E/CN.4/2003/21 page 12 62. The observer for China noted that the reluctance and refusal to remedy the situation of people of African descent and to pay reparations was itself a manifestation of racial discrimination. He encouraged concerned Governments to not distort historical facts and to have the “consciousness and courage” to pay compensation. 63. At the third meeting, Mr.Georges Jabbour presented his paper (E/CN.4/2003/WG.20/WP.1) entitled “Some personal thoughts on reparations and people of African descent” to the Working Group. He commented that “reparations” were an emotional and controversial issue and that, while the World Conference against Racism did not consider “reparations” per se, there was a “silent consensus” as the Conference made pronouncements that proclaimed slavery a crime against humanity. He considered the legal concept and meaning of “monetary” and “moral” reparations. He discussed the “three-sided” material reparations relationship and possible elements to be taken into consideration in the calculation of reparations and made suggestions on how to proceed in studying the matter of reparations, noting that the issue, ultimately could only be solved politically. 64. Mr. Martins commented on the need for a wide variety and means of material reparations to undo the disadvantage and damage caused by the slave trade. Mr. Kasanda said that the issue was not a recent one and appeared to be firmly on the international agenda. 65. The observer for Egypt noted that the study of reparations must not focus solely on material damages, there was a need to look at various forms of reparations, including apologies or national expressions of regret. 66. The observer for Costa Rica cautioned against discussions that exceeded the mandate of the Working Group and stated that the issues of reparations and crimes against humanity were controversial issues at the World Conference which should not be reopened. 67. The observer for the December Twelfth Movement stated that he agreed with the assertion by the expert, Mr. Jabbour, about what reparations were not, that is, social welfare programmes, affirmative action policies and international aid and assistance programming. He continued that the concept of moral reparations did not speak to the question of underdevelopment experienced by people of African descent in all spheres, and that this is what needed repairing. 68. The observer for Interfaith International stated that the matter of reparations was implied in paragraph 4 (d) of the mandate of the Working Group and that it might be useful to approach regional groups with a plan on how to move forward to study the idea of reparations so as to build common ground and encourage dialogue. 69. The Working Group discussed the many issues raised by Mr. Jabbour’s paper. It was agreed that there was a need for more refinement of the process and that the various aspects of reparations, its ramifications, must be carefully and thoughtfully explored. 70. At the fourth meeting, Mr. Roberto Martins gave a visual presentation on the situation of people of African descent in Brazil. Interpreting statistical research compiled over a 10-year period, Mr. Martins explained that Afro-Brazilians were at the bottom of every socio-economic