E/CN.4/2004/21 page 7 26. Ms. Taylor-Thompson presented her paper, “Understanding and addressing racial discrimination in representation” (E/CN.4/2003/WG.20/Misc.3). She gave an overview of the problems of racial discrimination in the United States and the disproportionate representation of people of African descent in its justice systems. She stated that there was a critical economic and social disjuncture between clients charged and service delivery in the justice system. The policies that led to arrest, prosecution and sentencing were often “influenced and infected” by racial discrimination. There was no coherent system of defence of indigent persons, no standard or guarantee governing the performance of defence counsels/lawyers, and the racial dynamics of the justice system mirrored the racial dynamics in the country. She recommended that Governments consider/adopt a policy of mandatory appointment of lawyers/counsels in serious cases; require as a qualification for practice training in racial sensitivity/cultural awareness; construct linkages between law school programmes and defence counsels; and develop political coalitions between bar associations and community leadership. 27. Mr. Jabbour commented that the United States Supreme Court might wish to consider the widespread bias in the criminal justice system. Mr. Martins noted that racial bias in the justice system was not confined to North America and that in countries like Brazil, affirmative action policies were aimed at addressing such structural barriers to securing justice. Ms. Zlătescu referred to paragraphs 161 and 162 of the Programme of Action of the World Conference which dealt with legal assistance. 28. Mr. Frans raised the issue of bias in the justice system faced by migrants in the European context and queried whether it would be possible for an accused to choose his/her own defence lawyer in such cases. A greater presence of people of African descent at future meetings of the Working Group would be welcome; the Group required political support as well to accomplish its work. Despite the limited participation, the Working Group must continue its work as it was “fighting for the collective memory of humanity as a whole”. 29. The observer for Brazil stated that self-identification was still the basis of affirmative action programmes in Brazil. She also pointed out that the Organization of American States was considering a regional convention on the elimination of racial discrimination in the Americas. 30. The Chairperson-Rapporteur welcomed two additional panellists from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People-Legal Defense and Educational Fund (NAACP-LDF) of the United States, Miriam Gohara and Vanita Gupta. Ms. Gupta outlined the problems of defending indigent persons in the United States. She said that the standard of defence was very low; there was also no oversight or accountability for this system. Ms. Gohara introduced a paper prepared by NAACP-LDF entitled “Assembly line justice: Mississippi’s indigent defense crisis” (E/CN.4/2003/WG.20/Misc.4), which movingly described the problems of indigent defence in both capital and non-capital cases. The report found that community investment in public defence was insufficient and recommended that States and the federal Government should contribute in order to ensure standards and accountability. 31. Ms. Souleliac presented her paper, “La lutte contre les discriminations dans le cadre de l’accès au droit et à la justice (E/CN.4/2003/WG.20/Misc.2)”. She briefly described the legal system in France and noted that legal aid was managed directly by the bar, and that lawyers were assigned depending on the nature of a given case. “General access” to the legal system was available for the most vulnerable and in France legal aid was available to nationals, citizens of