provisions of the Charter article 4 of the Covenant. Non-- 0 . . . of Rights . and Freedome and were consistent with of the UWE to that issue, members of the Committee wished to receive GO. With reference clarification of the references in section 6 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to “mobility rights” and wondered whether such rights were guaranteed only to Canadian citieens. They also inquired whether the recent review of the Canadian Human Rights Act had given rise to any proposals to emend federal legislation: why political opinion was not one of the prohibited grounds for discriminatory treatment except in the case of Newfoundland2 whether any measures had been taken to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act so as to eliminate discrimination on such grounds; whether Indians could invoke both the Human Rights Act and the Indian Act; and whether the fact that all female offenders in the country were placed in a single federal penitentiary for usual place of residence, did not women, sometimes very far away from their constitute discrimination against women, Clarification was also sought of the concept of “reasonable accommodation” and of the functions and activities of the Citieens ’ Participation Branch. 61. In addition, members recalled that although the Covenant did not speak of the right to immigration or even of the right to asylum, the Committee was of the view that article 26 of the Covenant required that all rights and advantages should be accorded to everyone without discrimination of any kind. III that regard, it was asked what measures had been taken to avoid any discrimination on the grounds enumerated in article 26. In particular, concern was expressed over the heavy backlog of cases of asylum seekers and, in that respect, over the priority that was being accorded on the basis of the language spoken by the asylum seeker. 62. In his reply, the representative of the State party said that “mobility rights” were covered by general legislation that did not discriminate on the basis of province of origin and did not require residence as a condition of eligibility for social services. Rights restricted to Canadian citizens concerned only the right to enter, stay in and/or leave the country. The comprehensive review of the Canadian Human Rights Act had not yet been completed. Section 15 of the Charter prohibited discrimination on a certain number of grounds, which were not exhaustive and were sufficiently broad to cover any other grounds of discrimination not expressly mentioned. The Federal Government was considering whether or not the question of political or other opinion should be added to the Canadian Human Rights Act as prohibited grounds for discrimination. Various provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Act had been judged discriminatory by a Human Rights Tribunal and a bill had, consequently, been tabled in Parliament to enable those flaws to be eliminated. The principle of “reasonable accommodation” held that everything possible had to be done to enable a person to participate in employment or to have access to goods and services, although that requirement had to be subject to a balancing test to see whether it would cause undue hardship, cost or inconvenience to the employer. The Citizens’ Participation Branch sought to protect the rights of individuals by helping federal, provincial and territorial governments to implement international treaties, preparing for the ratification of new instruments and promoting a greater awareness of human rights. The provisions of article 67 of the Human Rights Act were intended to -15-