ÿWPC)   ÇTÀ9ÚUÙG|„ ± º­h$Oø¢·`E¿çÏûãÎ ºh£ßR…ü˜)„·Í Ôã¶Ò¶ó6ӈʦ³@Г@”ÒXuÖxl1~HXVÒ"ô!ÄÞf—™!2¿¸ñ ·Ø‰ižÎþìôTöÅ K^LÃcNÉï^@j x= X'<ŽkN^XŽá\ãDÀí;ñL 1íØS›Ã‡|?]Iþƒ©À՛˕-¥¡ç†J°hÂye‰PiÝú>¬%P†c™ߓ)íì«å/ÔÕyÓÆÙËGð¥!÷f¢‘~¬ ÍbÜK,2×óZ"éªÃaµ,^ö! »’×õ¸L£T ÒÊ”ÝéËž= xdA(üÉdXûâµó±¡÷,¿3FæSBá±èeE[ŸY§oòÄlÅ^|²Iä‘ÜÙÄú{#èP^œÿáÚ6 –„ߤù'z‘JÕ¼Žna0 Æ“Á¬€‹%8x«Eƒ”m]vêò7ÁºY§n|º9k æ(§1¦D ¦wúõÑöšcœñ¤«éøuUÿ1‡ß)ŠREÈ¿’Þ…¥ô´ÌÚžH¹òŠp™s[‚yµrè1z@  ´¯.3ƒ°¿gÌ?0|Z’haýR2 Éa U>BÌ€ 0nL 0iº 0Y# 0_| 0&ÛU6  7 0ÆG #! UN. %| M‚ († N® ^ ° w@¼ 4ü  m ô\  `‹&Times New Roman' United Nations Human Rights Website - Treaty Bodies Database - Document - Jurisprudence - 4nt - Jurisprudence - "Angie Dituri"0Angie Dituri .   <ÿÿ:Default ParaÔ€ôôôÔÔ€XXXÔ< ÿÿ:Normal (Web)Ô S ÔÓ =jSÓÓ =jSÓ6ÿÿ4HyperlinkóóòòÔ ÿ ÔóóÔ  Ô<ÿÿ:FollowedHypeóóòòÔ  ÔóóÔ  Ô<qyÿÿ:HTML TypewriÔ€ôôôÔÔK€<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ  ÔÔ€XXXÔÔS€ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÔ  Ô<þ6X9`(‹Courier New#|x(žÅb$¡¡ÒÜ°ÒÒÜ°ÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€ XxLXX XÔÔ€XxLXX XxLÔÔÔ˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PSÈÚØÚÚØÈÚ0(ÈhH  Z‹6Times New Roman Regular X€-)Æ U U [ [££ED£€as()ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀÝ ƒ Åb!ÝÒÜ°ÒÒÜ°ÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€ X¨+XX XÔÔ€X¨+XX X¨+ÔÔÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôò òCOMMITTEE€ON€THE€ELIMINATION€OF€RACIAL€DISCRIMINATIONÐ ° ÐÌòòB.€M.€S.€v.€AustraliaóóÐ ˆØ ÐÌCommunication€No€8/1996ÌÌ12€March€1999ÌÌÔ_ÔCERDÔ_Ô/C/54/D/8/1996ÌÌÌVIEWSó óÐ Ô$  ÐÌÌÌòòòòSubmitted€byóó:€B.€M.€S.€[represented€by€counsel]€Ð „Ô  ÐÌòòAlleged€victimóó:€The€author€Ð \¬ ÐÌòòState€party€concernedóó:€Australia€Ð 4„ ÐÌòòDate€of€communicationóó:€19€July€1996€(initial€submission)óó€Ð  \ ÐÌÌòòññÓ  ÓññThe€Committee€on€the€Elimination€of€Racial€Discriminationóó,€established€under€article€8€ofÐ Ð  Ðthe€International€Convention€on€the€Elimination€of€All€Forms€of€Racial€Discrimination,€ÌÌòòMeeting€onóó€12€March€1999,€Ð ”ä ÐÌòòHaving€concludedóó€its€consideration€of€communication€No.€8/1996,€submitted€to€theÐ l¼ ÐCommittee€under€article€14€of€the€International€Convention€on€the€Elimination€of€All€FormsÏof€Racial€Discrimination,€ÌÌòòHaving€taken€into€considerationóó€all€written€information€made€available€to€it€by€the€author€andÐ #l! Ðthe€State€party,€Ìññà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àññÌòòBearing€in€mindóó€rule€95€of€its€rules€of€procedure€requiring€it€to€formulate€its€opinion€on€theÐ à%0!$ Ðcommunication€before€it,€ÌÌòòAdoptsóó€the€following:€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐññÓéÓññÓ  Óñ ñÌñ ñÌñ ñòòñ ññ ñò òñ ñOPINIONñ ñó óñ ññ ñóóñ ñÐ h+¸&* ÐÓ  Óñ ñÌñ ñÐ @-(, ЇññññÓ  ÓññññññññÓ  ÓññññññÓ  ÓÓ  Óññ1.€The€author€of€the€communication€is€B.M.S.,€an€Australian€citizen€since€1992€of€IndianÏorigin€and€a€medical€doctor.€He€claims€to€be€a€victim€of€violations€of€the€Convention€byÏAustralia.€He€is€represented€by€counsel.€ÌÌò òòòThe€facts€as€submitted€by€the€authoró óóó€Ð `° ÐÌ2.1€The€author€graduated€from€Ô_ÔOsmaniaÔ_Ô€University€(India).€He€holds€a€diploma€in€ClinicalÏNeurology€(Ô_ÔDCNÔ_Ô)€from€the€University€of€London.€He€has€Ô_ÔpractisedÔ_Ô€medicine€in€England,ÏIndia,€Ireland€and€the€United€States.€For€10€years€he€has€worked€as€a€medical€practitionerÏunder€temporary€registration€in€Australian€public€hospitals.€ÌÌ2.2€The€author€states€that€doctors€trained€overseas€who€have€sought€medical€registration€inÏAustralia€have€to€undergo€and€pass€an€examination€involving€two€stages,€a€multiple€choiceÏexamination€(Ô_ÔMCQÔ_Ô)€and€a€clinical€examination.€The€whole€process€is€conducted€by€theÏAustralian€Medical€Council€(AMC),€a€non„governmental€organization€partly€funded€by€theÏGovernment.€ÌÌ2.3€In€1992,€the€Australian€Minister€of€Health€imposed€a€quota€on€the€number€of€doctorsÏtrained€overseas€who€pass€the€first€stage€of€this€examination.€As€a€result,€doctors€who€wereÏtrained€abroad€and€who€are€Australian€residents€and€Australian€citizens€may€not€be€registeredÏprecisely€because€they€fall€outside€the€quota.€On€the€other€hand,€quota€places€may€beÏallocated€to€persons€without€any€immigration€status€in€Australia.€ÌÌ2.4€Following€the€imposition€of€the€quota€system€the€author€sat€the€Ô_ÔMCQÔ_Ô€examination€onÏthree€occasions.€He€satisfied€the€minimum€requirements€but€was€always€prevented,€by€theÏquota€system,€from€proceeding€to€the€clinical€examination.€ÌÌ2.5€In€March€1993,€the€author€filed€a€formal€discrimination€complaint€with€the€AustralianÏHuman€Rights€and€Equal€Opportunity€Commission€(Ô_ÔHREOCÔ_Ô)€against€the€quota€and€theÏexamination€system.€In€August€1995,€the€Commission€found€the€quota€policy€unlawful€underÏthe€Australian€Racial€Discrimination€Act,€considering€it€"grossly€unfair,€resulting€inÏunnecessary€trauma,€frustration€and€a€deep€sense€of€injustice".€As€regards€the€examinationÏsystem,€the€Commission€held€that€the€decision€to€require€the€author€to€sit€for€and€passÏexaminations€was€not€based€on€his€national€origin€or€on€the€consideration€that€he€was€aÏperson€not€of€Australian€or€New€Zealand€origin.€ÌÌ2.6€The€Australian€Government€and€the€AMC€appealed€the€decision€of€the€Ô_ÔHREOCÔ_Ô.€On€17ÏJuly€1996,€the€Federal€Court€of€Australia€ruled€in€their€Ô_ÔfavourÔ_Ô,€finding€that€the€quota€and€theÏexamination€system€were€reasonable.€ÌÌ2.7€The€author€did€not€appeal€this€decision€to€the€High€Court€of€Australia.€According€toÏcounsel€the€appeal€to€the€High€Court€is€not€an€effective€remedy€within€the€meaning€of€articleÏ14,€paragraph€7€(a),€of€the€Convention.€On€the€one€hand,€there€is€no€automatic€right€of€appealÏto€the€High€Court,€since€the€Court€must€first€grant€special€leave€to€appeal.€On€the€other€hand,Ïthe€High€Court€has€consistently€stated€that€a€prima€facie€case€of€error€will€not€of€itselfÐ D-”(, Ðwarrant€the€granting€of€an€application€for€leave€to€appeal.€There€must€be€some€special€featureÏwhich€warrants€the€attention€of€the€Court,€with€its€public€role€in€developing€and€clarifyingÏthe€law€and€in€maintaining€procedural€regularity€in€the€lower€courts,€outweighing€the€privateÏrights€of€litigants.€ÌÌ2.8€Furthermore,€the€author€did€not€have€the€means€to€pursue€the€appeal€without€beingÏawarded€legal€aid,€and€a€cost€order€would€be€imposed€on€him€if€the€appeal€was€unsuccessful.ÏIn€fact,€on€28€October€1996€Legal€Aid€advised€that€it€would€not€fund€the€author's€appeal€toÏthe€High€Court.€ÌÌ2.9€In€subsequent€submissions€counsel€indicates€that€following€Ô_ÔHREOCÔ_Ô's€decision€andÏnotwithstanding€that€an€appeal€had€been€lodged,€the€AMC€decided€to€abandon€the€quota.€AsÏa€result€all€overseas„trained€doctors€(Ô_ÔOTDsÔ_Ô)€who,€like€the€author,€have€met€the€minimumÏrequirements€of€the€Ô_ÔMCQÔ_Ô€examination€but€have€been€prevented€from€doing€so€by€the€quota,Ïare€now€allowed€to€undertake€the€clinical€examination.€The€author€has€attempted€the€clinicalÏexamination€on€several€occasions.€The€examination€has€three€components€and€it€is€necessaryÏto€pass€all€the€components€at€the€one€sitting.€The€author€has€passed€each€component€at€leastÏonce€but€not€all€three€at€the€same€sitting.€ÌÌ2.10€The€standard€of€the€AMC€examination€is€supposedly€that€of€an€Australian„trainedÏmedical€student€who€is€about€to€commence€an€intern€year.€Counsel€states€that€it€is€objectivelyÏpreposterous€that€a€person€of€the€author's€experience,€with€13€years€working€as€a€doctor€andÏ8€years€in€the€Australian€health€system,€is€not€at€least€of€the€standard€of€a€newly€graduatedÏmedical€student.€ÌÌ2.11€Studies€on€Australian€medical€graduates€show€serious€deficiencies€in€clinical€skills.€ForÏexample,€a€University€of€Queensland€study€published€in€1995€indicates€that€at€theÏcommencement€of€the€intern€year,€medical€staff€did€not€consider€all€graduates€competentÏeven€in€history„taking€and€clinical„examination€skills€and€most€graduates€were€notÏconsidered€competent€in€such€areas€as€diagnosis,€interpreting€investigations,€treatmentÏprocedures€and€emergency€procedures.€At€the€conclusion€of€the€intern€year,€only€45€per€centÏof€medical€staff€considered€all€interns€competent€at€history„taking€and€only€36€per€cent€ofÏmedical€staff€considered€all€interns€competent€at€physical€examination.€In€view€of€suchÏstudies,€it€is€clear€that€overseas„trained€doctors€are€examined€at€a€higher€standard€thanÏAustralian€graduates.€In€the€author's€case,€the€fact€that€the€AMC€persistently€fails€him€raisesÏthe€additional€question€of€whether€he€is€being€penalized€for€taking€his€case€to€the€Ô_ÔHREOCÔ_Ô.€ÌÌò òòòThe€complaintó óóó€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌ3.1€Counsel€claims€that€both€the€AMC€examination€system€for€overseas€doctors€as€a€wholeÏand€the€quota€itself€are€unlawful€and€constitute€racial€discrimination.€In€this€respect€theÏjudgement€of€the€Federal€Court€of€Australia€condones€the€discriminatory€acts€of€theÏAustralian€Government€and€the€AMC€and€thereby€reduces€the€protection€accorded€toÏAustralians€under€the€Racial€Discrimination€Act.€At€the€same€time,€it€eliminates€any€Ô_ÔchanceÏof€reform€of€this€discriminatory€legislation.€Ð D-”(, Ї3.2€Counsel€contends€that€the€restrictions€to€practise€their€profession€imposed€on€overseas„¼trained€doctors€before€they€can€be€registered€aim€at€limiting€the€number€of€doctors€toÏpreserve€the€more€lucrative€areas€of€medical€practice€for€domestically€trained€doctors.€ÌÌò òòòState€party's€preliminary€submission€and€author's€comments€thereonó óóó€Ð `° ÐÌ4.1€In€a€submission€dated€7€January€1997€the€State€party€informs€the€Committee€that€inÏOctober€1995€the€AMC€decided€to€discontinue€the€quota€system€following€the€HREOC'sÏconclusion€that€the€system€was€racially€discriminatory.€That€decision€was€taken€in€spite€ofÏthe€Federal€Court's€ruling€that€the€quota€system€was€reasonable€and€not€raciallyÏdiscriminatory.€As€a€result,€the€281€candidates€who€had€fallen€outside€the€quota,€includingÏthe€author,€were€informed€that€they€were€eligible€to€undertake€the€clinical€examinations.€ÌÌ4.2€The€State€party€notes€that€the€author€has€sat€the€AMC€clinical€examination€and€failed€itÏthree€times.€As€a€result€of€the€HREOC's€decision€in€the€author's€case€an€independent€observerÏappointed€by€the€author€was€present€during€his€first€two€attempts.€Under€the€current€AMCÏregulations,€he€may€resit€the€clinical€examination€in€the€next€two€years,€without€having€toÏresit€the€MCQ€examination.€Currently,€there€is€no€restriction,€other€than€satisfactoryÏperformance,€on€the€author's€progress€through€the€AMC€examinations.€ÌÌ4.3€With€respect€to€counsel's€allegation€that€the€Federal€Court€ordered€the€author€to€pay€theÏlegal€costs€of€the€AMC,€the€State€party€informs€the€Committee€that€in€November€1996€theÏAMC€agreed€to€discontinue€pursuit€of€costs€against€the€author.€The€Federal€Court€had€madeÏno€order€for€costs€in€respect€of€the€Commonwealth€of€Australia,€which€agreed€to€bear€its€ownÏcosts.€ÌÌ4.4€In€the€light€of€the€above€the€State€party€considers€the€author's€complaint€to€be€moot.€ÌÌ5.1€In€his€comments,€counsel€informs€the€Committee€that€the€author€does€not€wish€toÏwithdraw€his€communication.€He€notes€that€although€the€quota€system€was€discontinued€itÏmay€be€reintroduced€at€any€time€in€the€light€of€the€Federal€Court's€ruling€which€overturnedÏthe€HREOC's€decision.€According€to€counsel€the€State€party€authorities€have€indeedÏcontemplated€the€possibility€of€reintroducing€it.€ÌÌ5.2€Counsel€reiterates€that€the€discontinuation€of€the€quota€has€not€solved€the€problem€ofÏdiscrimination,€since€the€AMC€has€simply€increased€the€pass€criteria€to€compensate€for€theÏabsence€of€the€restrictive€effects€of€the€quota.€He€further€claims€that€although€the€author€hasÏbeen€allowed€to€proceed€to€the€clinical€examination€he€was€failed€on€each€occasion,€inÏcircumstances€which€suggest€that€he€is€being€penalized€for€having€originally€complained€toÏthe€HREOC.€He€has€lodged€a€further€complaint€with€the€Commission€about€this€issue.€ÌÌ5.3€Furthermore,€the€fact€that€a€discriminatory€practice€has€been€discontinued€does€notÏchange€its€previous€discriminatory€nature€or€render€void€complaints€concerning€itsÏapplication€and€operation€when€it€was€still€in€force.€Consequently,€it€is€argued€that€theÏauthor's€rights€were€violated€from€1992€to€1995,€causing€him€a€detriment€which€has€not€beenÐ D-”(, Ðredressed€by€the€discontinuation€of€the€quota€system.€ÌÌò òòòThe€Committee's€admissibility€decision€and€State€party's€comments€thereonó óóó€Ð ˆØ ÐÌ6.1€During€its€fifty„first€session€the€Committee€examined€the€communication€and€noted€thatÏthe€main€issues€before€it€were:€(a)€whether€the€State€party€had€failed€to€meet€its€obligationÏunder€article€5€(e)€(i)€to€guarantee€the€author's€right€to€work€and€free€choice€of€employment;Ïand€(b)€whether€the€order€of€costs€against€the€author€by€the€Federal€Court€violated€theÏauthor's€rights€under€article€5€(a)€to€equal€treatment€before€the€courts.€ÌÌ6.2€On€19€August€1997€the€Committee€adopted€a€decision€by€which€it€considered€theÏcommunication€admissible€with€respect€to€the€claim€relating€to€the€discriminatory€nature€ofÏboth€the€AMC€examination€and€its€quota€system.€The€Committee€noted,€òòinter€aliaóó,€that€theÐ Ä  ÐFederal€Court's€decision€provided€a€legal€basis€for€the€reintroduction€of€the€quota€system€atÏany€time.€The€Committee€did€not€share€the€State€party's€reasoning€that€since€the€quota€systemÏhad€been€discontinued,€the€author's€complaint€for€the€discrimination€alleged€to€have€takenÏplace€between€1992€and€1995€had€become€moot.€In€respect€of€the€fact€that€the€author€did€notÏappeal€the€Federal€Court's€decision€to€the€High€Court€of€Australia,€the€Committee€consideredÏthat€even€if€this€possibility€were€still€open€to€the€author,€and€taking€into€account€the€lengthÏof€the€appeal€process,€the€circumstances€of€the€case€justified€the€conclusion€that€theÏapplication€of€domestic€remedies€had€been€unreasonably€prolonged.€ÌÌ6.3€The€Committee€declared€the€case€inadmissible€as€to€the€author's€complaint€that€he€wasÏdiscriminated€against€because€the€pass€criteria€had€been€raised,€since€that€matter€had€beenÏsubmitted€to€the€HREOC€and€therefore€domestic€remedies€had€not€been€exhausted.€It€alsoÏconsidered€the€case€inadmissible€as€to€the€author's€claim€that€costs€ordered€by€the€CourtÏagainst€him€constituted€discrimination,€in€view€of€the€State€party's€information€that€the€AMCÏwould€not€be€pursuing€further€the€costs€imposed€by€the€Court.€ÌÌ6.4€By€letter€dated€24€December€1997€the€State€party€informed€the€Committee€that€itsÏsubmission€of€17€January€1997€contained€a€request€for€advice€on€whether€the€communicationÏwas€ongoing.€This€request€was€made€because€the€alleged€victim€had€effectively€received€aÏremedy€as€a€result€of€the€Government's€decision€to€lift€the€quota.€This€request€did€notÏconstitute€the€State€party's€pleadings€on€admissibility€and€was€not€submitted€under€rule€92Ïof€the€Committee's€rules€of€procedure.€The€submission€clearly€indicated€that€if€theÏCommittee€decided€to€proceed€with€its€consideration€of€the€author's€complaint€the€State€partyÏwould€like€to€be€given€the€opportunity€to€make€submissions€on€the€admissibility€and€meritsÏof€the€communication.€The€State€party€also€indicated€that€it€had€never€been€advised€that€theÏauthor€had€declined€to€withdraw€his€complaint.€ÌÌ6.5€By€letter€dated€11€March€1998€the€Committee€informed€the€State€party€that€rule€94,Ïparagraph€6,€of€the€Committee's€rules€of€procedure€provides€for€the€possibility€of€reviewingÏan€admissibility€decision€when€the€merits€of€a€communication€are€examined.€Accordingly,Ïthe€Committee€would€revisit€its€earlier€decision€on€admissibility€upon€receipt€of€relevantÏinformation€from€the€State€party.€Ð D-”(, Їò òòòState€party's€observations€on€admissibility€and€meritsó óóó€Ð ° ÐÌ7.1€The€State€party€submits€that€the€author's€interpretation€of€the€requirement€imposed€onÏoverseas„trained€doctors€such€as€himself€to€sit€written€and€clinical€examinations€toÏdemonstrate€competence€is€incorrect.€The€author€is€not€subject€to€the€system€of€examinationsÏbecause€of€his€(Indian)€national€origin,€but€because€he€has€trained€at€an€overseas€institution.ÏAll€OTDs,€regardless€of€national€origin,€are€required€to€sit€the€examinations.€The€objectiveÏof€the€examination€process€is€to€establish€that€medical€practitioners€trained€in€medicalÏinstitutions€not€accredited€formally€by€the€AMC€have€the€necessary€medical€knowledge€andÏclinical€competence€for€the€practice€of€medicine€with€safety€within€the€AustralianÏcommunity.€Its€standard€is€the€level€of€attainment€of€medical€knowledge€and€clinical€skillsÏcorresponding€to€that€required€of€newly€qualified€graduates€of€Australian€medical€schoolsÏwho€are€about€to€commence€intern€training.€The€author€has€sat€the€MCQ€examinations€onÏa€total€of€six€occasions.€His€first€three€attempts€predated€the€introduction€of€the€quota€inÏ1992.€On€each€occasion,€he€failed€to€reach€the€"pass€mark".€After€the€introduction€of€theÏquota€in€1992,€the€author€sat€the€MCQ€examination€a€further€three€times.€Whilst€succeedingÏin€obtaining€a€"pass",€he€did€not€come€within€the€top€200€candidates€passing€the€MCQ€andÏso€was€unable€to€proceed€to€the€clinical€examination.€When€the€quota€was€discontinued,€theÏauthor€was€permitted€to€sit€for€the€clinical€examination€in€March€1996,€August€1996,€OctoberÏ1996€and€March€1997.€On€each€occasion€he€failed€to€demonstrate€sufficient€proficiency€inÏeach€of€the€subject€areas€to€be€granted€registration.€He€currently€is€on€the€waiting€list€to€sitÏthe€clinical€examination€again.€ÌÌ7.2€The€State€party€submits€that€the€scheme,€in€general€and€in€its€application€to€the€author,Ïdoes€not€represent€a€breach€of€Australia's€obligations€under€article€5€(e)€(i).€The€underlyingÏbasis€of€the€author's€complaint€is€that€OTDs,€particularly€those€who€have€"provenÏcompetence"€through€practice€in€Australian€public€hospitals,€should€be€similarly€placed€toÏdoctors€trained€in€AMC„accredited€schools.€In€the€view€of€the€Australian€Government,Ïhowever,€graduates€of€overseas€universities€and€those€from€Australian€and€New€ZealandÏuniversities€cannot€be€accepted€as€having€equal€medical€competence€without€furtherÏinvestigation.€Educational€standards€vary€across€the€globe€and€the€Australian€GovernmentÏis€justified€in€taking€account€of€this€difference€in€devising€schemes€to€test€the€comparabilityÏof€standards.€To€accept€the€author's€complaint€would€be€to€engage€in€a€circular€argumentÏwhich€prejudges€the€question€of€equivalence€of€standards,€a€matter€which€the€AustralianÏGovernment€is€entitled€to€question.€The€scheme€in€fact€ensures€equality€of€treatment.€ÌÌ7.3€Furthermore,€the€State€party€does€not€accept€that€working€in€Australian€hospitals€underÏtemporary€registration€is€necessarily€sufficient€proof€of€competence€to€justify€the€waiving€ofÏexamination€requirements.€When€working€under€temporary€registration,€overseas„trainedÏdoctors€are€subject€to€strict€supervision€and€practice€requirements€and€may€not€be€exposedÏto€the€broad€range€of€medical€conditions€which€exist€in€the€Australian€community.ÏSatisfactory€performance€under€such€restricted€conditions€does€not€equate€with€sufficientÏknowledge€and€competence€over€the€range€of€areas€of€permitted€practice€under€generalÏregistration.€ÌÔ_ÔÐ D-”(, Ð7.4€The€requirement€that€Ô_ÔOTDsÔ_Ô€sit€for€and€pass€AMC€examinations€is€not€based€on€nationalÏorigin.€The€distinction€made€is€on€the€basis€of€the€identity€of€the€medical€school,€regardlessÏof€the€national€origin€(or€any€other€personal€characteristic)€of€the€candidate€seekingÏregistration.€In€practice,€no€matter€the€race€or€national€origin€of€a€candidate,€that€candidateÏmust€fulfil€the€same€requirements:€either€graduation€from€an€accredited€medical€school€orÏthe€completion€of€AMC€exams€to€demonstrate€an€equal€level€of€competence€to€those€whoÏhave€successfully€graduated€from€an€accredited€medical€school.€Thus,€for€instance,€if€aÏperson€of€Indian€national€origin€studied€overseas,€he/she€would€have€to€sit€the€AMC€exams.ÏIf€he/she€studied€in€Australia,€he/she€would€be€entitled€to€proceed€straight€to€an€internship.ÏSimilarly,€whether€a€person€is€of€English€national€origin,€Australian€national€origin,€IndianÏnational€origin€or€any€other€national€origin,€the€requirements€remain€constant.€ÌÌ7.5€Furthermore,€despite€the€author's€implication€that€the€AMC€has€deliberately€chosen€notÏto€accredit€overseas€medical€schools€for€reasons€associated€with€racial€discrimination,€thereÏis€no€evidence€to€suggest€that€the€system€was€intended€to,€or€in€fact€works€to,€the€detrimentÏof€persons€of€a€particular€race€or€national€origin.€Contrary€to€the€author's€complaint,€theÏsystem€of€AMC€examinations€does€not€carry€any€imputation€regarding€the€attributes€ofÏindividuals€of€particular€national€origins.€In€particular,€the€need€to€sit€for€such€examinationsÏdoes€not€imply€that€doctors€trained€overseas,€whether€or€not€they€have€been€Ô_ÔpractisingÔ_Ô€inÏAustralia,€are€inferior€because€of€their€race,€national€or€ethnic€origin.€Instead,€it€simply€sendsÏthe€message€that€all€graduates€of€medical€schools€will€be€subject€to€the€same€standard€ofÏexamination€before€being€permitted€to€work€unconditionally€in€Australia.€ÌÌ7.6€The€Ô_ÔHREOCÔ_Ô€was€satisfied€that€the€accreditation€system€was€not€based€on€race.€TheÏAMC's€evidence,€which€the€Ô_ÔHREOCÔ_Ô€accepted,€was€that€accreditation€was€undertaken€on€theÏbasis€of€efficient€use€of€resources.€The€AMC€has€considered€it€impractical€to€investigate€forÏthe€accreditation€process€every€university€attended€by€applicants€for€registration.€Given€theÏwide€range€of€countries€from€which€immigrants€to€Australia€come,€there€is€concomitantlyÏan€extremely€large€number€of€universities€all€around€the€world€from€which€Ô_ÔOTDsÔ_Ô€haveÏgraduated.€The€AMC€does€not€have€the€resources€to€undertake€such€an€extensiveÏaccreditation,€nor€should€it€be€expected€to.€The€Australian€Government€supports€theÏreasonableness€of€the€allocation€of€the€AMC's€resources€to€accredit€schools€with€which€it€hasÏmost€familiarity€and€contact.€It€thus€considers€an€examination€to€be€an€equitable€system€ofÏadjudging€standards€of€competence€by€persons,€regardless€of€race€or€national€origin.€TheÏaccreditation€of€New€Zealand€medical€schools,€in€particular,€is€explainable€in€terms€of€theÏmutual€accreditation€Ô_ÔprogrammeÔ_Ô€carried€out€by€the€Australian€Medical€Council€and€theÏMedical€Council€of€New€Zealand.€ÌÌ7.7€The€State€party€does€not€accept€the€author's€allegation€that€the€system€privilegesÏAustralian€and€New€Zealand€doctors€and€disadvantages€doctors€trained€outside€Australia€andÏNew€Zealand.€Even€if€(for€the€purposes€of€argument)€such€a€benefit€or€disadvantage€couldÏbe€established,€such€an€effect€would€not€constitute€discrimination€on€the€basis€of€"nationalÏorigin"€or€any€other€prescribed€ground€under€the€Convention.€The€group€who€are€privilegedÏunder€this€scenario€are€those€òòtrainedóó€in€Australian€and€New€Zealand€medical€schools,€ratherÐ T,¤'+ Ðthan€persons€of€particular€national€origin.€Medical€students€in€Australia€do€not€share€a€singleÐ @-(, Ðnational€origin.€Similarly,€those€who€are€Ô_ÔOTDsÔ_Ô€are€not€of€a€single€national€origin.€Whilst€theÏlatter€group€are€likely€"not€to€be€of€Australian€national€origin",€the€Australian€GovernmentÏdoes€not€accept€that€such€a€broad€category€of€persons€represents€a€"national€origin"€or€racialÏclassification€for€the€purposes€of€article€5€(e)€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô).€For€the€purposes€of€article€5€(e)€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô),€it€wouldÏbe€necessary€to€demonstrate€discrimination€on€the€basis€of€a€person's€particular€nationalÏorigin€„€in€this€case,€the€author's€Indian€national€origin.€ÌÌ7.8€The€current€system€of€examinations€is€clearly€based€on€objective€and€reasonable€criteria.ÏIt€is€a€legitimate€policy€objective€for€the€Australian€Government€to€seek€to€maintain€highÏstandards€of€medical€care€for€its€residents€and€to€seek€to€assure€itself€of€the€standards€ofÏmedical€competence€of€those€seeking€to€work€in€Australia€on€an€unsupervised€basis.€Thus,Ïit€is€reasonable€for€legislatures€to€institute€a€means€of€supplementary€exams€for€those€trainedÏin€universities€with€which€it€is€not€familiar€to€ensure€that€their€competence€is€at€a€comparableÏlevel€to€those€trained€within€Australia€and€New€Zealand.€That€the€author€would€prefer€anÏalternative€method€of€evaluating€competence€does€not€detract€from€the€reasonableness€of€theÏcurrent€system.€It€is€within€a€State's€discretion€to€take€the€view€which€has€been€adopted€„€thatÏan€examination€is€the€best€method€to€test€for€overall€knowledge.€The€reasonableness€of€suchÏa€system€is€also€demonstrated€by€the€extent€to€which€similar€practices€are€adopted€by€otherÏStates€parties€to€the€Convention,€such€as€the€United€Kingdom,€Canada,€the€United€States€andÏNew€Zealand.€ÌÌ7.9€The€need€for€doctors€to€demonstrate€their€competence€could€also€be€regarded€as€outsideÏthe€realm€of€"discrimination"€by€reason€of€it€being€an€inherent€occupational€requirement.ÏAlthough€the€Convention€does€not€explicitly€mention€such€an€exception,€it€would€seem€inÏkeeping€with€the€spirit€of€the€Convention€for€the€Committee€to€recognize€that€measures€basedÏon€the€inherent€requirements€of€jobs€do€not€represent€discrimination,€in€a€similar€way€to€theÏrecognition€of€the€principle€in€article€1€(2)€of€the€ILO€Convention€(No.€111)€concerningÏDiscrimination€in€respect€of€Employment€and€Occupation.€ÌÌ7.10€The€State€party€submits€that€there€has€been€no€relevant€impairment€of€the€right€to€workÏor€free€choice€of€employment€through€the€current€scheme.€The€institution€of€regulatoryÏschemes€governing€the€prerequisites€for€admission€to€Ô_ÔpractiseÔ_Ô€in€a€particular€profession€andÏapplying€equally€to€all€does€not€infringe€or€impair€an€individual's€right€to€work.€Implicit€inÏthe€author's€complaint€is€that€he€should€have€the€right€to€work€as€a€doctor€and€the€right€toÏhave€his€qualifications€recognized€by€the€health€authorities€in€Australia€without€undergoingÏany€form€of€external€examination.€In€the€Australian€Government's€view,€such€an€argumentÏmisunderstands€the€nature€of€the€internationally€recognized€right€to€work.€ÌÌ7.11€Under€international€law,€the€right€to€work€does€not€confer€a€right€to€work€in€the€positionÏof€one's€choice.€Instead,€by€recognizing€the€right€to€work,€States€parties€undertake€not€toÏinhibit€employment€opportunities€and€to€work€towards€the€implementation€of€policies€andÏmeasures€aimed€at€ensuring€there€is€work€for€those€seeking€it.€In€the€current€context€theÏAustralian€Government€is€not€impairing€anyone's€right€to€work.€In€fact,€the€relevantÏlegislative€schemes€merely€regulate€the€means€of€Ô_ÔpractisingÔ_Ô€a€particular€profession.€ÌÐ @-(, Ð7.12€The€system€of€admission€to€unrestricted€practice€does€not€impair€the€right€of€anyone€toÏfree€choice€of€employment,€let€alone€persons€of€a€particular€national€origin.€Recognition€ofÏa€right€to€free€choice€of€employment€is€designed€to€prevent€forced€Ô_ÔlabourÔ_Ô,€not€to€guaranteeÏan€individual€the€right€to€the€particular€job€he/she€desires.€In€the€present€context,€there€is€noÏservitude€or€forced€Ô_ÔlabourÔ_Ô€regime€which€impairs€the€choice€of€employment€of€doctors€of€aÏparticular€national€origin.€Instead,€there€is€a€system€of€examinations€which€permits€entry€intoÏunrestricted€practice.€ÌÌ7.13€Similarly,€whilst€counsel€has€attempted€to€argue€that€the€author€is€equally€placed€toÏAustralian€doctors€in€terms€of€competence€and€that€his€experience€should€be€a€sufficientÏdemonstration€of€competence,€the€State€party€submits€that€there€is€no€evidence€that€doctorsÏof€Indian€national€origin€should€be€treated€differently€to€overseas„trained€doctors€of€otherÏnational€origins.€Nor€is€there€compelling€evidence€to€suggest€that€the€subjection€of€the€authorÏto€the€AMC€examinations€is€unreasonable€and€evidence€of€racial€discrimination.€DespiteÏcounsel's€reliance€on€the€author's€practice€in€public€hospitals,€the€State€party€notes€that€at€allÏrelevant€times,€the€author's€practice€has€been€circumscribed€by€strict€supervision€and€limitedÏpractice€requirements€commensurate€with€his€status€as€a€conditional€registrant.€The€StateÏparty€would€thus€reject€any€implication€that€his€work€in€Australia€demonstrates€sufficientÏcompetence€to€warrant€automatic€general€registration.€ÌÌ7.14€The€State€party€denies€that€the€standard€of€the€AMC€examinations€is€higher€than€thatÏexpected€of€students€at€Australian€and€New€Zealand€medical€schools.€Steps€have€been€takenÏto€ensure€the€comparability€of€the€examination€system,€including:€(a)€the€appointment€of€aÏBoard€of€Examiners€with€broad€experience€in€teaching€and€examining€undergraduates,€andÏtherefore€familiar€with€the€curricula€of€Australian€university€medical€schools;€(b)€the€use€ofÏa€bank€of€approximately€3,000€Ô_ÔMCQÔ_Ô€questions€mostly€drawn€from€Ô_ÔMCQÔ_Ô€examination€papersÏof€the€medical€schools€of€Australian€universities€and€questions€specifically€commissionedÏby€the€AMC€from€Australian€medical€schools;€(c)€the€Ô_ÔMCQÔ_Ô€examination€papers€are€markedÏby€Educational€Testing€Ô_ÔCentreÔ_Ô€at€the€University€of€New€South€Wales,€a€major€nationalÏtesting€authority€which€also€provides€information€in€relation€to€the€statistical€reliability€andÏvalidity€of€the€questions.€If€data€indicate€that€a€particular€question€fails€as€a€Ô_ÔdiscriminatorÔ_Ô€ofÏperformance,€or€if€there€is€evidence€to€suggest€that€a€question€could€be€misleading,€the€BoardÏof€Examiners€is€able€to€delete€that€question€from€the€examination;€(d)€instructing€both€theÏÔ_ÔMCQÔ_Ô€and€clinical€examiners€to€the€effect€that€the€examinations€should€be€directed€toÏestablishing€whether€AMC€candidates€have€the€same€level€of€medical€knowledge€andÏmedical€skills€as€new€graduates.€ÌÌ7.15€The€past€practice€of€adjustment€of€raw€scores€in€the€Ô_ÔMCQÔ_Ô€examination€does€not€reflectÏany€racial€discrimination,€or€a€racially€discriminatory€quota.€Such€adjustment€was€designedÏas€a€method€of€standardization€to€prevent€unrepresentative€results€based€on€the€particularÏexamination.€ÌÌ7.16€Other€than€his€particular€complaints€about€his€failure€to€pass€the€examinations,€theÏauthor€has€not€advanced€any€objective€evidence€to€support€the€non„comparability€of€theÏexamination€standards.€The€only€study€produced€by€the€author's€counsel€merely€commentsÐ @-(, ÐÔ_Ôon€perceptions€of€deficiencies€in€the€standard€of€first€year€interns,€rather€than€theÏcomparability€of€the€forms€of€examination€to€which€OTDs€and€AMC„accredited€medicalÏstudents€are€subject.€ÌÌ7.17€Quite€apart€from€the€nature€of€the€examinations€in€themselves,€the€author€has€failed€toÏmake€a€case€that€any€disparity€in€standards€of€the€MCQ€examinations€and€standards€at€AMC„¼accredited€universities€has€the€purpose€or€effect€of€discriminating€against€persons€of€aÏparticular€national€origin.€When€the€figures€of€national€origin€and€success€rates€in€the€MCQÏare€compared,€there€is€no€evidence€of€discrimination€against€persons€of€a€particular€nationalÏorigin.€In€particular,€there€is€no€evidence€that€persons€of€Indian€national€origin€are€less€likelyÏthan€persons€of€other€national€origin€to€pass€the€examination.€The€State€party€provides€a€tableÏof€results€in€the€1994€exams€(the€last€year€in€which€the€quota€applied),€showing€that€IndianÏstudents'€success€rates€in€the€AMC€exams€are€proportionate€to€their€entry€levels€in€theÏexaminations.€Whilst€Indian€doctors€comprised€16.48€per€cent€of€doctors€attempting€theÏMCQ€examination€in€1994,€they€represented€16.83€per€cent€of€those€successfully€passing€theÏMCQ€examination.€ÌÌ7.18€The€author€alleges€that€during€the€period€of€the€operation€of€the€quota€system€betweenÏJuly€1992€and€October€1995,€the€exclusion€of€OTDs€such€as€himself€from€the€AMC€clinicalÏexamination€on€the€basis€of€his€quota€ranking€constituted€racial€discrimination€and€was€aÏdenial€of€his€right€to€equal€enjoyment€of€the€right€to€work€and€free€choice€of€employmentÏunder€article€5€(e)€(i).€ÌÌ7.19€When€the€Australian€Health€Ministers'€Conference€(AHMC)€resolved€to€introduce€theÏquota€on€OTDs€in€early€1992,€the€OTDs€in€the€process€of€undergoing€the€AMC€examinationsÏnumbered€approximately€4,500,€almost€four€times€the€number€of€doctors€expected€toÏgraduate€from€Australian€medical€schools.€In€the€face€of€such€a€large€number€of€OTDsÏseeking€to€practise€in€Australia€and€mindful€of€the€national€workforce€supply€target€(set€atÏone€doctor€per€500€persons),€the€AHMC€adopted€a€National€Medical€Workforce€StrategyÏcomprising€a€number€of€initiatives.€One€of€them€was€the€introduction€of€a€quota€on€theÏnumbers€of€OTDs€who€would€be€allowed€to€sit€the€clinical€examination,€having€passed€theÏMCQ€examination.€Thus,€the€AHMC€requested€the€AMC€to€set€a€cap€of€200€on€the€numberÏof€candidates€proceeding€annually€to€the€clinical€examinations.€The€request€was€made€on€theÏbasis€of:€(a)€the€number€of€doctors€needed€to€service€the€Australian€community€to€requisiteÏstandards;€(b)€the€cost€of€the€provision€of€medical€services€under€an€open„ended€fundingÏcommitment€and€the€impact€on€that€cost€of€a€more€than€optimum€number€of€doctors;€(c)€theÏgeographic€distribution€of€doctors;€and€(d)€the€degree€to€which€the€supply€of€doctors€isÏsufficient€to€meet€the€needs€of€particular€community€groups€and€particular€specialities.€ÌÌ7.20€The€quota€was€not€racially€discriminatory€in€any€form.€Firstly,€it€applied€to€all€OTDsÏregardless€of€national€origin,€with€persons€of€a€variety€of€national€origins,€includingÏAustralians,€being€subject€to€the€requirement.€Nor€is€there€any€evidence€that€the€quotaÏdisproportionately€affected€persons€of€Indian€national€origin.€In€evidence€before€the€FederalÏCourt,€for€example,€the€proportion€of€doctors€of€Indian€birth€gaining€entry€to€the€quota€wasÏin€fact€marginally€higher€than€the€percentage€of€doctors€of€Indian€birth€attempting€the€Ô_ÔÔ_ÔMCQÔ_ÔÐ @-(, Ðexamination.€Furthermore,€the€quota€on€doctors€trained€overseas€was€complemented€by€theÏpre„existing€de€facto€quota€on€students€seeking€entry€to€Australian€medical€schools.€ÌÌ7.21€Secondly,€even€if€the€quota€could€be€considered€to€have€Ô_ÔbenefitedÔ_Ô€those€who€haveÏattended€Australian€and€New€Zealand€medical€schools,€such€persons€are€not€characterizedÏby€a€national€origin.€Instead,€they€would€be€likely€to€share€citizenship,€a€factor€outside€theÏrealm€of€the€Convention.€ÌÌ7.22€Thirdly,€even€if€(for€the€purposes€of€argument)€the€Committee€was€of€the€view€that€theÏquota€represented€a€distinction€on€the€basis€of€national€origin,€the€State€party€would€submitÏthat€the€quota€was€a€reasonable€measure,€proportionate€to€meeting€the€State's€legitimateÏinterest€in€controlling€the€number€of€health„care€providers€and€hence€was€not€an€arbitraryÏdistinction.€Such€a€purpose€is€not€inconsistent€with€the€Convention€and€would€only€infringeÏthe€Convention€if€such€policies,€designed€to€deal€with€the€supply€of€medical€professionals,Ïdisguised€racial€discrimination.€Whilst€the€details€of€the€quota€were€subject€to€some€criticismÏby€the€Ô_ÔHREOCÔ_Ô€(in€that€it€did€not€provide€for€a€waiting€list,€but€required€Ô_ÔOTDsÔ_Ô€not€initiallyÏsuccessful€in€coming€within€the€annual€quota€to€undergo€the€examination€again),€such€aÏfactor€does€not€make€the€quota€unreasonable€or€discriminatory.€ÌÌ7.23€As€the€State€party€has€previously€noted,€the€quota€is€no€longer€in€existence€and€theÏauthor€has€been€permitted€to€sit€for€the€clinical€examination€on€several€occasions.€He€hasÏthus€been€afforded€a€remedy,€if€any€was€required.€The€State€party's€view€remains€that€theÏsubject€matter€is€moot.€ÌÌ7.24€The€State€party€further€considers€that€the€author's€complaint€concerning€the€applicationÏof€the€quota€to€all€Ô_ÔOTDsÔ_Ô€regardless€of€citizenship€status€does€not€fall€within€the€terms€of€theÏConvention.€Under€article€1€(2)€of€the€Convention€States€parties€are€not€prohibited€fromÏdiscriminating€on€the€basis€of€citizenship.€Conversely,€the€imposition€of€a€system€which€doesÏnot€take€account€of€citizenship€cannot€be€the€basis€of€complaint€under€the€Convention.€ÌÌ7.25€Furthermore,€the€State€party€denies€that€the€judgement€of€the€Federal€Court€has€theÏeffect€of€reducing€the€protection€accorded€to€Australians€under€the€Racial€Discrimination€ActÏ1975.€The€issues€raised€by€the€author€under€this€allegation€relate€primarily€to€theÏinterpretation€of€domestic€legislation€which€should€not€be€the€subject€of€separateÏinvestigation€by€the€Committee.€The€Racial€Discrimination€Act€1975€remains€an€appropriateÏand€effective€means€of€eradicating€racial€discrimination.€ÌÌ7.26€Finally,€the€State€party€notes€the€author's€allegations€that€Australia€continues€to€act€inÏviolation€of€article€5€(e)€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)€on€the€grounds€that€the€AMC€has€raised€the€pass€criteria€for€theÏclinical€examination€to€compensate€for€the€discontinuation€of€the€quota€system.€The€authorÏalleges€that€his€failure€to€pass€the€clinical€examination€is€evidence€of€this€practice€and€of€theÏfact€that€he€is€being€victimized€for€lodging€his€original€complaint€with€the€Ô_ÔHREOCÔ_Ô€in€1995.ÏThe€State€party€contends€that€this€complaint€continues€to€be€subject€to€the€investigation€ofÏthe€Ô_ÔHREOCÔ_Ô€and€thus€remains€an€inappropriate€subject€for€the€Committee's€examination.€ÌÐ @-(, Ðò òòòCounsel's€commentsó óóó€Ð ° ÐÌ8.1€In€his€response€to€the€State€party's€observations€counsel€indicates€that€unlike€otherÏcountries€where€both€local€graduates€and€overseas„trained€doctors€are€assessed€by€sittingÏexactly€the€same€national€licensing€examination,€in€Australia€there€is€a€differential€systemÏwith€one€regime€for€overseas„trained€doctors€and€another€for€Australian€graduates.€TheÏAustralian€graduate€is€assessed€by€his/her€university€on€the€basis€of€what€he/she€has€beenÏtaught.€It€is€primarily€an€exercise€in€curriculum€recall€rather€that€an€assessment€of€essentialÏmedical€knowledge€and€clinical€competence.€The€Australian€Medical€Council's€ownÏwitnesses€in€the€author's€case€before€the€Ô_ÔHREOCÔ_Ô€have€conceded€that€in€undergraduateÏassessment€the€aim€is€to€try€and€pass€the€student.€Indeed,€pass€rates€for€final„year€medicalÏstudents€in€Australian€universities€are€close€to€100€per€cent.€On€the€contrary,€the€AMC€Ô_ÔMCQÔ_ÔÏexamination€purports€to€assess€whether€a€doctor€possesses€sufficient€knowledge€for€safeÏpractice.€In€1995€the€Australian€Medical€Council€conducted€a€trial€in€which€its€1994€Ô_ÔMCQÔ_ÔÏpaper€was€submitted€to€final„year€medical€students€at€Ô_ÔMonashÔ_Ô€University€and€SydneyÏUniversity.€The€results€of€the€trial€clearly€reveal€that€a€higher€assessment€standard€is€appliedÏto€Ô_ÔOTDsÔ_Ô€than€to€Australian€graduates€and€that€the€quota€served€to€disadvantage€overseasÏdoctors€when€compared€to€local€graduates.€ÌÌ8.2€As€regards€the€AMC€clinical€examination,€the€differential€nature€of€the€system€is€evenÏmore€manifest.€The€author€has€attempted€the€AMC€clinical€examination€on€four€occasions.ÏOn€each€occasion€he€has€been€failed.€He€lodged€a€further€complaint€with€the€Ô_ÔHREOCÔ_Ô,€whichÏhas€not€issued€a€decision€yet.€In€the€course€of€the€hearing,€the€true€nature€of€the€AMC€clinicalÏexamination€system€has€been€revealed.€It€has€been€exposed€as€a€chaotic,€unstructured€andÏunreliable€assessment€tool€which,€in€form€and€content,€departs€markedly€from€the€systemÏused€to€assess€students€in€Australian€universities.€Moreover,€the€AMC's€own€internalÏworking€parties€have€emphasized€the€inadequacies€of€its€examination€system€and€the€needÏto€improve€its€reliability€and€validity.€ÌÌ8.3€Counsel€provides€a€table€showing€pass€rates€in€the€AMC€clinical€examination€by€countryÏof€birth€during€the€period€1995€to€1997.€The€pass€rate€for€persons€born€in€India€is€45.9€perÏcent,€for€those€born€in€the€Middle€East€43.6€per€cent€and€for€those€born€in€Asia€43.5€per€cent.ÏFor€those€born€in€the€United€States€or€Canada€the€pass€rate€is€55.6€per€cent,€for€WesternÏEurope€62.5€per€cent,€for€the€United€Kingdom€and€Ireland€77.1€per€cent€and€for€South€AfricaÏ81.1€per€cent.€Counsel€wonders€whether€these€differential€pass€rates€are€merely€a€reflectionÏof€the€quality€of€medical€education€in€the€countries€in€question€or€whether€conscious€orÏunconscious€perceptions€of€racial€"compatibility"€play€a€part.€It€is€well€established€that€manyÏpeople€make€conscious€or€unconscious€judgements€about€a€person's€competence€on€the€basisÏof€race€and€Ô_ÔcolourÔ_Ô€and€if€an€examination€system€has€a€format€that€gives€free€rein€to€anyÏprejudices€that€may€exist,€then€it€is€not€competence€alone€which€determines€the€result.ÏCounsel€also€quotes€a€number€of€reports€and€statements€by€Australian€institutions€indicatingÏthat€the€country€needs€more€trained€doctors€and€that€the€system€of€accreditation€of€overseas„¼trained€doctors€is€unfair€and€discriminatory.€ÌÌ8.4€With€respect€to€the€quota€system,€counsel€argues€that€the€quota€was€a€quantitative€controlÐ D-”(, Ðdesigned€to€shut€out€a€number€of€overseas„trained€doctors€not€because€they€were€trainedÏoverseas€but€because€they€were€from€overseas.€There€is€a€close€correlation€between€place€ofÏbirth€and€place€of€training€in€that€most€people€are€educated€in€their€country€of€birth.ÏAccordingly,€a€restriction€purportedly€based€on€place€of€training€is€effectively€a€restrictionÏbased€on€national€origin,€particularly€if€that€restriction€is€in€no€way€connected€to€the€issue€ofÏtraining.€He€also€states€that€in€the€author's€1995€case€before€the€Ô_ÔHREOCÔ_Ô€there€was€no€clearÏevidence€of€an€oversupply€of€doctors€in€the€country.€Rather,€it€was€the€increase€in€the€numberÏof€Australian€medical€graduates€coupled€with€the€automatic€registration€of€doctors€from€theÏUnited€Kingdom€(which€existed€until€recently)€which€had€been€the€major€reasons€for€theÏincrease€in€doctors'€numbers.€It€was€also€emphasized€that€the€principal€supply€problem€wasÏone€of€geographical€distribution€of€doctors,€that€the€imposition€of€the€quota€was€motivatedÏby€a€desire€to€restrict€the€number€of€doctors€to€control€the€health€expenditures€ofÏCommonwealth€countries€(and€protect€doctors'€incomes)€and€that€the€Health€Ministers'Ïadvisers€were€advocating€immigration€quotas,€not€examination€quotas.€The€only€reasonableÏconclusion€to€be€drawn€from€the€evidence€of€the€Government's€own€witnesses€and€reportsÏwas€that€the€decision€to€impose€the€quota€was€based€not€on€fact€and€analysis€but€on€feelingsÏand€perceptions.€ÌÌ8.5€The€State€party€asserts€that€the€author€has€been€Ô_ÔpractisingÔ_Ô€medicine€in€Australia€underÏtemporary€registration€and€that€he€is€subject€to€strict€supervision€and€practice€requirementsÏwhile€working€as€a€practitioner€in€the€public€hospital€system.€This€statement€is€totally€untrue.ÏThe€author€has€now€worked€as€a€doctor€for€14€years,€10€of€which€have€been€in€AustralianÏpublic€hospitals.€He€is€classified€as€a€Senior€Hospital€Medical€Officer€Year€5€and€in€his€lastÏposition€at€Ô_ÔMaroondahÔ_Ô€Hospital€(a€large€hospital€in€Melbourne)€he€was€the€Night€Senior,€Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô.Ïe.€he€was€in€charge€of€the€whole€hospital€at€night.€Unfortunately,€he€is€now€unable€to€Ô_ÔpractiseÔ_ÔÏeven€under€temporary€registration.€The€Medical€Board€of€Victoria,€following€advice€fromÏthe€Australian€Medical€Council€regarding€his€examination€results,€has€placed€such€tightÏrestrictions€on€this€registration€that€it€has€made€him€unemployable.€ÌÌ8.6€The€State€party€asserts€that€the€United€States,€Canada,€the€United€Kingdom€and€NewÏZealand€have€similar€examination€systems€to€Australia.€It€does€not€say,€however,€that€whileÏthe€United€States€and€Canada€have€an€initial€evaluating€examination€for€overseas„trainedÏdoctors,€the€licensing€examination€is€the€same€for€both€overseas„trained€and€locally„trainedÏdoctors.€Thus,€there€is€not€a€differential€system€allowing€differential€standards€and€open€toÏabuse,€as€is€the€case€in€Australia.€ÌÌ8.7€Counsel€further€states€that€the€right€to€work€must€embrace€the€right€to€be€fairly€assessedÏto€work€in€the€occupation€for€which€a€person€is€qualified€and€not€to€be€denied€that€right€byÏreasons€of€a€capricious€assessment€system€or€quota.€ÌÌò òòòIssues€and€proceedings€before€the€Committeeó óóó€Ð )à$( ÐÌ9.1€In€accordance€with€rule€94,€paragraph€6,€of€its€rules€of€procedure,€the€CommitteeÏreconsidered€the€question€of€admissibility€in€the€light€of€the€observations€made€by€the€StateÏparty€with€respect€to€the€Committee's€decision€of€19€August€1997€that€declared€theÐ D-”(, Ðcommunication€admissible.€The€Committee,€however,€did€not€find€reasons€to€revoke€itsÏprevious€decision,€since€the€State€party's€observations€as€well€as€the€author's€commentsÏthereon€referred€mainly€to€the€substance€of€the€matter.€In€the€circumstances,€the€CommitteeÏproceeded€with€the€examination€of€the€merits.€ÌÌ9.2€The€main€issue€before€the€Committee€is€whether€the€examination€and€the€quota€systemÏfor€overseas„trained€doctors€respect€the€author's€right,€under€article€5€(e)€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)€of€theÏConvention,€to€work€and€to€free€choice€of€employment.€The€Committee€notes€in€this€respectÏthat€all€overseas„trained€doctors€are€subjected€to€the€same€quota€system€and€are€required€toÏsit€the€same€written€and€clinical€examinations,€irrespective€of€their€race€or€national€origin.ÏFurthermore,€on€the€basis€of€the€information€provided€by€the€author€it€is€not€possible€to€reachÏthe€conclusion€that€the€system€works€to€the€detriment€of€persons€of€a€particular€race€orÏnational€origin.€Even€if€the€system€Ô_ÔfavoursÔ_Ô€doctors€trained€in€Australian€and€New€ZealandÏmedical€schools€such€an€effect€would€not€necessarily€constitute€discrimination€on€the€basisÏof€race€or€national€origin€since,€according€to€the€information€provided,€medical€students€inÏAustralia€do€not€share€a€single€national€origin.€ÌÌ9.3€In€the€Committee's€view,€there€is€no€evidence€to€support€the€author's€argument€that€he€hasÏbeen€penalized€in€the€clinical€examination€for€having€complained€to€the€Ô_ÔHREOCÔ_Ô,€in€view€ofÏthe€fact€that€an€independent€observer,€appointed€by€him,€was€present€during€two€of€hisÏattempts.€ÌÌ10.€The€Committee€on€the€Elimination€of€Racial€Discrimination,€acting€under€article€14,Ïparagraph€7€(a),€of€the€International€Convention€on€the€Elimination€of€All€Forms€of€RacialÏDiscrimination,€is€of€the€opinion€that€the€facts€as€submitted€do€not€disclose€a€violation€ofÏarticle€5€(e)€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)€or€any€other€provision€of€the€Convention.€ÌÌ11.1€Pursuant€to€article€14,€paragraph€7€(b),€of€the€Convention,€the€Committee€recommendsÏthat€the€State€party€take€all€necessary€measures€and€give€transparency€to€the€procedure€andÏcurriculum€established€and€conducted€by€the€Australian€Medical€Council,€so€that€the€systemÏis€in€no€way€discriminatory€towards€foreign€candidates€irrespective€of€their€race€or€nationalÏor€ethnic€origin.€ÌÌ11.2€After€considering€several€complaints€concerning€Australia€under€article€14€of€theÏConvention,€the€Committee€also€recommends€to€the€State€party€that€every€effort€be€made€toÏavoid€any€delay€in€the€consideration€of€all€complaints€by€the€Human€Rights€and€EqualÏOpportunity€Commission.€ÌÌ[Done€in€English,€French,€Russian€and€Spanish,€the€English€text€being€the€original€version.]€ÌññÓ  ÓññññÝ‚ÿÿÿÝÔ€ô=õXX¨+ÔÔ€ôg0õõô=ÔÔÔÝ  ÝÌÝ‚ÿÿÿÕáÿ²¿ÝÔ€XçXõôg0ÔÔ€X¨+XXXçÔÔÔÝ  ÝÔ€ô=õXX¨+Ôò ò€Ô€X¨+Xõô=Ôó óÌññññññÓå ÓññÓ  ÓññññÓ7Óññ