A/79/316 75. The risks of withdrawing special measures prematurely were exemplified by the banning of affirmative action in certain states of the United States prior to the 2023 decisions of the Supreme Court, as raised by the Special Rapporteur following her 2023 visit to the country. 95 In 1996, California banned affirmative action at public universities. Prior to the ban, the University of California campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles broadly reflected the racial and ethnic composition of the high school graduate population that was eligible for university enrolment. In the first year after the ban, the proportion of Black and Latino students at both campuses decreased by approximately 40 per cent. 96 A quarter-century later, University of California chancellors say that they are still not able to meet their diversity and equity goals despite having dedicated significant resources to outreach and alternative admissions standards. 97 Similarly, since 2006, when the University of Michigan was forced to discontinue its race-conscious admissions policy, the percentage of Black students has decreased, from 7 per cent in that year to 4 per cent in 2021, and the percentage of Native American students decreased, from 1 per cent to just 0.11 per cent. 98 VI. Conclusions and recommendations 76. Special measures are an essential component in the suite of measures needed to address systemic racial discrimination, which is frequently rooted in historical patterns of enslavement, colonialism and apartheid. 77. There is a significant lack of understanding, awareness and adoption of special measures globally. The Special Rapporteur has also identified a lack of focus on intersectional discrimination, insufficient disaggregated data and monitoring mechanisms, and a lack of consultation with intended beneficiaries. In addition, she has expressed concern about special measures being taken in isolation and the early or abrupt withdrawal of special measures. It is essential to address the existing gaps between policy objectives and actual implementation to enhance the effectiveness of these measures. To overcome these challenges, the Special Rapporteur proposes the recommendations below. 79. States should: (a) Urgently fulfil their obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination to adopt special measures in all areas of public life, including education, employment, political representation, housing and health care; (b) Take steps to collect and publish data, disaggregated by race, colour, descent, caste, ethnic or national origin, and gender, on the socioeconomic and cultural status and conditions of the population in order to increase understanding of the nature and magnitude of systemic racism and racial discrimination and identify areas where special measures are needed to inform their design and monitor their effectiveness; __________________ 95 96 97 98 24-15073 A/HRC/56/68/Add.1, para. 22. Zachary Bleemer, “Affirmative Action, Mismatch, and Economic Mobility After California’s Proposition 209”, Research and Occasional Papers Series (Berkeley, California, Center for Studies in Higher Education, 2020). University of California, amicus brief filed in the Supreme Court of the United States in support of Harvard College and University of North Carolina, Nos. 20-1199 and 21-707. Available at www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1199/232355/20220801134931730_201199%20bsac%20University%20of%20California.pdf. University of Michigan, amicus brief filed in the Supreme Court in support of Harvard College and University of North Carolina, Nos. 20-1199 and 21-707, p. 22. Available at https://record.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/220804_AmicusBrief.pdf. 23/24