HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE CONSIDERS REPORT OF GEORGIA
United Nations Human Rights Committee
16 Oct 2007
The Human Rights Committee has considered the third periodic report
of Georgia on how that State Party is fulfilling its obligations
under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Givi Mikanadze, Deputy Minister of Justice of Georgia, introducing
the report, said Georgia had undergone significant change aimed at
improving democratic values and the rule of law. Accession to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1994 was a
declaration of the commitment of Georgia and its adherence to the
cherished values of the Covenant.
Tamar Tomashvili, Adviser to the Permanent Mission of Georgia to
the United Nations Office at Geneva, also introducing the report,
said there had been institutional changes in judicial and criminal
procedures in Georgia, including improved guarantees of rights for
detainees, reduction of the pre-trial period of detention, and the
national anti-torture plan. Government priorities in recent years had
been focused on the prevention of torture, protection of religious
minorities, and the fight against human trafficking.
In preliminary concluding remarks, Rafael Rivas Posada, Committee
Chairperson, said a good many of the concerns expressed revolved
around a few issues only: the need to find a solution to matters on
non-jurisdiction within Georgian territory that would ensure protection
of individuals as required by the Covenant; the need for continued
legislative reforms aimed at tackling excesses in the prisons and law
and order sectors; the problem of freedom of expression; the efforts
needed to monitor the results of legislative reforms or measures and
their practical outcome; and the issue of integration of national
minorities.
Questions raised by Committee Experts included measures to protect
Chechen refugees entering Georgia; freedom of expression; domestic
violence; and property restitution for conflict victims.
The Committee reviewed the report of Georgia over three meetings and
will issue its concluding observations and recommendations at the
end of the session on 2 November.
Georgia is one of the 160 States parties to the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights and is obligated to submit periodic
reports on implementation of the provisions of the Covenant.
It is also one of the 109 signatories of the Optional Protocol
to the Covenant, which provides for confidential consideration of
communications from individuals who claim to be victims of violations
of any rights proclaimed by the Covenant.
The Georgian delegation, which presented the report, included
representatives from the State Commission for the Development of
State Strategy for Internally Displaced Persons at the Ministry of
Refugees, the Civil Cases Collegium, the Human Rights Unit and the
Legal Department of the Prosecutor General’s Office, and other senior
diplomats and experts.
The Committee will reconvene in public at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 17
October when it is scheduled to begin its consideration of the fourth
periodic report of Libya (CCPR/C/LBY/4).
Report of Georgia
The third periodic report of Georgia (CCPR/C/GEO/3) notes that
the Georgian Government has taken firm steps to combat corruption,
including prosecution of public officials. It says the country is
seriously engaged in the great challenge of establishing an independent
judiciary and strengthening the right to a fair trial.
Law enforcement bodies are subject to reform aimed at building public
confidence, and there is day-to-day monitoring of violations by the
Prosecutor General’s Office and the Ministry of the Interior.
Georgia continues to take steps to combat torture and human
trafficking, through national action plans that are currently
being implemented. Georgia has signed the Optional Protocol to the
Convention Against Torture, and debate is under way concerning the
establishment of a national human rights institution. The Ministry
of the Interior treats cases of alleged torture with due attention,
and is actively engaged also in anti-trafficking measures and tackling
organised crime. The report says that border territories of Abkhazia
and Tskhinvali/South Ossetia are effectively under the control of the
Russian Federation and Georgians living there are subject to torture
and ill treatment. Georgia needs international assistance in promoting
and protecting their rights.
Presentation of Report
GIVI MIKANADZE, Deputy Minister of Justice of Georgia, introducing
the report, said Georgia had undergone significant change aimed at
improving democratic values and the rule of law. Accession to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1994 was
a declaration of the commitment of Georgia and its adherence to
the cherished values of the Covenant. There had been continual and
productive collaboration between the Government of Georgia and the
Human Rights Committee and useful steps had been taken with a view
to achieving maximum compliance with the obligations of the Covenant.
They included, among others, harmonization of national legislation,
and the promotion of practical enjoyment of rights and freedoms
contained in the Covenant, in particular the development of an
effective criminal justice system.
TAMAR TOMASHVILI, Adviser to the Permanent Mission of Georgia to the
United Nations Office and other international organizations in Geneva,
also introducing the report, said there had been institutional changes
in judicial and criminal procedures in Georgia, including improved
guarantees of rights for detainees, reduction of the pre-trial
period of detention, and the national anti-torture plan. Government
priorities in recent years had been focused on the prevention of
torture, protection of religious minorities, and the fight against
human trafficking. Human rights monitoring in places of detention had
been strengthened through initiatives in the Ministries of Justice and
Interior. There were still problems of overcrowding in some prisons,
but refurbishment had improved prison conditions. In the judicial
system, there had been strenuous efforts to establish independence of
the judiciary, as well as improved accountability, training and working
conditions for judges. The Government was also active in conflict
resolution in the territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia through its
goal of securing self-governance, protecting individual human rights
and freedoms and guaranteeing integrity and inviolability of the State.
Replies of the Government of Georgia
Constitutional and Legal Framework within which the Covenant is
Implemented
In response to questions sent to the State party in advance, the
delegation of Georgia said the relevant authorities were now discussing
the question of Communication N. 975/2001 (Ratiani vs Georgia), and
had been inquiring as to best practices for compensating the claimant
in connection with the case. The judiciary was the appropriate organ
for establishing this issue, but more time was needed before giving
a final answer on the amount of compensation awarded.
On property registration and rehabilitation in conflict areas,
Georgia had faced problems safeguarding the rights of victims,
the delegation said. There were active steps to implement the law
on restitution. There had also been a programme called "My House"
established in 2006 aimed at helping internally displaced persons with
property claims and registration. Georgia did not have de facto control
over Abkhazia and South Ossetia so more time was needed to record,
certify and register legitimate property claims in those territories.
Because of the status of the breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South
Ossetia/Tskhinvali, the Government of Georgia was limited in its
jurisdiction there, but was nevertheless aware of its obligations
as a Contracting State to the Covenant and worked with the Office
of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and Special Procedures to
protect human rights in those regions. Law enforcement authorities were
investigating violations where possible and the Government supported
peace and confidence building, but did not accept responsibility for
the violations themselves.
Principles of Non-Discrimination and Non-Refoulement
Concerning refugees’ rights, the delegation said Chechen refugees
were fully covered by national legislation and international
agreements. Concerning extradition of Chechens to Russia, there had
been legislative amendments and compensation for victims of such
extraditions, and the Extradition Decree had been annulled. There
had been no deportation of persons of Chechen origin from Georgian
territory since 2002.
Gender Equality and Protection of the Family
Domestic violence was a challenge and the Government had been taking
necessary measures, notably the adoption of the Law and Action Plan
on domestic violence, the delegation said. The law aimed to protect
and assist victims and operated in tandem with criminal procedures in
cases of domestic violence. Rape was criminalized under the Criminal
Code. Incest was not subject to a separate article of the Code, but
was covered by other articles. Restrictive orders had been established
for police officers to deal with offenders under the new domestic
violence provisions. Police training on domestic violence had also
evolved. Protection orders could also be issued by the Courts. The
Action Plan on domestic violence covered standards for shelters
and rehabilitation, training for justice personnel, activities of
non-governmental organizations, hotlines and other provisions.
On bride-knapping, the delegation said the Constitution protected the
institution of marriage as a voluntary union and upheld equality of
rights for men and women. While disagreeing with the assessment that
bride-knapping was a significant problem, the delegation said there
was adequate legal sanction and extensive civil education to prevent
and punish the practice.
Right to Life and Prohibition of Torture
On prisoners’ rights and police violence, the delegation highlighted
the decrease in deaths in prison institutions. Prison health
provisions had improved and this had greatly helped reduce mortality
in prisons. The new Government had made the fight against organized
crime a top priority since 2003. In this process, armed clashes had
been unavoidable and regrettable. Legislation on the use of force by
police was largely compatible with international standards. Figures
for the use of lethal force were now much lower, and police operational
planning and weapons and crisis training had been improved. Intensive
investigation of the police actions in 2006 at Tbilisi prison, an
incident linked to the fight against organized crime, was under way.
On torture, a draft anti-torture action plan was under consideration
within the Government. There was wide-ranging monitoring through
various government ministries in cooperation with non-governmental
organizations (NGOs). Those in temporary detention could be visited by
representatives of the Ombudsman and the Main Unit for Human Rights
Protection. Pre-trial detention facilities were rigorously monitored
by relevant ministries and internally in the prison system.
International and local NGOs were active in the country, increasing
the platform for debating the issue at Government level. Local
monitoring commissions for penitentiaries had been set up. The Human
Rights Protection Unit of the Legal Department (Prosecutor General’s
Office) was active in investigating claims of ill treatment, and
had monitored 24 allegations in January-March 2007 with six formal
investigations. There were ample criminal and civil provisions, as well
as compensation mechanisms, for victims of torture and ill treatment.
Treatment of Prisoners
The Draft Code on Imprisonment was in Parliament and appropriate
amendments had been adopted on prison visits, the delegation said.
Georgia remained concerned about the issue of overcrowding and had
worked to upgrade old infrastructure and build new facilities.
Decreasing the number of custodial sentences was also a priority,
and pre-term release and pardon of prisoners was being refined.
Statistics showed that more than 50 per cent of cases were dealt with
through non-custodial measures in 2006. Improved systems for healthcare
and exercise for inmates were being developed, and improved nutrition
was being funded by the national budget.
Oral Questions by Committee Experts
Committee Experts noted that there was important progress in
legislative reform in Georgia, and welcomed the ratification of the
Optional Protocol on the death penalty and accession to the Optional
Protocol on torture. They asked questions on a number of issues. It
was encouraging to see legislation being developed for compensation to
complainants in human rights violations, but the Committee wanted to
know how soon the compensation in the Ratiani case would be disbursed.
While the legal provisions on domestic violence were improving, the
issue was still generally regarded as a private matter and no special
legislation on marital rape existed. There were concerns about the
extent of protection for women. The response of the delegation on
establishing standards for shelters and rehabilitation centres was
unclear: how many shelters were proposed, and what plans were in
place to create them? Training of police officers, and the use of
protective and restrictive orders were welcome steps, but had there
been any systematic follow-up on these orders? If bride-knapping was
not widespread, what were the figures on frequency and geographical
extent of the practice?
Concerning property restitution for conflict victims, an Expert
commended the adoption of the Law on Restitution, but wondered when
the Tripartite Commission would be able to start its work, and how
the issue of restitution (repossession of legally owned property)
versus compensation (if the owner chose not to repossess) would
operate in law.
An Expert asked whether measures to protect Chechen refugees were
adequate to prevent future reoccurrence. How were asylum mechanisms
being tightened up at the frontier?
Other Experts took note of the lack of de facto control over
Abkhazia/South Ossetia, but one queried the status of the Ajara
autonomous region in relation to the Covenant.
Statistics on deaths in custody were interesting, but the delegations
had not, in their presentation, mentioned the increased total prison
population in 2005-6, shown in the table: what was the explanation
for the sudden rise in prison numbers? Were murder charges being
investigated against prison, police and law enforcement officers,
including Special Forces? Had police officers been sentenced or
suspended for crimes amounting to torture or ill treatment? Were
prison officers required to wear badges with traceable ID numbers?
Was it possible to grant compensation to victims of torture or ill
treatment even when there was no criminal conviction?
Use of non-custodial measures and reforms to combat overcrowding
were welcomed, but overcrowding remained a serious concern for the
Committee, an Expert said. Was it true that one of the prisons was so
overcrowded that prisoners slept in shifts? It was not clear in the
report whether bail and other non-custodial treatment were confined
to pre-trial cases or applied also to convictions.
An Expert asked how effective legislative measures to deal with torture
and inhuman or degrading treatment (such as inspection visits) had
been in ensuring protection of detainees’ rights. What background
issues had influenced prison policy, i.e. what, if any, was the
link between detainees’ nutrition and Georgia’s national economic
prosperity? Had restrictions on physical exercise been influenced
by a high escape rate? Allegations concerning pre-trial detention
suggested there had been brutal treatment of detainees and one Expert
asked how the detaining authorities’ behaviour was monitored.
Another Expert queried the constitutional approach to certain articles
of the Covenant and the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court
over practical application of the treaty. Was supervision by the
Constitutional Court a priori or a posteriori? Could courts rule on
unconstitutionality when such issues were evoked or must the issues
be referred to the Constitutional Court?
Response by the Delegation of Georgia to Oral Questions from Committee
Experts
Members of the Georgian delegation, responding to the first round
of questions, said the Government was doing everything necessary to
implement legislation pertinent to the Ratiani case. This would not
happen in Parliament’s current session, but would be on the agenda
for the spring session.
The delegation disagreed with the claim that domestic violence was
seen as a private matter. Both the public and the Government were
engaged in this matter. Police were well trained in handling domestic
violence, providing information and leaflets for those who may be
unwilling to speak out straight away. Regarding shelters, there was
no figure on numbers of shelters as yet, but the Government position
was to develop laws that would include social workers’ training,
management of shelters and other necessary preparations. Legal aid and
medical and psychiatric assistance was available for anyone visiting
the shelters regardless of whether they were run by non-governmental
organizations or Government agencies.
The issue of bride-knapping involved certain cultural specificities.
There were some cases of girls hiding from their own families in
order to have children with a partner, but the family’s allegations
of bride-knapping were usually quickly thrown out. There were no
statistics available at present.
On identification of prison officers, there were laws for clear
identification of officers through a system of numbered and photo-ID
badges. On the issue of arrests and pre-trial treatment, there were
systems for checking any physical injuries suffered by detainees.
Medical checks were made again on entry into a temporary detention
cell, and data passed to the Office of the Human Rights Protection
Unit. The Prosecutor General’s Office was empowered to corroborate
information.
On compensation for victims of torture, the delegation said there had
been cases of convictions of law enforcement officers and a system
for claiming and granting compensation was in place.
An Expert had queried the rise in prison numbers, and the delegation
said the fight against corruption and increased resourcing of the law
enforcement services were responsible for this. As far as overcrowding
was concerned, there was high-level political support to combat
overcrowding as well as budgetary provisions. Six out of a total
of seventy prisons were the most affected. It was true that in one
case prisoners had been sleeping in shifts, but a newly built prison
in Tbilisi, designed in cooperation with Council of Europe experts,
was soon to be completed.
Applications for parole followed established procedures, and there
was a special pardons commission to consider relevant cases. On prison
populations, only 24 per cent of total prison numbers were in pre-trial
detention, and most had been sentenced. Reforms were under way to
improve financing for prison food and provisions for exercising,
as well as staff salaries, training, medical provision for inmates
and other investments. The Government was eager to establish proper
standards for detention in conformity with European norms.
The delegation said the State budget provided for
restitution/compensation for losses incurred by Georgians in
Abkhazia/South Ossetia. Appointment of the Committee concerned was
subject to some delays, but monetary and membership issues would
be resolved. Decisions on whether claims would be handled through
compensation or restitution would be dealt with on a case-by-case
basis. On refoulement at the Georgian frontier, the delegation
said border guards worked under the Ministry of Internal Affairs so
there was no informational gap between the two. Refugees were given
(or denied) asylum or refugee status within three days of crossing
the border. In the event of a refugee being detained at the border,
there was immediate reporting to the Ministry of Internal Affairs to
allow their status to be promptly determined.
There was indeed an autonomous republic of Ajara and although there
had been problems of jurisdiction and sovereignty in the past, since
2004 the problems of who was in de facto control of the territory
had been conclusively dealt with and Georgian jurisdiction extended
fully into the territory.
Regarding constitutional oversight of human rights, there were a
number of rights that were not directly included in the Constitution,
but these, mainly social rights, were covered by the spirit of the
Constitution and had been tested in law. The Constitutional Court could
only discuss legal acts that were in force already, so Constitutional
control was a posteriori.
Further Oral Comments and Questions by Experts
Regarding rights in conflict areas, one Expert said it was a matter
of finding remedies for past violations – primary responsibility lay
with the Government, not the international community. He added that
full protection against refoulement was a central issue, and welcomed
efforts to deal with the issue. Another Expert warned against police
claims of detainees being "wounded while resisting arrest". He remained
concerned at the definition and scope of the use of lethal force. An
Expert asked about details of the invocation of the Covenant before
the courts.
Replies to Oral Questions
The delegation said the Constitution provided for a hierarchy of
legislative measures. Discussion about the Optional Protocol to the
Convention Against Torture belonged in a broader picture of national
preventive mechanisms, including NGO input. It was not a matter for
the Government to rule on alone. Police codes did cover the use of
lethal force and, as mentioned, the authorities were working with
international bodies to revise the manual on the use of force.
Further Responses from the Government of Georgia to Written Questions
Non-discrimination and Freedom of Movement
Continuing their response to written questions prepared by the
Committee Experts and received by the State party in advance, the
delegation said internally displaced persons (IDPs) enjoyed full
freedom of movement, protection and guarantees. They made up about 6
per cent of the population. The national strategy for IDPs focused
on voluntary return and improving temporary living conditions, and
involved all stakeholders including NGOs and IDP groups. There had
been constructive dialogue with international organizations and NGOs
on developing the second draft of the Action Plan. In the Abkhazia and
South Ossetia /Tskhivali region, Government control was limited, and
the Action Plan recognized the need for partnership with international
organizations in those areas to further dialogue, improve humanitarian
and social services, employment and other matters. Temporary living
conditions were to be improved and provisions for purchase of property
developed under the Action Plan.
General progress on the Action Plan was good.
In the breakaway regions, there were different issues. Georgia was
committed to resolving the conflicts. The Government tried to cooperate
with the de facto authorities in Abkhazia, with limited success. The
human rights violations in the Abkhazia conflict region were well known
and were not always dealt with by the de facto authorities. Georgia did
not fully control the Gali district, and therefore there was a lack
of implementation for returnees. In South Ossetia/Tskhinvali, there
had been progress in negotiations on territorial adminstration, thus
helping to ensure voluntary, safe and dignified return of displaced
populations to their homes.
Independence of the Judiciary and Right to a Fair Trial
Judicial reform followed a Government Judicial Reform Strategy and
Action Plan aimed at implementing change by 2009. Court reform was in
line with European standards, and the reform of the body of magistrate
judges was well under way. Court buildings had been refurbished and
modernized, salaries and training for judges were being overhauled
and the budget for the judiciary was protected by law. There had been
reforms to the High Council of Justice that appointed judges and the
President had no de jure control over the High Council. Disciplinary
measures had been revised, along with rules of communication, ethical
codes and other instruments.
Freedom of Religion
The Georgian Orthodox Church belonged to so-called "multi-tiered"
church-state models. Georgia was studying the legal aspect of
discrimination in the context of the special status of the Orthodox
Church. Regarding registration, in Georgia, religious organizations
were free to register as non-commercial legal entities, and also
to operate without registration. There was no obstacle to these
organizations in pursuing their religious activities within the law.
Concerning religious tolerance, practical measures had been taken
to tackle religious discrimination, and there had been several
convictions. The Government was also committed to dealing with earlier
cases of religious persecution, notably against Jehovah’s witnesses,
and had issued sentences in absentia.
Schools were secular and proselytising in schools was prohibited. A
Ministry of Interior Code of Ethics emphasized non-discrimination
and religious tolerance.
Freedom of Opinion and Expression
Georgia had been extensively monitoring the issue of free expression.
Harassment of journalists was met with legal prosecution. There was
no law in force banning the existence of extremist groups.
Rights of Persons Belonging to Minorities
Concerning minority languages, the Government had carried out an
extensive survey on language use in Georgia. The State language was
Georgian and, in Abhkazia, also Abkhazian. In regions populated by
national minorities (Kvemo Kartli, Samtskhe-Javakheti), minority
languages were used, and Russian was also still spoken though
it was not as popular as in former times. Although the language
of administration was Georgian, active steps were being taken to
involve local language speakers and incorporate minority languages in
public discourse. The State Language Programme was part of the Civil
Integration Programme, aiming to promote a society based on tolerance
and respect of different cultures and languages in Georgia. There
were a number of language support programmes for Azeri, Armenian and
Azerbaijani speakers as well as schemes to facilitate the teaching
of Georgian in non-Georgian schools and communities.
Human Rights Training
There were a number of training schemes in the Ministries of
Justice, Internal Affairs, law enforcement agencies and other public
departments. They covered national and international instruments and
were geared to developing an international outlook on human rights
protection and harmonization of national measures with international
standards.
Oral Questions by Committee Experts
An Expert queried the issue of the protection and promotion of rights
of internally displaced persons (IDPs). Privatization of collective
accommodation centers for IDPs was welcomed, but there had been
reports of forced evictions without legal authority or compensation,
with the involvement of government agencies. What was the procedure
on privatization and what safeguards were built in?
The Government policy on languages was commended but at the same time
seemed to highlight possible marginalization in social integration of
minority groups. An Expert remarked that the delegation had not given
clear statistics on the integration of minorities in the judiciary,
universities and elsewhere. Were there plans to acknowledge or even
upgrade the status of minority languages?
An Expert asked for clarification on restitution of property for other
churches (Catholic, Armenian, etc), and related acts of religious
intolerance. What was the situation of other non-protestant churches?
Another Expert said that Georgia ranked 89th out of 168 countries
on press freedom, according to a Human Rights Centre pamphlet, with
journalists allegedly fearful of their jobs and broadcasting freedoms
subject to constraint. What was the delegation’s view on this?
Training of state personnel, judges, teachers and other public servants
in human rights was welcomed. How did the delegation disseminate
the Committee’s own comments on Georgia’s performance to NGOs and
stakeholders?
There were further questions on plea-bargaining, which appeared to
be open to misuse, a request for clarification on the use of force
by the police, and for the details of the time period for alternative
(non-military) service.
Replies of the Delegation to Oral Questions
The delegation of Georgia said the newly-adopted Code of Ethics for
the police demanded restrained, proportionate use of force, respect
for human life, ensuring medical aid for the injured, and other
requirements. The duration of alternative service was six months
longer than military service.
The strategy on rights of internally displaced persons (IDPs)
was guided by UN principles, the Georgian Constitution and other
legislative documents. Regarding collective centers for housing IDPs,
some centers were located in favourable areas and there was commercial
pressure on them, but the IDPs concerned were compensated and the
majority bought their own homes. IDPs in Ajara were also re-housed,
either using their compensation payouts or through government
collective centre programmes if preferred.
On minority languages, State law prescribed the use of Georgian as
the State language, but conditions had been created to facilitate oral
communication in local languages, the delegation said. The situation
was comparable to that in European countries.
Interpretation services were provided. Concrete opportunities
for integration of minorities existed. Officers from the
Armenian minority had been recruited in the police academy in the
Armenian-speaking region. Secondary education included a minority
language component. University enrolment was based on equal opportunity
for all prospective students. Georgia was committed to developing the
social space for the use of minority languages within the constraints
imposed by the Public Service Law on the use of the State language
in public administration.
Responding to earlier questions on prison facilities and staff
training, the delegation said there were human rights based programmes
for penitentiary personnel, and imminent improvements to combat
overcrowding were emphasized.
In the High Council of Justice, made up of both judges and non-judges,
the self-governing Conference of Judges elected the disciplinary
panel and senior officers. Disciplinary matters were handled with
full independence under the High Council’s supervision, and there
were rights to appeal through the Supreme Court.
Accreditation of judges was transparent and strictly enforced.
Conclusion of plea agreements were not limited to the payment of a
fine, but governed by a wide range of factors, and reached through
reduction in severity of sentences or by a voluntary guilty plea.
These agreements tended to be applied for less serious crimes,
particularly in corruption cases.
The delegation explained developments in university teaching and
alignment with the Bologna Process. Training for legal personnel was
particularly important, with new emphasis on technical and analytical
expertise in relation to international law. There was a successful
paid internship programme feeding into employment in the criminal
justice system.
Regarding freedom of religion, the legal status of religious
denominations was an essential human right. After 2005, as mentioned
earlier, Civil and Administrative Codes were amended granting new
rights to religious entities (non-commercial legal entities), and
a flexible status allowing greater autonomy for the organization
concerned.
Preliminary Concluding Observations
RAFAEL RIVAS POSADA, Chairperson of the Human Rights Committee, said a
good many of the concerns expressed revolved around a few issues only:
the need to find a solution to matters on non-jurisdiction within
Georgian territory that would ensure protection of individuals as
required by the Covenant; the need for continued legislative reforms
aimed at tackling excesses in the prisons and law and order sectors;
the problem of freedom of expression; the efforts needed to monitor
the results of legislative reforms or measures and their practical
outcome; and the issue of integration of national minorities.