In its General Recommendation No.31 on the prevention of racial discrimination in the administration and functioning of the criminal justice system, CERD outlines a number of factual indicators the presence of which should be taken by States to be alarm signals warning States that serious and urgent steps should be taken to address discrimination in the criminal justice system and in the larger society. Those warning signals include: the number of acts of violence committed by State officials against minority group members; low number of prosecutions relating to those acts of violence; the disproportionately high number of reported petty offences committed by minority group members; the percentage of minorities in prison or administrative detention; the disproportionately harsh sentences imposed on minorities; the insufficient representation of minorities in police, judges, jurors and other decision makers in the criminal justice system, and the insufficient data collections that would reveal the disparities. General Recommendation No. 31 also details specific strategies that States can take to prevent violations of the Convention in the functioning of their criminal justice systems. And since that Recommendation was adopted in 2005, CERD has criticised countries on every continent, in every region of the world for practices of law enforcement personnel which violate the rights of racial minorities. CERD has called on States to investigate and prosecute law enforcement officers who commit racially biased acts under the cover of enforcing law and order and to make those unlawful acts subject to increased penalties as aggravated offenses or hate crimes. Additionally, CERD has called on States to ensure that victims of police abuses are afforded remedies that are effective, independent and impartial and that victims receive fair and proper compensation.2 of the penal system and in the application of the law, as well as in the actions and attitudes of institutions and individuals responsible for law enforcement, especially where this has contributed to certain groups being overrepresented among persons under detention or imprisoned” 2 For example: (Austria, 2012)reports of racial profiling and the use of stops and searches (stop and frisk) of persons of ethnicities other than the majority. the committee is further concerned at the failure by the state party to adequately prosecute and punish law enforcement personnel who commit offences against people with migration backgrounds and fail to provide equal protection under the law, as well as the failure to prosecute many violations of the prohibition of racial discrimination, considering them “petty offences” (arts. 2, 4, 5 and 6). (Russian Federation, 2013) (a) ensure that the law on police is effectively implemented and that appropriate legal measures are taken against law enforcement officials for unlawful conduct based on racially discriminatory grounds. (Ireland, 2011) c)reports that many non-irish people are subjected to police stops, and are required to produce identity cards, which practice has the potential to perpetuate racist incidents and the profiling of individuals on the basis of their race and colour (arts. 2, 3 and 6). (Thailand, 2012) the discriminatory impact of the application of the special laws in force in the southern border provinces, including reports of identity checks and arrests carried out on the basis of racial profiling, as well as reports of torture and enforced disappearance of malayu thais. (Panama, 2012) r) pay particular attention to the conditions of imprisonment of the large number of afropanamanians deprived of their liberty r) to ensure that remedies are effective, independent and impartial and that victims receive fair and proper compensation r) to investigate and punish the practice of racial profiling used by the police against the population of african descent. 2