"As societies build walls of separation between communities,
ICAAD works to remove each brick to illuminate our common humanity"

Report Reveals System Failures in U.S. Documentation of Hate Crimes

Report Reveals System Failures in U.S. Documentation of Hate Crimes

Geneva, Switzerland, Sept. 16, 2013: The International Center for Advocates Against Discrimination (ICAAD) submitted a Shadow Report to the United Nations Human Rights Committee on Sept. 13, 2013, for the upcoming review of United States (U.S.) compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Read ICAAD’ Shadow Report

The Report finds the U.S. in violation of the ICCPR because it has failed to protect vulnerable communities from hate crimes. It highlights that under the current Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program led by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), only 3% percent of all hate crimes are documented through the UCR Program. Out of 14,575 participating law enforcement agencies in the UCR program, 86.7% of these agencies reported zero hate crimes in their jurisdiction, including 64 jurisdictions with a population over 100,000. The jurisdictions that reported zero hate crimes represent almost one third of the U.S. population.

The downstream effect of the massive gap in data collection results in the governments’ limited ability to justify mandating law enforcement training and documentation of hate crimes. Furthermore, identification of crime patterns to prevent, prosecute, and protect vulnerable communities from bias-motivated acts is severely compromised.

The Report concludes that the reporting gap that currently exists is unconscionable. The disparity leaves policy makers and other interested parties paralyzed to act because the true scope of the problem and the patterns of bias-motivated violence remain permanently walled off from consideration.”

In partnership with the US Human Rights Network (USHRN) ICCPR Task Force, a coalition that works to expand civil societies’ knowledge and participation in the ICCPR review process, ICAAD and other advocacy organizations jointly submitted Shadow Reports on many human rights issues and are participating in a national day of action in cities across the U.S.

After the U.N. Human Rights Committee reviews reports from the government and civil society NGOs it assesses compliance with the ICCPR and offers Concluding Observations, which are recommendations to improve the U.S.human rights record before the next review session.

Read the summary of the U.S. government’s submission to the UN Human Rights Committee

Report Reveals System Failures in U.S. Documentation of Hate Crimes

Shadow Report on Hate Crimes Submitted to the UN Human Rights Committee
Sources:FBI Hate Crimes Statistics 2011&Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report 2013

Civil society plays a formidable role in providing alternative reports (Shadow Reports) that directly highlight the human rights conditions on the ground while holding states accountable to the recommendations (Concluding Observations) issued by the Human Rights Committee.The U.S. review before the Human Rights Committee in Geneva, Switzerland is scheduled for October 2013. A delegation representing civil society organizations will be in attendance.

Brief History of U.S. Submissions before the Human Rights Committee

Upon ratification in 1992, the ICCPR became the supreme law of the land under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which gives treaties the status of federal law.The U.S. Department of State is responsible for coordinating the government response as they submit themselves before the Human Rights Committee every four years. The U.S. submitted its First Periodic Report in 1994 under the Clinton administration. The Second and Third Periodic Reports were combined because they were delayed seven years, under the Bush administration, and were submitted in 2005. The Fourth Periodic Report was submitted on Dec. 30, 2011.



Great talk! "Dr. Prabhjot Singh is on a mission to makes healthcare more accessible. His “a-ha moment” came as he attended the funeral of one of his patients where he saw the man in context of his life and community, rather than the bare facts included on his chart. Singh realized that this man’s death had been the result of the collective failure of many systems—education, mental health, neighborhood safety, job placement, veteran support. In Dying and Living in the Neighborhood, Singh insists that we must discard our top-down approach to the healthcare system and that regardless of our leadership, the solutions won’t come from our government. We must rebuild our system from the neighborhood up." ... See MoreSee Less

View on Facebook


"Article 25, sub-clause 1 of the Indian Constitution guarantees
that “subject to public order, morality and health,
all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience
and the right to freely to profess, practice and propagate
religion.”38 However, its sub-clause 2 (B) and its corresponding
Explanation II is considered very controversial.
While Explanation I states that the wearing and
carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in
the profession of the Sikh religion. Explanation II in
sub-clause 2 (B) states, “Hindus shall be construed as
including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jain
or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious
institutions shall be construed accordingly.”39 This
constitutional provision is very discriminatory, as it connotes
that even as a multi-faith state, India seems to be
concerned about the social welfare of only one religion
(Hinduism) and its religious institutions. The appended
Explanation II effectively groups Sikhs, Buddhists, and
Jains into Hinduism. Explanation II has also led to other
discriminatory laws against these religions, including
the Hindu Succession Act (1956), Hindu Marriage Act
(1955), Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (1956),
and Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (1956). These
laws are largely viewed to force legal assimilation of
these religions into Hinduism, rather than recognizing
them as distinct religious identities."
... See MoreSee Less

View on Facebook