E/CN.4/2006/16/Add.2 page 11 35. The Ministry further explained that article 4 (a) and (b) of ICERD requires State parties to punish the dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred and incitement to racial discrimination. Japan made a reservation to these two provisions, indicating that these would be applied as far as they are compatible with the rights to freedom of assembly, association and expression. As a result, propaganda of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred is not punished in itself, and may only be punished if it engenders criminal conduct such as physical violence, threat, or defamation. The Ministry indicated that, despite the lack of a specific law, racial discrimination is not tolerated in Japan, since equal protection before the law is basic under the Constitution. There are no statistics on judicial cases that relate to racism. III. PRESENTATION OF THEIR SITUATION BY THE COMMUNITIES CONCERNED A. The Buraku people 36. The Buraku community indicated that discrimination against them still exists and is even increasing, while nationalism rises in the current political context. The daily manifestations include graffiti, posters and Internet messages insulting Buraku people, treating them as dirty and requesting them to leave, and discriminatory practices, mainly in the field of employment and marriage. Employers continue to enquire on the origins of the job applicants, but there is no local or national legislation that prohibits this practice, except for the prefectures of Osaka, Fukuoka, Kumamoto, Tokushima, Kagawa and Tottori. Regrettably, the “Buraku lists” are also used by marriage partners, who inquire as to the origins of their future spouse. According to a recent survey, 78 per cent of the population of Osaka indicated that they would see a marriage with Buraku people as problematic: this shows how profound the discriminatory mentality against Buraku people is. Discouragement of marriages is a major obstacle to the integration of Buraku people into the rest of the Japanese society. 37. The case of the Nishinari district in Osaka prefecture, visited by the Special Rapporteur, is a special case, since mixing took place to a certain extent. Since the leather industry has been very successful, some Buraku per cent people reached a considerable standard of living and left the district. At the same time, many non-Buraku people came to the district to work in that industry and pay lower rents. As a result, only 50 per cent of those who live in Nishinari were born there: this is still an exception in Japan. 38. Nevertheless, the district has a number of serious problems, as came out of a survey conducted in 2000, which reflect the situation of the majority of the Buraku districts: one household out of five needs income subsidies, the level of schooling is very low (the majority of the elderly residents only completed compulsory education), only 20 per cent of the inhabitants use computers and 10 per cent the internet, which is much lower than the national averages (respectively, 38.6% and 28.9% ), 20 per cent of the houses are insalubrious, 30 per cent of the inhabitants feel useless, and 17.4 per cent were victims of discrimination in relation to marriage. Among young people aged between 15 and 29.17 per cent are unemployed. The elders have extremely low revenues and serious heath problems, 11 per cent of the inhabitants are disabled and only 19 per cent of these people work. In Nishinari, all discriminations intermingle. The strong prejudice against the district is felt: 50 per cent of the inhabitants hesitate to declare their residence.