THE TANDEM PROJECT
UNITED NATIONS, HUMAN RIGHTS,
FREEDOM OF RELIGION OR BELIEF
7TH SESSION HUMAN RIGHTS
COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS AND AD HOC
EXPERTS STUDY RELATING TO FREEDOM OF RELIGION
OR BELIEF
Issue: 7th Session HRC Resolutions and Experts
Study Relating to Freedom of Religion or Belief
For: United Nations, Governments, Religions or Beliefs,
Academia, NGOs, Media, Civil Society
Review: Several resolutions in the seventh session of the
United Nations Human Rights Council 3-25 March 2008 related to the mandate on
Freedom of Opinion and Expression, and the mandate on Racism, Racial
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Forms of Intolerance, to the mandate on
Freedom of Religion or Belief. Contentious and serious
differences between members of the UN Human
Rights Council on the relationship of
freedom of opinion and expression to freedom of religion or belief, and a study
by five experts for the Ad Hoc Committee of the Council on the elaboration of
complementary standards is discussed in this Issue Statement.
(A/HRC/7/L.14) – Call for global action against racism, racial discrimination,
xenophobia and related forms of intolerance passed 34 in favor, 0 against, 13
abstentions; (A/HRC/7/L.15) – Defamation of religion passed 21 in favor, 10
against, 14 abstentions; (A/HRC/7/L.18) –
Mandate on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of
intolerance, passed by consensus; (A/HRC/7/L.24) – Mandate
on freedom of opinion and expression with amendments L.39 and Cuba oral
amendment, passed 32 in favor, 0 against, 15 abstentions. (A/HRC/7/L.39) – Amendment to mandate on freedom of
opinion and expression “to report on instances in which abuse of the right to
freedom of expression constitutes an act of racial or religious discrimination”
passed 27 in favor, 17 against, 3 abstentions: Cuba oral amendment to mandate
on freedom of opinion and expression adding “and also the importance for all
forms of media to report and deliver information in a fair and impartial
manner” passed 32 in favor, 0 against, 15 abstentions.
A report with the longest title of the seventh session
was given the day before voting on the draft resolutions. “Item 9: racism,
racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance, follow-up
and implementation of the Durban Declaration and Program of Action; reports of
the Intergovernmental Working Group, and Ad Hoc Committee of the Council on the
elaboration of complementary standards. A study
on the complementary standards of international human rights instruments has
been prepared for the post-Durban Review Conference. This has serious
implications for freedom of religion or belief. This report (A/HRC/AC.1/1/CRP.4)
Extracts from the report begin on the third page
and are followed by an Issue Statement that refers to the study by the five
experts.
International Standards
for Regional, National and Local Applications
Objective: Build understanding and support for
Article 18, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights –Everyone
shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion - and the
1981 UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief. Encourage the United Nations,
Governments, Religions or Beliefs, Academia, NGOs, Media and Civil Society to
use international human rights standards as essential for long-term
solutions to conflicts based on religion or belief.
Challenge: In 1968 the United Nations deferred work on an
International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Religious
Intolerance, because of its apparent complexity and sensitivity. In the
twenty-first century, a dramatic increase of intolerance and discrimination on
grounds of religion or belief is motivating a worldwide search to find
solutions to these problems. This is a challenge calling for enhanced dialogue
by States and others; including consideration of an International Convention on
Freedom of Religion or Belief for protection of and accountability by all
religions or beliefs. The tensions in today’s world inspire a question such as:
Response: Is it the appropriate moment to
reinitiate the drafting of a legally binding international convention on
freedom of religion or belief? Law making of this nature requires a minimum consensus
and an environment that appeals to reason rather than emotions. At the same
time we are on a learning curve as the various dimensions of the Declaration
are being explored. Many academics have produced voluminous books on these
questions but more ground has to be prepared before setting up of a UN working
group on drafting a convention. In my opinion, we should not try to rush the
elaboration of a Convention on Freedom of Religion or Belief, especially not in
times of high tensions and unpreparedness. - UN Special Rapporteur on
Freedom of Religion or Belief,
Option: After forty years this may be the time,
however complex and sensitive, for the United Nations Human Rights Council to
appoint an Open-ended Working Group to draft a United Nations Convention on
Freedom of Religion or Belief. The mandate of an Open-ended Working Group would
have to be written in a way to assure nothing in a draft Convention would be
construed as restricting or derogating from any right defined in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenants on Human Rights, and
1981 UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief
Concept: Separation of Religion or
Belief and State – SOROBAS. The starting point for this concept is the First
Preamble to the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights; “Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable
rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice
and peace in the world. It suggests
States recalling their history, culture and constitution adopt fair and equal
human rights protection for all religions or beliefs as described in General
Comment 22 on Article 18, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
UN Human Rights Committee,
Dialogue: United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki
Moon, at a UN backed Alliance of Civilizations Forum in January 2008 addressed
the importance of dialogue; “Never in our lifetime has there been a more
desperate need for constructive
and committed dialogue, among individuals,
among communities, among cultures, among and between nations.” A writer in
another setting said, “The warning signs are clear: unless we establish genuine dialogue within and among all kinds of belief,
ranging from religious fundamentalism to secular dogmatism, the conflicts of
the future will probably be even more deadly.” Solutions to conflicts based on
ideology call for dialogue on the purpose and
role of international human rights law on freedom of religion or belief;
including the values of these standards for
regional, national and local applications.
Education:
______________________________________________________________________________________
Extracts: Extracts are presented under the Eight Articles of
the 1981 U.N. Declaration on the Elimination of all Forms of Intolerance and of
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief. Examples of extracts are presented
prior to an Issue Statement for each Review.
4. 1 All States shall take
effective measures to prevent and eliminate discrimination on the grounds of
religion or belief in the recognition, exercise and enjoyment of human rights
and fundamental freedoms in all fields of civil, economic, political, social
and cultural life.
4. 2 All States shall make all
efforts to enact or rescind legislation where necessary to prohibit any such discrimination,
and to take all appropriate measures to combat intolerance on the grounds of
religion or other beliefs in this matter.
Information on the high level experts for the study
(A/HRC/4/53) and the Ad-Hoc Committee on the elaboration of complementary
standards to be reconvened on
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/racism/AdHocCommittee.htm
IV. THE MANDATE OF THE AD HOC
COMMITTEE
17. Human Rights Council resolution 6/21 of 28
September 2007 provides further clarity to the mandate of the Ad Hoc Committee
by recalling “its decision 3/103 of 8 December 2006, by which, heeding the
decision and instruction of the 2001 World Conference against Racism, Racial
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, it decided to establish the
Ad Hoc Committee of the Human Rights Council on the Elaboration of Contemporary
Standards, with the mandate to elaborate, as a matter of priority and necessity,
complementary standards in the form of either a convention or additional
protocol(s) to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Racial Discrimination, filling the existing gaps in the Convention, and also
providing new normative standards aimed at combating all forms of contemporary
racism, including incitement to racial and religious hatred.”
I. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE CONTENT
AND SCOPE OF SUBSTANTIVE GAPS ON COMPLEMENTARY INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS WITH
REGARD TO POSITIVE OBLIGATIONS OF STATES PARTIES
Assessment and recommendations
40. The experts recommend that a convention on
human rights education be adopted, to define positive obligations of States
regarding the incorporation of human rights education in their educational
systems, including private, religious, and military schools.
A. Religious groups
Assessment and recommendations
48. The nexus between racism and religion poses
complex and sensitive issues which are not adequately addressed under international
law. The experts believe that the reference to the right to freedom of religion
in article 5, paragraph (d) (vii) of ICERD should be further developed to cover
the complexity of the connection between religion and race, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. In light of the increasing
incidents of Islamophobia, anti-Semitism and Christianophobia in the aftermath
of the events of
49. It is recommended in particular that CERD
adopt a general recommendation addressing concerns which have emerged in the
area of racial discrimination and religion or belief.
50. In addition, the experts recommend that the
Human Rights Committee revise general comment No. 22 (1993) on article 18
(Freedom of thought, conscience or religion) in order to address present
challenges. The experts stress that in addressing problems linked to the nexus
between racism and religion, it is vital that human rights bodies and
Governments rely on the provisions of the 1981 Declaration on the Elimination
of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief.
D. Religious intolerance and
defamation of religious symbols
Assessment and recommendations
130. The experts are of the view that there is an
increase in religious intolerance and incitement to religious hatred. Equally
well-founded is the observation that religious intolerance and violations of
the right to freedom of religion have increased substantially in the aftermath
of
F.
Incitement to racial hatred and dissemination of hate speech and xenophobic and
caricature pictures, through traditional mass media and information technology, including the
Internet.
Assessment and recommendations
150. The experts are convinced that the implementation
of national legislation harmonized with human rights treaty obligations could
serve effectively to prevent dissemination of hate speech. Effective
cooperation between Governments, NGOs and civil society-based organizations in
the identification of good practices could help curb both incitement and
dissemination. Practical initiatives could include the creation of a model
anti-racism network for educational institutions; the inclusion of anti-racism
messages on websites accessed by young people; training courses for teachers on
the use of the Internet; the sharing of good practices; the promotion of
digital inclusion; the ethical use of the Internet; and the development of
critical thinking skills for children.
151. It goes without saying that particular
attention should be paid to the Internet because of its outreach and the
decentralized nature of its architecture. The emerging approach of
self-regulatory governance of the Internet offers an important opportunity that
needs to be further explored. This could prove to be most effective in tackling
incitement to racial and religious hatred and the dissemination of hate speech
through this medium. States should continue the dialogue on this subject as it
will lead to political agreement on how to prevent the Internet from being used
for racist purposes and how to promote its use to combat racism.
152. In addressing the underlying question as to
whether there is a gap in international human rights law pertaining to
combating incitement to racial and religious hatred and the dissemination of
hate speech, the experts discern a gap in application and consider that while
there are provisions from various treaties addressing the issue, further
guidance from treaty bodies as to the interpretive scope of these provisions
and their threshold of application would be most useful.
ISSUE STATEMENT: Two resolutions passed by contentious votes between
members of the Human Rights Council were; (A/HRC/7/L.15) defamation of
religion, and (A/HRC/7/L.24) the mandate on freedom of opinion and expression
as amended. The differences were principally between the European Union (EU)
and member states that are also members of the Organization of the Islamic
Conference (OIC). The EU believes Article 19 and Article 20 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights are sufficient human rights instruments
to cover protection against discrimination under Item F of the Ad Hoc
recommendations on incitement to racial and religious hatred. For the EU,
reporting restrictions placed on freedom of
opinion and expression is tantamount to a violation of the bedrock,
foundational principle of democracy.
The OIC believes caricatures, cartoons, films and
other media issues in some EU and other countries is Islamophobia; a fear of Islam
or an abuse or defamation of religion and reporting restrictions must be placed
on the media when such abuse of any
religion is involved.
In the week HRC
resolutions on defamation of religion and restrictions on freedom of opinion
and expression were approved a film, “Fina,”was
released over the Internet by a Dutch Member of Parliament, Mr. Geert Wilders
associating Muslims exclusively with violence and terrorism. The Dutch
Government had a fast and balanced
reaction to the film saying the “vast majority of Muslims reject extremism
and violence;” as the Government defends the right to freedom of opinion and expression as a
foundation of democracy. Three UN Special Rapporteurs issued a joint statement
on
The passage of these resolutions continues
the split between the EU and OIC over a different issue in December 2007 on the
mandate on Freedom of Religion or Belief (Word Document attached) which passed
with 18 abstentions. The votes on these resolutions reflect worldwide tensions
since
48. The nexus between racism and religion poses complex
and sensitive issues which are not adequately addressed under international
law. The experts believe that the reference to the right to freedom of religion
in article 5, paragraph (d) (vii) of ICERD should be further developed to cover
the complexity of the connection between religion and race, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. In light of the increasing
incidents of Islamophobia, anti-Semitism and Christianophobia in the aftermath
of the events of
The report by the Special
Rapporteur on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance
may be too narrow in scope regarding
religion, with repeated references to three monotheistic religious beliefs, not
taking into account the broadest possible scope of freedom of religion or
belief. This is true of the five experts study for the Ad Hoc Committee of the
Council on the elaboration of complementary standards as well, when they
recommend an addition to General Comment 22 on Article 18 of the ICCPR, rather
than taking a bold step to be more inclusive of
all religion or belief in the elaboration of complementary human rights
standards on race and religion. (Word Document attached: Race & Religion or
Belief).
The study by five experts
says there is a gap in international human rights instruments on race and religion.
However they do not refer to the origin of the gap which began in 1962 when two Conventions were proposed by the General Assembly
on racial and religious discrimination. The Convention on the Elimination of
Racial Discrimination (CERD) easily passed in 1969. The General Assembly could
not agree whether to adopt a Convention on Religious Intolerance. In 1968 they
deferred work on a Convention and began work that eventually led to the 1981 UN
Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief. (Word Document attached: History;
United Nations & Freedom of Religion or Belief). This chronological history
explains why a Convention on Religious Intolerance was deferred and why it took
so long to adopt a Declaration on a bedrock foundational principle of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Another answer may be found in a
reflection by Sam Harris in his Letter to a Christian
Nation:
Challenge: In 1968 the United Nations deferred work on an
International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Religious
Intolerance, because of its apparent complexity and sensitivity. In the
twenty-first century, a dramatic increase of intolerance and discrimination on
grounds of religion or belief is motivating a worldwide search to find
solutions to these problems. This is a challenge calling for enhanced dialogue
by States and others; including consideration of an International Convention on
Freedom of Religion or Belief for protection of and accountability by all religions
or beliefs. The tensions in today’s world inspire a question such as:
Option: After forty years this may be the time,
however complex and sensitive, for the United Nations Human Rights Council to
appoint an Open-ended Working Group to draft a United Nations Convention on
Freedom of Religion or Belief. The mandate of an Open-ended Working Group would
have to be written in a way to assure nothing in a draft Convention would be
construed as restricting or derogating from any right defined in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenants on Human Rights, and
1981 UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination
Based on Religion or Belief.
Concept: Separation of Religion or
Belief and State (SOROBAS). The starting point for this concept is the First
Preamble to the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights; “Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable
rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice
and peace in the world. It suggests
States recalling their history, culture and constitution adopt fair and equal
human rights protection for all religions or beliefs as described in General
Comment 22 on Article 18, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
UN Human Rights Committee,
49. It is recommended in particular that CERD
adopt a general recommendation addressing concerns which have emerged in the
area of racial discrimination and religion or belief.
50. In addition, the experts recommend that the
Human Rights Committee revise general comment No. 22 (1993) on article 18
(Freedom of thought, conscience or religion) in order to address present
challenges. The experts stress that in addressing problems linked to the nexus
between racism and religion, it is vital that human rights bodies and
Governments rely on the provisions of the 1981 Declaration on the Elimination
of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief.
The study by the five experts refers to the 1981 UN
Declaration and stresses the vital importance of relying on its provisions.
This includes Article 8 of the 1981 UN Declaration: Nothing in
the present Declaration shall be construed as restricting or derogating from
any right defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the
International Covenants on Human Rights.
152. In addressing the underlying question as to whether
there is a gap in international human rights law pertaining to combating
incitement to racial and religious hatred and the dissemination of hate speech,
the experts discern a gap in application and consider that while there are
provisions from various treaties addressing the issue, further guidance from
treaty bodies as to the interpretive scope of these provisions and their
threshold of application would be most useful.
40. The experts recommend that a convention on
human rights education be adopted, to define positive obligations of States
regarding the incorporation of human rights education in their educational
systems, including private, religious, and military schools.
This is a recommendation
by the five experts for a Convention on human rights education. It should refer
directly to human rights education on freedom of religion or belief and be
expanded to include places of worship, to begin at an early age.
______________________________________________________________________________
Reply: The Tandem Project Country & Community Database
collects information worldwide on United Nations Human Rights Bodies. The
information is used for UN Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Reviews
(UPR); UN Treaty-based Reports; UN Special Procedures, Special Rapporteur
Reports. Click on the link below to open the Database. Read the Instructions
& Table of Contents: scroll to an Article of your choice and click to reply.
http://www.tandemproject.com/databases/forms/card.htm
The Tandem Project: a non-profit, non-governmental
organization established in 1986 to build understanding and respect for diversity
of religion or belief, and prevent discrimination in matters relating to
freedom of religion or belief. The Tandem Project has sponsored multiple
conferences, curricula, reference materials and programs on Article 18 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – Everyone shall have the
right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion - and the 1981 United
Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief.
The Tandem Project
initiative was launched in 1986 as the result of a co-founder representing the
World Federation of United Nations Associations (WFUNA) at a 1984 United
Nations Geneva Seminar, Encouragement of
Understanding, Tolerance and Respect in Matters Relating
to Freedom of Religion or Belief, called by the UN Secretariat on
ways to implement the 1981 UN Declaration. In 1986, The Tandem Project
organized the first NGO International Conference on the 1981 UN Declaration.
The Tandem Project
Executive Director: Michael M. Roan, mroan@tandemproject.com.
Documents Attached:
7TH SESSION HR COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS RELATING TO FREEDOM OF RELIGION OR BELIEF
FREEDOM OF OPINION & EXPRESSION - FREEDOM OF RELIGION OR BELIEF
RACE & RELIGION OR BELIEF
HISTORY - UNITED NATIONS & FREEDOM OF RELIGION OR BELIEF
RELATED INTOLERANCE & FREEDOM OF RELIGION OR BELIEF
UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL ADOPTS RESOLUTION ON FREEDOM OF RELIGION OR BELIEF
The Tandem Project is a UN NGO in
Special Consultative Status with the
Economic and Social Council of
the United Nations