The relevant paragraph provides: "In the light of article 2 of the Constitution of the French Republic, the French Government declares that article 27 is not applicable so far as the Republic is concerned." Article 2 of the French Constitution provides in relevant part: "France is a Republic, indivisible, secular, democratic and social. It shall ensure the equality of all citizens before the law, without distinction of origin, race or religion. It shall respect all beliefs." As is noted in the decisions of the Committee, the reports of France to the Committee under article 40 of the Covenant have explained that the prohibition in the Constitution of distinction on grounds of origin, race or religion means that there are no minorities in France; and therefore article 27 does not apply. As I believe, the French notification concerning article 27 is a declaration and not a reservation; it is, in my view, ultimately for the Committee to see if the interpretation of the French Government accords with its own. The Committee has, in relation to several States parties, rejected the notion that the existence of minorities is in some way predicated on an admission of discrimination. Rather, it has insisted that the existence of minorities within the sense of article 27 is a factual matter; and that such minorities may indeed exist in States parties committed, in law and in fact, to the full equality of all persons within its jurisdiction. Any many States parties whose constitutions, like that of the French Republic, prohibit discrimination, readily accept that they have minorities on whom they report under article 27. I therefore conclude that the declaration of the French Government, while commanding the respectful attention of the Committee, does not accord with its own interpretation of the meaning and scope of article 27; and does not operate as a reservation. The point of principle seems to me an important one. However, local remedies would require to be exhausted as much in respect of article 27 as of article 26. My views on the French declaration would not lead me to any different conclusion as to admissibility. ________________ 47