Statement by Gwendolyn Albert

To the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women on the Third Periodic Report from the Government of the Czech Republic

17 August 2006

Thank you, Madame Chair, for giving me the opportunity to address the Committee on the Third Periodic Report submitted by the Government of the Czech Republic. I speak on behalf of the League of Human Rights and the European Roma Rights Center, human rights organizations which contributed to the Shadow Report to the Third Periodic Report. I would like to raise two critical areas of systemic discrimination against women.

• THE COERCIVE STERILIZATIONS OF ROMANI WOMEN

In December 2005 the Czech Ombudsman issued his Final Statement in the Matter of Sterilizations Performed in Contravention of the Law, confirming that 100 % of the 87 complaints he received during 2005 were justified in that not a single instance of consent to any of the sterilizations met the condition of being free and informed. He made several recommendations on this basis.

To date, legislation relevant to the coercive sterilization has yet to be amended as per the Ombudsman’s recommendations.

Despite the sheer number of social workers, doctors, and hospitals involved in coercive sterilization since the earliest example of a complaint received by the Ombudsman dating from 1958, to date the courts have instructed only one hospital to pay one victim compensation and one hospital to apologize to another victim in writing. No doctor or social worker has ever been punished and no social worker has ever had previous “recognition” for having achieved sterilization “targets” revoked. Given the scope of the violations, the punishment to date is exceedingly disproportionate. The Govt has not indicated how it intends to further punish this wrongdoing and seems not to appreciate the desirability of safeguarding the prevention of future harms, but contents itself with proposing “expert review” of any future allegations, which is unacceptable.

The Govt has yet to institute a procedure for remedying victims or address criteria for those victims whose medical records have been destroyed.

It is our submission that government action responding to the Ombudsman’s Final Statement should be given a priority in keeping with Articles 10 (h), 12, and 16 of the Convention and with the CEDAW General Recommendations adopted in 1999, especially Recommendation 19, 21, and 24 (points 20 and 22).

Since we submitted the Shadow Report, the following developments have occurred:

In May 2006: at a session of the Czech Government Human Rights Council’s vote on whether to adopt material based on the Ombudsman’s recommendations, ministerial members of the Council blocked adoption of the material, with the Health Ministry disavowing any state responsibility at all and even arguing speciously that the Czech Republic is not the successor state to the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic. At present the Human Rights Council, as an avenue for advising the Government in this serious matter, is at gridlock.

Most importantly, of eight criminal charges brought in cases of coercive sterilization complaints to the Ombudsman filed in March 2005, five of the cases have been dismissed, with experts and police characterizing acts which are prima facie illegal (such as a sterilization commission agreeing to a sterilization post facto) as not actually constituting violations of the law.The victims are considering a Constitutional Court complaint.

Specific questions we recommend the Committee raise to the Govt are:

• Does the Czech General Prosecutor intend to monitor the ongoing criminal investigations into coercive sterilization allegations?
• When does the Govt intend to make an official statement on the practice of coercive sterilization?
• How does the Govt intend to address the Health Ministry’s failure to monitor whether the information recorded in medical records actually reflects procedures performed in compliance with the law?
• How does the Govt intend to ensure the requirement of informed consent to sterilization is made clear to everyone on Czech territory?
• How does the Govt intend to ensure the giving of consent is understood as a legal act by everyone on Czech territory?
• Does the Govt intend to conduct further research to determine exactly how many women suffered this practice?
• How does the Govt intend to ensure doctors fully identify with and embody the principle that, in legal terms, patients are their equals?
• With reference to the Genocide Convention, can the Ombudsman further expound his reasoning as to why he refuses to characterize pre-1989 policy has having been genocidal? Can the Govt give its position?
• Regarding doctors’ motivation to recommend Caesarian operations: how does the Govt plan to monitor whether such recommendations are indeed lege artis in future and not secondarily motivated by a desire to opportunistically sterilize a patient?
• How does the Govt plan to ensure that collusion between social workers and doctors to coerce women into sterilization is no longer ongoing?

We recommend:

• The Government immediately and publicly apologize to the victims of coercive sterilization.
• The Government immediately adopt the legislative changes proposed by the Ombudsman.
• The Health Ministry immediately implement the “Methodological measures” proposed by the Ombudsman.
• The Government immediately establish the compensation mechanism proposed by the Ombudsman.
• The Government establish a fund to assist victims in bringing claims under the compensation mechanism.
• The Government seek legal opinion as to the best method for providing compensation in cooperation with the Council of Europe.
• The Government publish the criteria for establishing veracity of claims.
• The General Prosecutor monitor the criminal investigation into the coercive sterilization complaints and publish its findings.
• The Government make financial assistance available to victims who wish to undertake artificial insemination.
• The Foreign Affairs Ministry raise with the Slovak Government the issue of compensation for persons sterilized in the Slovak Republic who are now Czech citizens.

II. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND RAPE

Despite recent legislative improvements the arrest and conviction rate remains low for perpetrators of this crime, the victims of which are overwhelmingly women. Existing efforts to train law enforcement officials in how to handle victims of domestic violence have yet to result in an increase in domestic violence convictions. Domestic violence victims report to us that when police interrogate them, the focus is strictly on the most recent attack, which is frequently evaluated as having only constituted a misdemeanor or a crime other than that described in 215a of the Criminal Code. In general, investigators are still not asking about the history of the case or about other typical symptoms of domestic violence such as threats, blackmail, insults, etc.

We therefore recommend that the government rigorously enforce current regulations and either institute or toughen the following regulations:

1) define "stalking" as a crime in the Criminal Code

2) refine the definition of rape to include lack of consent as a determining factor

3) institute, in line with recommendations previously made by the Czech Government Human Rights Council, an independent monitoring mechanism for investigating crimes alleged to have been committed by police officers.

4) institute therapeutic programs for batterers.

This page was last updated on September 18, 2006

“IWRAW Asia Pacific is an independent, non-profit, NGO in Special consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations.”
©IWRAW Asia Pacific
Contact Us | Site Map