E/CN.4/2005/21 page 9 servants should be treated much more seriously than was presently the case. It was undoubtedly important to punish such attitudes and forms of behaviour but training was equally necessary. It was essential that those officials be trained to observe human rights and to respect difference, so that they might become effective “human rights protection agents”. 44. Julio Faundez, professor of law at the University of Warwick, United Kingdom, delivered a paper entitled “Equal opportunity and employment”. He submitted that “equal opportunity” meant that employment decisions - such as appointments, promotions or selection for special training schemes - were taken on the basis of merit; irrelevant factors such as race or ethnic or national origin ought not to be considered. Only factors such as qualifications, ability to do the job and relevant experience were to be used in the selection and appointment of candidates. This approach was intended to ensure that all candidates for jobs were treated equally and that the principle of equal opportunity was respected. 45. Mr. Faundez discussed the direct or indirect aspects of discrimination. Direct discrimination occurred when an employer denied employment to a person because of his/her race, colour or national origin. It presupposed a discriminatory intent. Intent was reasonably easy to establish when the employer had explicitly or implicitly stated that he/she was not willing to hire members of a particular race. Intent, however, could also be inferred from the behaviour of the employer. Such inference could be drawn where an employer refused to hire a qualified individual who was a member of a particular race, and the job remained open to candidates with similar qualifications of a different race. Unless the employer could justify his/her decision on legitimate grounds, such behaviour could constitute direct discrimination. 46. Discrimination could also be indirect. This form of discrimination occurred when institutional policies or practices had the effect of systematically excluding members of certain groups from job opportunities. This form of discrimination was perhaps the most prevalent. It was also the most difficult to eradicate. It occurred when seemingly neutral job requirements consistently excluded members of a particular race. Such requirements included height or weight restrictions, or diploma or other formal requirements that were unrelated to the specific job. 47. Mr. Faundez submitted that legal remedies against discrimination were meant to reaffirm and restore the principle of equal opportunity. Yet, the principle of equal opportunity had an important limitation as it did not take into account the contemporary consequences of past discriminatory policies. He concluded that one of the reasonable ways to break the vicious circle of discrimination was to require employers to take positive measures so as to ensure that visible and invisible barriers that reproduced prevailing patterns of discrimination were promptly eliminated. 48. In the ensuing discussion, one observer remarked that many jobs in the public sector were legitimately reserved for nationals since they were very much linked to the authority of the State and the way in which it functioned. 49. One NGO observer referred to the direct link between racism and unemployment and how they were connected to lack of educational opportunities and poverty.