficial to use their innovation and abilities in the process of renovating Ukraine when the war was over. The State was working on providing the Roma with more education. There were many grants provided to Roma for studying in universities.
The delegation said in 2021, the Ukrainian Parliament adopted the law on indigenous people in Ukraine, which was developed through extensive consultations with indigenous groups and civil society, and represented the aspirations of these groups. In addition, a draft law was developed on the status of the Crimean Tartar people which would be registered in Parliament in the near future.
To ensure prisoners of war were not tortured, relevant legislation and policies had been developed. Three legislative acts had been produced to regulate these affairs.
Questions by Committee Experts
CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, asked if there were representative bodies of minorities inside the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine? How did the State party ensure consultations with all indigenous peoples under the framework of this law?
Another Expert said 10 to 20 per cent of Ukrainian Roma did not have identity documents? Was there a provision for determining statelessness in the act on statelessness? Did the Roma community benefit from universal birth registration?
A Committee Expert asked how many of the ethnic and national minorities participated in the relevant bodies in the Government? How many Roma, indigenous, or migrant women had been hired or granted responsibility positions, or were integrated in the responsibility of the work?
Responses by the Delegation
IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said when the law on indigenous peoples was adopted, several bylaws were prepared for the implementation of the law. According to one of the bylaws, Crimean Tatars regularly consulted with the Government. Only during the population census could the Government request information about the ethnic groups. Sometimes women with high-ranking positions did not disclose their ethnicity. It was up to people to declare this.
The delegation said due to the Russian full-scale invasion, there were problems preparing full statistical information on ethnic minorities. The legal aid system in Ukraine had provided legal assistance to more than 1,000 Roma people over the past three years. Most of these related to the processing of identity documents. Secondary legal aid had been provided for 27,000 internally displaced people over the past three years, due to the full-scale invasion.
Officially, Ukraine recognised three indigenous groups of peoples, including Crimean Tartars, Karaims and Krymchaks. Crimean Tartars were represented by an executive body; the spiritual administration of Ukraine represented the Karaim people; and there was no official information regarding a body for the Krymchaks, although they had the full rights to establish such a body under law.
Currently, there was no definition of hate speech under Ukrainian law. The Government of Ukraine had prepared a draft roadmap covering this issue. In Ukraine, a working group made up of State authorities and public organizations was working on a definition of hate speech and establishing administrative and criminal liability depending on the severity of the crime.
The public broadcaster of Ukraine continued to create a single information space for minorities. The broadcaster produced programmes for national minorities in their national languages, across broadcast, radio and digital formats. The State bodies would do their best to cover all the information needs of the national minorities in Ukraine.
Closing Remarks
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-Up Rapporteur, said the Committee would send Ukraine concluding observations after the dialogue, with specific recommendations to be enacted within a period of one year.
IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, thanked the delegation for the dialogue held, particularly given the context. War was ended through negotiation and diplomacy, not capitulation. It was hoped this would happen with Ukraine. The fact that Ukraine was here before the Committee was an example of the State’s willingness to cooperate. Ukraine was also meeting with the Committee against Torture at the same time, which may have weakened Ukraine’s ability to provide comprehensive answers.
IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, thanked the Committee members for their time and interest in the situation in Ukraine. The Committee’s recommendations were very much appreciated.
MICHAL BALCERZAK, Committee Chair, said racial discrimination was about ethnic and national origin. The Committee was concerned when ethnic minorities were denied their identity. This led to wars. It was now the sixtieth anniversary of the Convention, and the first composition of the Committee had included an expert of Ukrainian origin.
___________
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.
CERD25.002E
MIL OSI United Nations News –
