UN proposal against defamation of Islam

[Impenitent]

Following is a copy of the draft U.N. Human Rights Council resolution obtained from UN Watch. The resolution is prepared by Pakistan on behalf of the Islamic group, the text was circulated to Geneva diplomats in advance of a council vote scheduled for the end of March.

Entitled "Combating defamation of religions," the proposal mentions only Islam. UN Watch claims that the resolution would define any questioning of Islamic dogma as a human rights violation, thereby intimidate dissenting voices both within and outside the Islamic world.

UN Watch futher claims that "...while it is non-binding, the resolution threatens free speech because it would ban any perceived offense to Islamic sensitivities as a 'serious affront to human dignity' and a violation of religious freedom, and would pressure UN member states at the 'local, national, regional and international levels' to erode free speech guarantees in their 'legal and constitutional systems.'

The first to suffer would be moderate Muslims in countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan, countries which seek international legitimacy for state-sanctioned blasphemy laws that stifle religious freedom and outlaw conversions from Islam to other faiths.

Next to suffer would be writers and journalists in the non-Muslim world, with the resolution targeting the media for the 'deliberate stereotyping of religions, their adherents and sacred persons.'

The resolution's core premise, that 'defamation of religion' exists as legal concept, is not quite true, as the law on defamation protects the reputations of individuals, not beliefs.

On the face of it, some parts of this proposal sound benign to my non-politically-charged ears, yet I do see how they could be twisted into weapons to bludgeon free speech (as opposed to hateful or hate-inciting speech) because honest, insightful questioning of any aspect of any religion should always be legitimate.

What do you think of it? Is it an underhanded threat to free-speech by extremist Islamic nations or much ado about nothing? It's a UN resolution, after all.

I've posted the whole resolution below, with emphasis added.

=================

Human Rights Council Resolution A/HRC/10/L.. Combating Defamation of Religions

The Human Rights Council,

Reaffirming the pledge made by all States, under the Charter of the United Nations, to promote and encourage universal respect for and observance of all human rights and fundamental freedoms without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion,

Reaffirming also that all human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated,

Recalling the 2005 World Summit Outcome adopted by the General Assembly in its resolution 60/1 of 24 October 2005, in which the Assembly emphasized the responsibilities of all States, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations, to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction of any kind and acknowledged the importance of respect and understanding for religious and cultural diversity throughout the world,

Recognizing the valuable contribution of all religions to modern civilization and the contribution that dialogue among civilizations can make towards improved awareness and understanding of the common values shared by all humankind,

Welcoming the resolve expressed in the United Nations Millennium Declaration adopted by the General Assembly on 8 September 20006 to take measures to eliminate the increasing acts of racism and xenophobia in many societies and to promote greater harmony and tolerance in all societies, and looking forward to its effective implementation at all levels,

Underlining in this regard the importance of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action adopted by the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, held in Durban, South Africa, in 2001, welcoming the progress achieved in implementing them, and emphasizing that they constitute a solid foundation for the elimination of all scourges and manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance,

Welcoming all international and regional initiatives to promote cross-cultural and interfaith harmony, including the Alliance of Civilizations and the International Dialogue on Interfaith Cooperation and their valuable efforts towards the promotion of a culture of peace and dialogue at all levels,

Welcoming further the reports of the Special Rapporteur submitted to the Council at its fourth, sixth and ninth sessions that highlight the serious nature of the defamation of all religions and the need to complement legal strategies;

Noting with deep concern the instances of intolerance, discrimination and acts of violence against followers of certain faiths, occurring in many parts of the world, in addition to the negative projection of certain religions in the media and the introduction and enforcement of laws and administrative measures that specifically discriminate against and target persons with certain ethnic and religious backgrounds, particularly Muslim minorities following the events of 11 September 2001, and that threaten to impede their full enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Stressing that defamation of religions is a serious affront to human dignity leading to restriction on the freedom of religion of their adherents and incitement to religious hatred and violence,

Noting with concern that defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, could lead to social disharmony and violations of human rights, and alarmed at the inaction of some States to combat this burgeoning trend and the resulting discriminatory practices against adherents of certain religions and in this context stressing the need to effectively combat defamation of all religions and incitement to religious hatred in general and against Islam and Muslims in particular,

Convinced that respect for cultural, ethnic, religious and linguistic diversity, as well as dialogue among and within civilizations, is essential for global peace and understanding while manifestations of cultural and ethnic prejudice, religious intolerance and xenophobia generate hatred and violence among peoples and nations,

Underlining the important role of education in the promotion of tolerance, which involves acceptance by the public of and its respect for diversity,

Noting various regional and national initiatives to combat religious and racial intolerance against specific groups and communities and emphasizing, in this context, the need to adopt a comprehensive and non-discriminatory approach to ensure respect for all races and religions,

Recalling its resolution 7/19 of 27 March 2008 and UNGA resolution 63/154 of 18 December 2008,

1. Takes note of the report of the High Commissioner on the compilation of existing legislation and jurisprudence concerning defamation of and contempt of religions and the report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance presented during the 9th session of the Human Rights Council;

2. Expresses deep concern at the negative stereotyping and defamation of religions and manifestations of intolerance and discrimination in matters of religion or belief, still evident in the world, which have led to intolerance against the followers of these religions;

3. Strongly deplores all acts of psychological and physical violence and assaults, and incitement thereto, against persons on the basis of their religion or belief, and such acts directed against their businesses, properties, cultural centres and places of worship, as well as targeting of holy sites, religious symbols and venerated personalities of all religions;

4. Expresses deep concern at the continued serious instances of deliberate stereotyping of religions, their adherents and sacred persons in the media, as well as programmes and agendas pursued by extremist organizations and groups aimed at creating and perpetuating stereotypes about certain religions, in particular when condoned by Governments;

5. Notes with deep concern the intensification of the overall campaign of defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, including the ethnic and religious profiling of Muslim minorities in the aftermath of the tragic events of 11 September 2001; )

6. Recognizes that, in the context of the fight against terrorism, defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general have, become aggravating factors that contribute to the denial of fundamental rights and freedoms of members of target groups, as well as to their economic and social exclusion;

7. Expresses deep concern in this respect that Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism and in this regard regrets the laws or administrative measures specifically designed to control and monitor Muslim minorities, thereby stigmatizing them and legitimizing the discrimination they experience;

8. Deplores the use of the print, audio-visual and electronic media, including the Internet, and any other means to incite acts of violence, xenophobia or related intolerance and discrimination towards any religion, as well as targeting of religious symbols and venerated persons;

9. Emphasizes that, as stipulated in international human rights law including articles 19 and 29 of UDHR and 19 and 20 of ICCPR, everyone has the right to hold opinions without interference, and has the right to freedom of expression, the exercise of which carries with it special duties and responsibilities and may therefore be subject to limitations as are provided for by law and are necessary for respect of the rights or reputations of others, protection of national security or of public order, public health or morals, and general welfare;

10. Reaffirms that General Comment 15 of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, in which the Committee stipulated that the prohibition of the dissemination of all ideas based upon racial superiority or hatred is compatible with freedom of opinion and expression, is equally applicable to the question of incitement to religious hatred;

11. Strongly condemns all manifestations and acts of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance against national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities and migrants and the stereotypes often applied to them, including on the basis of religion or belief, and urges all States to apply and, where required, reinforce existing laws when such xenophobic or intolerant acts, manifestations or expressions occur, in order to deny impunity for those who commit such acts;

12. Urges all States to provide, within their respective legal and constitutional systems, adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, and to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and beliefs;

13. Underscores the need to combat defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, by strategizing and harmonizing actions at the local, national, regional and international levels through education and awareness building;

14. Calls upon all States to exert the utmost efforts, in accordance with their national legislation and in conformity with international human rights and humanitarian law, to ensure that religious places, sites, shrines and symbols are fully respected and protected, and to take additional measures in cases where they are vulnerable to desecration or destruction;

15. Calls for strengthening international efforts to foster a global dialogue for the promotion of a culture of tolerance and peace at all levels, based on respect for human rights and diversity of religions and beliefs, and urges States, non-governmental organizations, religious leaders as well as the print and electronic media to support and foster such a dialogue;

16. Appreciates the High Commissioner for Human Rights for holding a seminar on freedom of expression and advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence in October 2008, and requests her to continue to build on this initiative, with a view to concretely contributing to the prevention and elimination of all such forms of incitement and the consequences of negative stereotyping of religions or beliefs, and their adherents, on the human rights of those individuals and their communities;

17. Requests the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance to report on all manifestations of defamation of religions, and in particular on the serious implications of Islamophobia, on the enjoyment of all rights by their followers, to the Council during its 12th Session;

18. Requests the High Commissioner for Human Rights to report to the Council at its 12th Session on the implementation of the present resolution, including on the possible correlation between defamation of religions and the upsurge in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world.[/i]

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Interesting, Impy. I'll have to read it more carefully and think about it some more before I express an opinion. But I definitely appreciate you sharing it.

[Túrin Turambar]

To be blunt, this is an attempt by the conservative Islamic lobby to silence their dissenters. If it passes, it means that the will of the democratic world to defend free speech and freedom of thought has been eroded.

[Impenitent]

That's the argument (and I'll admit I agree with that, and further admit to sectarian interest as I am a strong supporter of Israel) but I wondered whether there were dissenting views amongst those here. The majority of HoFers tend to lean to the left and strongly support human and civil rights while at the same time abiding by a live and let live philosophy (apologies to those who feel I'm trying to stuff them into a square hole) so I wanted to hear other views.

[Pearly Di]

I agree completely with Lord M.

4. Expresses deep concern at the continued serious instances of deliberate stereotyping of religions, their adherents and sacred persons in the media, as well as programmes and agendas pursued by extremist organizations and groups aimed at creating and perpetuating stereotypes about certain religions, in particular when condoned by Governments;

'Continued serious instances of deliberate stereotyping of religions, their adherents and sacred persons in the media'?

Hmmmppph. And how many negative stereotypes of Christians have I seen in the media down the years?! Not a huge amount, but a fair few. *shrug* I don't want to sound precious about it, or exaggerate it (since nobody in my country is persecuted for being a Christian!) but I'm just saying.

Obviously, as a member of a somewhat minority faith group myself (Christianity is only dominant in the UK in a mainly cultural sense and evangelical Christianity is often seen as fair game for mockery), I am interested -- very -- in protecting religious freedoms. Christians, Jews, Muslims, and other faith groups should be able to voice opinions that others may find distasteful, or don't agree with, without fears of reprisal or harassment.

Equally, secularists should be able to voice criticism of Islam (in all its forms, moderate as well as fundamentalist) -- or my faith, for that matter -- without fears of reprisal or harassment.

No way should the UN ratify this. I regard it with the gravest possible misgivings and indeed alarm. We should be guarding the freedoms that western civilisation has taken hundreds of years to achieve.

[axordil]

I find the notion of an implied right not to be insulted insulting.

[Dave_LF]

At the risk of defaming Islam, right now no one's defaming Islam more than (certain) Muslims.

[vison]

To be blunt, this is an attempt by the conservative Islamic lobby to silence their dissenters. If it passes, it means that the will of the democratic world to defend free speech and freedom of thought has been eroded.

I'm with you.

[Impenitent]

So far, we are all in agreement.

Unfortunately, this will be ratified; the Islamic bloc and its supporters dominate the UN Human Rights Council and there is nothing to stand in the way of ratification.

Not sure to what extent this is binding on UN member states. I'd be interested to hear from anyone who has insight into the processes.

And also from anyone who has an opposing view to everyone who has posted so far.

[yovargas]

I find the notion of an implied right not to be insulted insulting.

Exactly.

[TheEllipticalDisillusion]

Maybe Pakistan is trying for worst resolution ever? The irony in this proposal is beautiful--defamation of islam would be considered a human rights violation proposed by a religion where too many of its followers practice their own brand of human rights violations in the name of this same religion. A woman was arrested recently in Saudi Arabia for driving (I'm pretty sure it was Saudi Arabia).

I doubt anyone outside of the most extreme islamic world is going to vote for this crappy resolution. I hold freedom of speech paramount to any other freedom. If you cannot speak your peace without fear of reprisal, even if it is to insult, or demean others, (not simply disagreement) then you cannot fulfill any of the other freedoms (press, assembly, etc). I'm fairly confident that even if the islamic bloc vote for this, my United States of America will not accept this garbage from Pakistan.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Okay, I have carefully read through the resolution, and honestly I don't see the horror in it that the rest of you do. Yes it has a particular emphasis on the dangers of Islamaphophia (something which I have seen in action and strongly deplore, but no more than attacks on individuals for the membership in any other religion, race or creed), but the language of the resolution very clearly condemnation defamation, stereotyping and other attacks based on the membership in all religions, not just Islam, as well racial intolerance and other forms of xenophobia.

I don't see anything in this resolution that I could not support.

[TheEllipticalDisillusion]

Why is this resolution important, and what does it do that the international bill of human rights does not?

Article 7: All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

I am skeptical about more legality based on the sensibilities of one religion? There should not be freedom from insult. It is too open to interpretation--regardless of whether perpetrated by the media or individuals.


Just as an aside:

7. Expresses deep concern in this respect that Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism and in this regard regrets the laws or administrative measures specifically designed to control and monitor Muslim minorities, thereby stigmatizing them and legitimizing the discrimination they experience;

Many countries where human rights are violated are islamic countries. Now I know correlation does not equal causation, but this is a striking coincidence. While enough acts of islamic terrorism have occurred, terrorism itself is not specifically islamic.


==================

I'll admit something: I don't see the big deal about stereotypes.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Why is this resolution important, and what does it do that the international bill of human rights does not?

I agree that it does not do anything more than reiterate what the international bill of human rights says. But I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing. At worst, it is redundant.

Article 7: All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

I am skeptical about more legality based on the sensibilities of one religion? There should not be freedom from insult. It is too open to interpretation--regardless of whether perpetrated by the media or individuals.

How can you interpret the statement that "all" are entitled to protection from discrimination and incitement to discrimination to be legality based on the sensibilities of one religion? It equal protects members of any religion (and, presumably, should even be interpreted as protecting atheists from discrimination and incitement to discrimination). Nor is there anything in this statement (or anywhere else in the resolution) that talks about prohibiting insults, despite what several people have said in this thread. It only calls for legal systems that provide "adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general."

I don't see how that is a bad thing. Certainly U.S. law already provides for that, at least in theory. I'd like to see it work better in practice, particularly as to discrimination and violence against Muslims.

[TheEllipticalDisillusion]

Why is this resolution important, and what does it do that the international bill of human rights does not?

I agree that it does not do anything more than reiterate what the international bill of human rights says. But I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing. At worst, it is redundant.

Article 7: All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

I am skeptical about more legality based on the sensibilities of one religion? There should not be freedom from insult. It is too open to interpretation--regardless of whether perpetrated by the media or individuals.

How can you interpret the statement that "all" are entitled to protection from discrimination and incitement to discrimination to be legality based on the sensibilities of one religion? It equal protects members of any religion (and, presumably, should even be interpreted as protecting atheists from discrimination and incitement to discrimination). Nor is there anything in this statement (or anywhere else in the resolution) that talks about prohibiting insults, despite what several people have said in this thread. It only calls for legal systems that provide "adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general."

I don't see how that is a bad thing. Certainly U.S. law already provides for that, at least in theory. I'd like to see it work better in practice, particularly as to discrimination and violence against Muslims.

There is no need for redundancy.

You misunderstand me, V. I meant that the resolution is based on the sensibilities of one religion while the declaration of human rights already provides protection to all.

[Túrin Turambar]

Okay, I have carefully read through the resolution, and honestly I don't see the horror in it that the rest of you do. Yes it has a particular emphasis on the dangers of Islamaphophia (something which I have seen in action and strongly deplore, but no more than attacks on individuals for the membership in any other religion, race or creed), but the language of the resolution very clearly condemnation defamation, stereotyping and other attacks based on the membership in all religions, not just Islam, as well racial intolerance and other forms of xenophobia.

I don't see anything in this resolution that I could not support.

The wording of the resolution is fairly innocuous, but its motives and possible affects are far more sinister.

The resolution comes from the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, which takes the view that the Universal Declaration of Humans Rights is itself subject to Shai’ra Law. I’m not entirely sure what they mean by ‘defaming’ a religion, but I’d be willing to guess that their definition would be very broad (perhaps including Martin Luther’s nailing of his list of demands to the church door). At the same time, they attack the ‘targeting of religious symbols and venerated persons’ (an obvious reference to the Mohammed cartoons) and the need for people to check their freedom of expression with ‘respect of...public morals’ (which strikes me as being aimed at critics of Shai’ra in Islamic countries). At the same time, the way that it ‘urges people to respect all religions and beliefs’ can easily be seen as an attempt to make people accept the more extreme aspects of Shai’ra Law.

By and large, this seems to be aimed specifically at Geert Wilders and his film, Fitna, which the OIC has been trying to see hushed up. If this resolution was adopted as they intend, the film would be banned.