Pew-Templeton Global Religious Futures Project

The Pew-Templeton Global Religious Futures project analyzes religious change and its impact on societies around the world.

The Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life uses a range of social science methods, including public opinion surveys, demographic analysis and coding, to examine three related areas of global change:

Patterns in religious beliefs and practices, including how they shape people’s social values and political attitudes;

Trends in religious affiliation, including the current and projected size of the world’s major religious groups; and

Comparisons of restrictions on the practice of religion, including restrictions imposed by governments as well as social groups, organizations and individuals.

The Pew-Templeton Global Religious Futures project is jointly and generously funded by The Pew Charitable Trusts and the John Templeton Foundation.

Read the reports produced as part of the Global Religious Futures project here.

Secrets of Britain's Sharia Councils

Panorama goes undercover to investigate what is really happening in Britain's Sharia Councils - Islamic religious courts. Some women reveal they have suffered domestic violence ignored by these councils as campaigners say it is time to tackle the parallel legal system which can run counter to British law.

Video source: BBC.

Read more at: Gatestone Institute.

A edificação constitucional do direito fundamental à liberdade religiosa: um feixe jurídico entre a inclusividade e o fundamentalismo

Jayme Weingartner Neto

Título/Degree: 2006, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul

URL: http://tede.pucrs.br/tde_busca/arquivo.php?codArquivo=64

A Constituição Brasileira consagra um direito fundamental à liberdade religiosa como um todo, um feixe de posições jusfundamentais radicado em diversos dispositivos textuais e apto a harmonizar a maximização da inclusividade (acolher as confissões religiosas minoritárias) com a tolerância ao fundamentalismo-crença e o bloqueio ao fundamentalismo-militante. Parte-se dos pressupostos histórico-teológicos da liberdade religiosa, que só faz sentido no Estado democrático de direito, sem deixar de notar que a racionalidade moderna surpreendese, hoje, com o fenômeno da dessecularização. Recolhem-se os aportes do interculturalismo, da tolerância e da complexidade e constata-se que o Estado constitucional, por mais inclusivo que deva ser, assenta em limites inerentes (valores básicos aglutinantes) que servem de barreira ao fundamentalismo religioso, conceito que vai desdobrado em fundamentalismo-crença, de estilo hermenêutico, e fundamentalismo-militante, que pretende impor, modo político, normas de conduta para toda a comunidade, extensíveis aos não crentes. Trabalha-se com os princípios da dignidade da pessoa humana, da liberdade, da igualdade e da proporcionalidade para, numa hermenêutica sistemática, ofertar um catálogo com mais de oitenta posições que concretizam diversas facetas da liberdade religiosa (a raiz preferencial da liberdade de consciência, o conceito de religião, a liberdade de crença, a liberdade de culto, a privacidade religiosa, os direitos das igrejas e, no plano objetivo, o princípio da separação e vários outros). O quadro é testado, nos limites, em relação a tópicos concretos: a religião e a escola pública, o sacrifício religioso de animais e implicações penais.

Orientadores/Membros da Banca/Advisors/Committee Members: Ingo Wolfgang Sarlet.

Assuntos/Palavras-Chave/Subjects/Keywords: DIREITO CONSTITUCIONAL; DIREITOS FUNDAMENTAIS; RELIGIÃO; LIBERDADE RELIGIOSA; DIREITO

Cronache di Convegno

International Consultation on Religious Freedom Research

GIOVANNI CROCCO

      Dal 16 al 18 Marzo 2013 si è svolto ad Istanbul (Turchia) un Convegno a carattere internazionale avente ad oggetto tematiche legate alla libertà religiosa, analizzata in ogni sua forma, quindi sia da un punto di vista strettamente giuridico-costituzionale, sia da una prospettiva interculturale(e oserei dire in senso “negativo”, poiché con riferimento alle persecuzioni religiose), sia ancora sotto un’ottica nuova e certamente più attuale, come, ad esempio, le implicazioni che questa può avere nella sfera sociale ed economica di un Paese. La consultation è stata promossa e finanziatadall’International Institute for Religious Freedom (IIRF), un network nato dall’unione di esponenti di tre principali città (Bonn, Cape Town e Colombo) e composto da professori, ricercatori, accademici e specialisti provenienti da tutti i continenti, che lavorano su dati attendibili relativi alla violazione, a carattere mondiale, della libertà religiosa ed il cui principale scopo è quello di portare tali studi all’interno di colleges e università, facendo diventare la tematica parte integrante dei programmi accademici, soprattutto nelle aree del diritto, della sociologia, degli studi religiosi e di quelli teologici.

(...)

      E’ toccato, poi, a Rodrigo Vitorino Souza Alves, un assistente universitario della Facoltà di Diritto della Universidade Federal de Uberlândia in Brasile, il cui elaborato si è occupato semplicisticamente della libertà religiosa in Brasile e più in generale in tutta l’America latina.

      Il suo lavoro ha illustrato l’attuale impostazione istituzionale, le regole prescritte dalla Costituzione e dalle altre leggi ordinarie, così come la prassi sociale e giurisprudenziale circa la libertà religiosa in Brasile, con brevi cenni alle altre esperienze latino-americane.

      Il Brasile è un Paese caratterizzato da una pluralità di credo. Dopo la sua indipendenza nel 1822 e fino alla fine del XIX secolo (durante l’intero periodo della Monarchia insomma), fu adottato come religione ufficiale il Cattolicesimo romano. Altre fedi subirono limitazioni, ma potevano essere praticate in privato o in luoghi specifici, e comunque, senza la forma e l’aspetto di un tempio religioso. Durante quest’arco di tempo, quasi il 99% della popolazione era Cattolica, anche se di lì in avanti le cose iniziarono a cambiare. Secondo l’ultimo censimento del 2010, il 64,6% della popolazione è legato al Cattolicesimo, il 22% è Protestante, l’8% non hauna religione (è atea quindi), il 3,2% si dichiara adepta ad altre religioni e il 2% è spiritualista. Questo pluralismo è reso possibile dalla legge, infatti già dal 1988 la Costituzione federale e la legislazione sono abbastanza progrediti in termini di libertà religiosa. La Costituzione garantisce a tutti gli individui il diritto alla libertà religiosa, proibendo ogni forma di discriminazione basata su motivi religiosi. In diritto, ci sono una serie di previsioni di legge che assicurano la libertà religiosa, per esempio: le organizzazioni religiose sono libere di decidere la loro struttura organizzativa; le pratiche religiose sono protette dalla Legge penalebrasiliana, essendo considerato reato deridere o schernire qualcuno per la sua appartenenza religiosa ovvero interrompere una cerimonia o la preghiera; gli edifici di culto sono dotati di immunità tributaria, vale a dire sono esenti dalle tasse; il matrimonio religioso può produrre anche effetti civili, e ci si potrebbe avvalere di molti altri esempi. 

      Attualmente, lo Stato brasiliano sta affrontando alcune questioni delicate circa i rapporti tra Stato e religione. Anche in questo caso, è possibile citare qualche caso emblematico: per esempio, il caso relativo all’iscrizione “God be praised” (Dio sia lodato) sulle banconote brasiliane e l’uso dei crocifissi nelle aule di tribunale o in altri luoghi pubblici; il rapporto tra sovranità statale, autodeterminazione e libertà religiosa dei gruppi indigeni, soprattutto in relazione all’uccisione dei neonati con disabilità fisiche; la posizione della Magistratura brasiliana sul discorso dell’odio; la discussione sull’istruzione religiosa nelle scuole pubbliche e le sovvenzioni statali per attività culturali a carattere però religioso; le implicazioni sociali del Sabbath, della festa comandata; il rapporto tra pratica medica e il rifiuto espresso dai pazienti o dai loro tutori legali di ricevere emotrasfusioni.

      Senza dubbio, quantunque non esistano significative persecuzioni di stampo religioso in Brasile (anche se delle minoranze sopportano pregiudizi in alcune aree), ci sono situazioni a rischio che meritano la dovuta attenzione ed importanza. Nell’America latina, fra tutte risalta l’esperienza colombiana. Sebbene sia costituzionalmente prevista e garantita la libertà religiosa, la Colombia rimane a livello internazionale uno dei Paesi con il più alto tasso di violenza per motivi religiosi, soprattutto nelle aree dominate dai gruppi armati e dove vige l’illegalità. 

      L’intento dell’autore è stato proprio quello di catturare l’attenzione dei gruppi che combattono per i diritti umani o dei ricercatori che studiano la libertà religiosa, poiché comunque in America latina ci sono diverse problematiche relazionate al fattore religioso che ancora non trovano soluzione.

(...)

http://www.antoniofuccillo.it/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Cronache-di-convegno_Istanbul.pdf

Heiner Bielefeldt at Third ICLARS Conference – Religion, Democracy, and Equality

The International Consortium for Law and Religion Studies (ICLARS) is pleased to announce that Heiner Bielefeldt, UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, is confirmed as the keynote speaker for the Third ICLARS Conference, to be held in the United States, 21-23 August 2013.

Holding both a PhD and a post-doctoral habilitation degree in philosophy, Professor Bielefeldt teaches in the areas of political science, philosophy, law and history. He has taught at the University of Heidelberg and the University of Toronto, and at the time of his UN appointment in 2010 he was professor in the newly created Chair of Human Rights and Human Rights Policy at the University of Erlangen. From 2003-2009 he served as Director of the German Institute for Human Rights.

Other international experts – including Rex Adhar, Kayatoun Alidadi, Ursula Basset, Agnès Callamard, Mohammed Saeed Eltayeb, Kent Greenawald, Andrew Koppleman, Douglas Laycock, Tahir Mahmood, Asher Maoz, Toby Mendel,  Michael O'Flaherty, Gerhard Robbers, Lawrence Sager, Eichiro Takahata, Jeroen Temperman, and John Witte Jr. – will address such topics as religious pluralism and treatment of religious minorities; religion and anti-discrimination norms; hate speech, hate crimes, and religious minorities; and religion and gender issues.

The past year has been a particularly significant one for the law and religion field. On 11 January 2012 the Supreme Court of the United States issued its judgment in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC, without question one of the most significant religion decisions of the Court in decades. One year later, on 15 January 2013, the European Court of Human Rights delivered judgment in a similarly significant set of four consolidated cases in Eweida and Others v. The United Kingdom. These US and European cases have brought law and religion questions to the forefront of public consciousness, and the decisions have spawned profound and ongoing debates. With these prospects in mind, the Steering Committee developed the conference themes.

The central location for the conference will be Richmond, Virginia, near where the language was crafted that ultimately became the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. One day of the conference will be spent in historic Charlottesville, home of the University of Virginia and Monticello, where much of the Jeffersonian heritage is in evidence, including the famous serpentine wall, sometimes identified as the true image of the famous "wall of separation" metaphor for the appropriate relationship of religion and state. A second day will take participants to Williamsburg, home of the College of William and Mary, and another major locus of historic church-state sites in early America.

ICLARS is an international network of scholars and experts of law and religion begun in 2007 with Professor Silvio Ferrari of the University of Milan as President. The purpose of ICLARS is to provide a forum for exchange of information, data, and opinions among members, which are then made available to the broader scientific community. Currently, ICLARS has members from more than 40 countries. 

Succeeding Professor Ferrari, the current president of ICLARS is Professor W. Cole Durham, Jr., Susa Young Gates University Professor of Law and Director, International Center for Law and Religion Studies (ICLRS), J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University. Vice-president is Professor Ana Maria Célis, Professor and Director of the Center of Religious Liberty of the Facultad de Derecho at the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile (Santiago). The ICLARS steering committee members are eminent law and religion scholars from Italy, Spain, India, Argentina, Germany, Israel, and South Africa.

ICLARS organizes conferences every other year and publishes a regular newsletter. The first ICLARS conference was held in Milan in 2009, the second took place in Santiago, Chile in 2011. The proceedings of both conferences have been published by Ashgate UK. The Santiago proceedings, titled Law, Religion, Constitution: Freedom of Religion, Equal Treatment, and the Law, will be available at the Conference in August.

Please consult this site as well or Consortium website at www.iclars.org for ongoing developments.

Source: International Center for Law and Religion Studies.

Third ICLARS Conference - Religion, Democracy, and Equality

The ICLARS Steering Committee is pleased to announce that the Third ICLARS Conference will be held in Virginia, USA, August 21-23, 2013.  

The general conference theme will be "Religion, Democracy, and Equality."  

The central venue for the conference will be historic Richmond, Virginia, the city where the language was first crafted that ultimately became the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. One conference day will be spent in nearby Charlottesville, home of both the University of Virginia and Thomas Jefferson's Monticello and its famous serpentine wall, to which some pointed as the true image of Jefferson's even more famous "wall of separation" metaphor for the appropriate relationship of religion and state. A second day will be spent in Williamsburg, another major locus of historic church-state sites in early America and home of the College of William and Mary.  

While a number of speakers will be commissioned, a call for papers is now open. 

Submissions are invited on the following Conference themes:

• Religious pluralism and treatment of religious minorities

• Religion and anti-discrimination norms

• Hate speech, hate crimes, and religious minorities

• Religion and gender issues

All academics interested in the study of law and religion are encouraged to submit proposals for individual papers and panels on any relevant topic. Presentation time will be approximately 15-20 minutes. 

"Young scholars" – in the first seven years of their teaching experience – are invited to submit proposals for presentations in a special first-day session. 

Proposals by all interested scholars should be submitted as an abstract of 300-500 words, together with a CV, by 1 May 2013, to wrightde@law.byu.edu. 

Limited funds are available to assist those traveling to the conference from outside the United States for whom travel would otherwise be impossible.

The Conference language is English. 

Where: Virginia, Charlottesville and Williamsburg 

When: 21/08/2013

Click here for the event webpage.

Source: International Consortium for Law and Religion Studies

The Virginia Act For Establishing Religious Freedom

Thomas Jefferson, 1786

Well aware that Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burdens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do; that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavoring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world, and through all time; that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical; that even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion, is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness, and is withdrawing from the ministry those temporal rewards, which proceeding from an approbation of their personal conduct, are an additional incitement to earnest and unremitting labors for the instruction of mankind; that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions, more than our opinions in physics or geometry; that, therefore, the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to the offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which in common with his fellow citizens he has a natural right; that it tends also to corrupt the principles of that very religion it is meant to encourage, by bribing, with a monopoly of worldly honors and emoluments, those who will externally profess and conform to it; that though indeed these are criminal who do not withstand such temptation, yet neither are those innocent who lay the bait in their way; that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles, on the supposition of their ill tendency, is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of that tendency, will make his opinions the rule of judgment, and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own; that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order; and finally, that truth is great and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them.

Be it therefore enacted by the General Assembly, That no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burdened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in nowise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.

And though we well know this Assembly, elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of legislation only, have no powers equal to our own and that therefore to declare this act irrevocable would be of no effect in law, yet we are free to declare, and do declare, that the rights hereby asserted are of the natural rights of mankind, and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right.

----------------

Comment: 

Thomas Jefferson drafted The Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom in 1779 three  years after he wrote the Declaration of Independence. The act was  not passed by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia until 1786. Jefferson was by then in Paris as the U.S. Ambassador to France. The  Act was resisted by a group headed by Patrick Henry who sought to pass a  bill that would have assessed all the citizens of Virginia to support a plural establishment. James Madison's Memorial and Remonstrance Against  Religious Assessments was, and remains, a powerful argument against state supported religion. It was written in 1785, just a few months before  the General Assembly passed Jefferson's religious freedom bill.  Both the draft  version of the Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom  and  the Memorial and  Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments  are availalbe on this site.

Source: The Religious Freedom Page - University of Virginia.

Pacto internacional sobre direitos civis e políticos

Decreto nº 592 - de 6 de julho de 1992

Presidente da República, no uso da atribuição que lhe confere o artigo 84, inciso VIII, da Constituição, e 

Considerando que o Pacto Internacional sobre Direitos Civis e políticos foi adotado pela XXI Sessão da Assembléia Geral das Nações Unidas, em 16 de dezembro de 1996;

Considerando que o Congresso Nacional aprovou o texto do referido diploma internacional por meio do Decreto Legislativo n. 226(1), de 12 de dezembro de 1991;

Considerando que a Carta de adesão ao Pacto Internacional sobre Direitos Civis e políticos foi depositada em 24 de janeiro de 1992;

Considerando que o Pacto ora promulgado entro em vigor, para o Brasil, em 24 de abril de 1992, na forma de seu artigo 49, § 2°;

Decreta:

Art. 1° O pacto Internacional sobre Direitos Civis e Políticos, apenso por cópia ao presente Decreto, será executado e cumprido tão inteiramente como nele se contém.  

Art.2° Este Decreto entra em vigor na data de sua publicação.

Fernando Collor - Presidente da República.

Celso Lafer.

Anexo ao Decreto que promulga o Pacto Internacional Sobre Direitos Civis e Políticos/M  R  E 

PACTO INTERNACIONAL SOBRE DIREITOS CIVIS E POLÍTICOS

ARTIGO 18

1.  Toda pessoa terá direito à liberdade de pensamento, de consciência e de religião. Esse direito implicará a liberdade de ter ou adotar uma religião ou uma crença de sua escolha e a liberdade de professar sua religião ou crença, individual ou coletivamente, tanto pública como privadamente, por meio do culto, da celebração de ritos, de práticas e do ensino.

2.  Ninguém poderá ser submetido a medidas coercitivas que possam restringir sua liberdade de ter ou de adotar uma religião ou crença de sua escolha.

3.  A liberdade de manifestar a própria religião ou crença estará sujeita apenas a limitações previstas em lei e que se façam necessárias para proteger a segurança, a ordem, a saúde ou a moral públicas ou os direitos e as liberdades das demais pessoas.

4.  Os Estados partes do presente Pacto comprometem-se a respeitar a liberdade dos pais - e, quando for o caso, dos tutores legais - de assegurar a educação religiosa e moral dos filhos que esteja de acordo com suas próprias convicções.

Meeting with Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, Heiner Bielefeldt

A talk by Professor Heiner Bielefeidt (UN Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Religion or Belief) followed by a question and answer period. Dr. Bielefeidt spoke on 20 October 2011 at a public meeting held at the Baha'i offices in New York City. This meeting commemorated the 30th Anniversary of the 1982 UN Declaration on the Elimination of all Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief and the 25th Anniversary of the Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief.

Dignitatis Humanae and the Legacy of Vatican II

This video is from the event "Catholic Perspectives on Religious Liberty," a symposium hosted by Georgetown University's Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs. The event was held as part of the Religious Freedom Project, which is an interdisciplinary research project sponsored by the Luce Foundation.

September 13, 2012 | Since the Second Vatican Council the Church has placed considerable emphasis on the importance of religious freedom as a matter of human dignity and individual flourishing, and as central to a just and democratic society. Abroad, the persecution of Christians and others has reached significant, perhaps even crisis, proportions. At home, issues involving same-sex marriage, abortion, and contraception have sparked sharp controversy about threats to religious freedom, leading the US Conference of Catholic Bishops to establish its own committee to begin engaging these issues.

The Maryland Catholic Bishops Conference and the Religious Freedom Project of Georgetown University's Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs brought together leading Catholic scholars to address these questions from different perspectives. Cardinal Donald Wuerl gave the symposium keynote address.

Participant Bios:

GERARD BRADLEY, a noted scholar in the fields of constitutional law as well as law and religion, joined the faculty of the Notre Dame Law School as professor in 1992, having taught at the University of Illinois from 1983 to 1992. With Professor John Finnis, he has served as director of Notre Dame's Natural Law Institute and as co-editor of the institute's American Journal of Jurisprudence since 1996. He is president of the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars, vice president of the American Public Philosophy Institute, member of the board of advisors of the Cardinal Newman Society, chair of the Federalist Society's Religious Liberties Practice Group, member of the Ramsey Colloquium on Theological Issues, and member of the board of advisors of the Society of Catholic Social Scientists. He is a graduate of Cornell University and Cornell Law School. 

LISA CAHILL is J. Donald Monan Professor in the Department of Theology at Boston College. Her scholarly interests lie broadly in the area of Christian ethics, particularly Catholic social ethics, sex and gender ethics, New Testament and ethics, bioethics, the history of Christian ethics, and the ethics of war and peace. She is a past president of both the Catholic Theological Society of America and the Society of Christian Ethics and she is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Professor Cahill has written a number of books including Sex, Gender, and Christian Ethics, Family: A Christian Social Perspective, and Bioethics and the Common Good. Her articles have been published in Theological Studies, The Journal of the Society of Christian Ethics, and the Journal of Religious Ethics. She holds a B.A. from the University of Santa Clara and an M.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Chicago. 

JOHN O'MALLEY is a Jesuit priest and University Professor in the department of Theology at Georgetown University. His specialty is the religious culture of early modern Europe, especially Italy. He is also an expert on the Second Vatican Council. Fr. O'Malley has held a number of fellowships, from the Guggenheim Foundation, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the American Council of Learned Societies, and other academic organizations. He is the author of The First Jesuits and What Happened at Vatican II, among other publications. He has edited or co-edited a number of volumes including The Collected Works of Erasums and The Jesuits and the Arts. Fr. O'Malley holds a doctorate from Harvard University. 

TOM FARR is Director of the Religious Freedom Project at the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs and a Visiting Associate Professor of Religion and International Affairs at Georgetown's Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. A former American diplomat and leading authority on international religious freedom, Farr has published widely, including "Diplomacy in an Age of Faith" in Foreign Affairs (March/April 2008), and World of Faith and Freedom: Why International Religious Liberty is Vital to American National Security (Oxford University Press, 2008). Farr received his BA in history from Mercer University, and his Ph.D. in modern British and European history from the University of North Carolina.

Source: Georgetown University's Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs.

Myanmar: Storm Clouds on the Horizon

Even as Myanmar’s democratic transition continues apace, ethnic violence in Rakhine State represents a threat to national stability. It demands decisive moral leadership from all the country’s leaders as they strive to find long-term solutions to the many challenges that lie ahead, including longstanding discrimination of the Rohingya and other Muslim minorities.

Myanmar: Storm Clouds on the Horizon, the latest report from the International Crisis Group, tracks the broad changes that have continued to move the country away from authoritarianism despite the recent and serious backward step of intercommunal violence between Buddhists and Muslims in the west of the country.

“The Myanmar government and legislature have demonstrated that they possess the vision and leadership to shift the country decisively away from its authoritarian past”, says Jim Della-Giacoma, Crisis Group’s South East Asia Project Director. “But they will inevitably face major challenges, including containing and resolving the intercommunal conflict that has engulfed Rakhine State and reaching a ceasefire in Kachin State”.

In May 2012, the rape and murder of a Buddhist woman by Muslim men ignited long-simmering tensions between the Buddhist Rakhine and the Muslim Rohingya communities in Rakhine State. Since June, rioting, violence and mass displacement have become too common. It has not helped that some local authorities have been seen to take the Rakhine side in the conflict. They have for decades actively discriminated against the Rohingya, leaving many without citizenship that they may have long ago qualified for if the law had been applied more fairly.

Unrest in Rakhine State may also be a by-product of the reform process. The transition has created unprecedented space to organise that has been denied for decades, including for long-suppressed ethno-nationalist causes. There is a real risk that the localised conflict in Rakhine State could take on a more general Buddhist-Muslim dimension and spread to other parts of the multi-religious and multi-ethnic country.

The unrest has taken place in the context of President Thein Sein continuing to introduce more democratic policies and consolidating power among reformers. Prisoners have been released, protests allowed, censorship abolished, and cabinet reshuffled to remove or sideline ministers who were seen as too conservative or ineffective.

But challenges lie ahead in advance of the 2015 elections, in which Aung San Suu Kyi and the National League for Democracy (NLD) will compete for seats as a fully fledged opposition party. Greater freedom to organise could lead to more confrontational social movements. It will be a challenging time, as the legislature is not always in step with Thein Sein’s administration and has tested its authority, and the NLD has its eye on the next poll. The NLD will have to ensure that its expected electoral success in 2015 does not come at the expense of the broad representation needed to reflect the country’s diversity and support an inclusive and stable transition.

“Social tensions are rising as more freedom allows local conflicts to resurface”, says Paul Quinn-Judge, Crisis Group’s Acting Asia Program Director. “Moral leadership is required now to calm tensions and new compromises will be needed if divisive confrontation is to be avoided”.

Jakarta/Brussels  |   12 Nov 2012

Source: International Crisis Group.

Read more at:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/burmamyanmar/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/burmamyanmar/10086645/Burma-ethnic-tensions-rise-after-mosque-and-orphanage-torched.html

Conselho da Europa aprova Resolução sobre liberdade religiosa

Com a Resolução 1928, de abril de 2013, o Conselho da Europa, organismo internacional integrado por 47 Estados e que representa mais de 800 milhões de pessoas, assegura a proteção dos direitos humanos em relação à religião e das comunidades religiosas contra violência.

Leia aqui esta e outras resoluções e recomendações sobre liberdade religiosa do Conselho da Europa.

The numbers of religious freedom: Brian J. Grim at TEDxViadellaConciliazione

Source: TED - Ideas worth spreading.

Aerosol Spiritual Art: Mohammed Alì at TEDxViadellaConciliazione

Source: TED - Ideas worth spreading.

Neil MacGregor: 2600 years of history in one object

Um cilindro de argila recoberto pela escrita cuneiforme acadiana, danificado e partido, o Cilindro de Ciro é um símbolo poderoso de tolerância religiosa e multiculturalismo. Nesta cativante 'talk', Neil MacGregor, diretor do Museu Britânico, desenha 2.600 anos da história do Oriente Médio através deste simples objeto.

------

A clay cylinder covered in Akkadian cuneiform script, damaged and broken, the Cyrus Cylinder is a powerful symbol of religious tolerance and multi-culturalism. In this enthralling talk Neil MacGregor, Director of the British Museum, traces 2600 years of Middle Eastern history through this single object.

The writer and presenter of the BBC Radio 4 series "A History of the World in 100 Objects" and the accompanying book.

About Neil MacGregor

The writer and presenter of the BBC Radio 4 series "A History of the World in 100 Objects" and the accompanying book.

Established by Act of Parliament in 1753 as a museum for the world (and free to enter, down to this day), the British Museum has built a near-encyclopedic collection of art and artifacts representing the sweep of human history across 2 million years. In his 2010 radio series A History of the World in 100 Objects (accompanied by a splendid book with the same title), director Neil MacGregor showed how the artifacts and items we collect are a powerful tool for sharing our shared human narrative.

MacGregor has long been fascinated with the way museums can tell the world's story. At the British Museum, he's negotiated his way to mounting shows full of Chinese and Persian treasures, helping sometimes-prickly governments to share his mission of cultural togetherness. He was named Briton of the Year in 2008 by the Sunday Times, who said, "He is a committed idealist who, in a world in which culture is increasingly presented as the acceptable face of politics, has pioneered a broader, more open, more peaceable way forward." He says: "That’s what the museum is about: giving people their place in things.” "[100 Objects is] a project that, I suspect, may prove a watershed in the way museums and galleries work with the public." Charlotte Higgins, the Guardian.

Source: TED - Ideas worth spreading.

First Amendment to the United States Constitution

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances".

Proposed 9/25/1789

Ratified 12/15/1791

Resolution 1928 (2013) Provisional version - Safeguarding human rights in relation to religion and belief and protecting religious communities from violence

Author(s): Parliamentary Assembly - Council of Europe

1. The Parliamentary Assembly is concerned about the increasing occurrence of violent attacks against religious communities and individuals throughout the world on the basis of their religion or beliefs. It notes that there is not only physical, but also psychological violence against persons because of their religion or beliefs and it condemns such violence in unequivocal terms.

2. The Assembly recalls that freedom of thought, conscience and religion are universal human rights enshrined in Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No. 5) and Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which every member State of the United Nations has committed to uphold: “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

3. The Assembly also wishes to draw attention to Article 18 of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and to the 1981 United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion and Belief; moreover, it reaffirms the utmost importance of the autonomy of religious communities and of their separation from the State, as well as of the neutrality and impartiality of the State on religious matters.

4. The Assembly has consistently drawn attention to the importance of upholding freedom of conscience and of religion, which can only be subject to the limitations that are necessary in a democratic society. The following texts are relevant in this context: Recommendation 1162 (1991) on the contribution of the Islamic civilisation to European culture; Recommendation 1396 (1999) on religion and democracy; Recommendation 1720 (2005) on education and religion; Resolution 1464 (2005) on women and religion in Europe; Resolution 1510 (2006) on freedom of expression and respect for religious beliefs; Recommendation 1804 (2007) on State, religion, secularity and human rights; Resolution 1535 (2007) on threats to the lives and freedom of expression of journalists; Resolution 1580 (2007) on the dangers of creationism in education; Resolution 1605 (2008) and Recommendation 1831 (2008) on European Muslim communities confronted with extremism; Recommendation 1805 (2007) on blasphemy, religious insults and hate speech against persons on grounds of their religion; Resolution 1743 (2010) and Recommendation 1927 (2010) on Islam, Islamism and Islamophobia in Europe; and Recommendation 1957 (2011) on violence against Christians in the Middle East.

5. It recalls, in particular, Resolution 1510 (2006) on freedom of expression and respect for religious beliefs, in which it stated that “freedom of expression as protected under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights should not be further restricted to meet increasing sensitivities of certain religious groups”. It emphasises that, as a general rule, freedom of expression should not be restricted to meet the sensitivities of any group in a democratic society.

6. The Assembly condemns any instances of negative stereotyping of persons based on religion as well as the advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.

7. The Assembly also wishes to insist on the need to combat all forms of religious fundamentalism and of manipulation of religious beliefs for terrorist purposes. Education and dialogue are two important tools that can contribute towards the prevention of such negative and dangerous trends.

8. While it is generally accepted that religious communities are better protected in Europe than in Africa, Asia and the Middle East, there are still problems being reported in Council of Europe member States. In some member States in particular, recent constitutional reforms raise serious concerns with regard to their compatibility with Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Assembly accepts that, if we are to be credible in our representations to non-member countries, such problems must be recognised, confronted and eliminated.

9. The Assembly therefore calls on member States to:

9.1. ensure equality of treatment before the State and public authorities of all individuals and communities regardless of religion, faith or non-religious beliefs;

9.2. reaffirm that respect of human rights, democracy and civil liberties is a common basis on which they build their relations with third countries, and ensure that a democracy clause, incorporating religious freedom, is included in agreements between them and third countries;

9.3. take account of the situation of religious communities in their bilateral political dialogue with the countries concerned, in particular those countries in which blasphemy laws are in force;

9.4. reaffirm that freedom of religion, conscience and belief is an essential part of the European human rights system guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights;

9.5. comply with their commitments and obligations to guarantee the full enjoyment of this fundamental right;

9.6. note the particular status of women and girls in many traditional religious settings, to protect women and girls and to ensure that religion can never be invoked to justify violence against women, such as honour killings, bride burning, forced marriages, female genital mutilation, even by members of their own religious communities;

9.7. promote, both at national and Committee of Ministers level, a policy which takes into consideration, in foreign relations, the question of the full respect for, and the effective protection of, the fundamental rights of minorities defined by their religion or beliefs;

9.8. ensure that the religious beliefs and traditions of individuals and communities of the society are respected, while guaranteeing that a due balance is struck with the rights of others in accordance with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights;

9.9. accommodate religious beliefs in the public sphere by guaranteeing freedom of thought in relation to health care, education and the civil service provided that the rights of others to be free from discrimination are respected and that the access to lawful services is guaranteed;

9.10. ensure the right to well-defined conscientious objection in relation to morally sensitive matters, such as military service or other services related to health-care and education, in line also with various recommendations already adopted by the Assembly, provided that the rights of others to be free from discrimination are respected and that the access to lawful services is guaranteed;

9.11. while guaranteeing the fundamental right of children to education in an objective, critical and pluralistic manner, respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions;

9.12. change their legal regulations whenever these go against the freedom of association for groups(including churches) defined by their religion or beliefs;

9.13. ensure the full respect of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights and relevant jurisprudence by the European Court of Human Rights since 1949 and that the freedom of communities and individuals defined by religion or belief is respected and exercised within the limits of the law;

9.14. recognise the need to provide international protection for those seeking asylum due to religious persecution;

9.15. duly take into account the possible overlap between racism, xenophobia and religious hatred, keeping in mind that these phenomena are often directed against migrant communities.

10. The Assembly further urges those non-member States which have the status of partner for democracy, to move steadily towards acceptance of the above principles and values and resolves to monitor their compliance.

11. The Assembly further urges all States in which violence against communities and individuals defined by religion or beliefs has occurred to:

11.1. unequivocally condemn not only attacks on innocent people, but also the use of violence in general, as well as all forms of discrimination and intolerance, including hate speech, based on religion and beliefs;

11.2. pursue and reinforce their efforts to combat and prevent such cases and bring to justice the perpetrators;

11.3. promote correct and objective education about religions and non-religious beliefs, including those of minorities;

11.4. actively support initiatives aimed at promoting the inter-religious and intercultural dimension of dialogue;

11.5. ensure the effective protection of communities and individuals defined by religion or beliefs and of their meeting places and places of worship, including those of minorities;

11.6. respect and protect the cultural heritage of the various religions.

12. The Assembly calls on all religious leaders in Europe to condemn attacks on religious communities and other faith groups, and to accept the principle of equal respect for all human beings regardless of their religion.

13. The Council of Europe urges member States where the restitution of church property is not yet concluded, to speed up this process and finish it in the short or medium term. The process should not be negatively affected or influenced by any political ideology or government.

14. Finally, the Assembly calls on the European Union, in its political dialogue with non-member countries, to enhance its monitoring of the situation of communities and individuals defined by religion or beliefs.

Recommendation 1518 (2001) - Exercise of the right of conscientious objection to military service in Council of Europe member states

Author(s): Parliamentary Assembly - Council of Europe

The Assembly recalls its Resolution 337 (1967) on the right of conscientious objection and Recommendation 816 (1977) on the right of conscientious objection to military service, and also Recommendation No. R (87) 8 of the Committee of Ministers regarding conscientious objection to compulsory military service. It notes that the exercise of the right of conscientious objection to military service has been an ongoing concern of the Council of Europe for over thirty years.

The right of conscientious objection is a fundamental aspect of the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights.

Most Council of Europe member states have introduced the right of conscientious objection into their constitutions or legislation. There are only five member states where this right is not recognised.

The position of conscientious objectors still differs considerably from one country to another, and differences in the law unfortunately result in varying levels of protection. The situation of conscientious objectors is therefore wholly unsatisfactory in member states that have recognised the right of conscientious objection.

The Assembly accordingly recommends that the Committee of Ministers invite those member states that have not yet done so to introduce into their legislation:

- the right to be registered as a conscientious objector at any time: before, during or after conscription, or performance of military service;

- the right for permanent members of the armed forces to apply for the granting of conscientious objector status;

- the right for all conscripts to receive information on conscientious objector status and the means of obtaining it;

- genuine alternative service of a clearly civilian nature, which should be neither deterrent nor punitive in character.

The Assembly also recommends that the Committee of Ministers incorporate the right of conscientious objection to military service into the European Convention on Human Rights by means of an additional protocol amending Articles 4.3.b and 9.

Recommendation 1957 (2011) - Violence against Christians in the Middle East

Author(s): Parliamentary Assembly - Council of Europe

Origin: Assembly debate on 27 January 2011 (7th Sitting) (see Doc. 12493, report of the Political Affairs Committee, rapporteur: Mr Volontè). Text adopted by the Assembly on 27 January 2011 (7th Sitting).

Eurovoc: RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION, FREEDOM OF RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, MIDDLE EAST, CULTURAL PLURALISM, CHRISTIAN, RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM.

1.    The Parliamentary Assembly recalls that Christianity had its beginnings in the Middle East two thousand years ago and that Christian communities have existed in the area since that time.

2.    These communities, which are made up of autochthonous people, have been declining in numbers for the last hundred years, mainly due to a combination of low birth rates and emigration, which, in some places, have been fuelled by discrimination and persecution.

3.    The situation has become more serious since the beginning of the 21st century and, if not properly addressed, could lead to the disappearance – in the short term – of Christian communities from the Middle East, which would entail the loss of a significant part of the religious heritage of the countries concerned.

4.    The number of attacks on Christian communities rose worldwide in 2010, as well as the number of trials and death sentences for blasphemy, which often affect women (as in the case of Mrs Asia Bibi in Pakistan).

5.    Relations between Christian communities in the Middle East and the Muslim majorities have not always been easy. Discrimination is reported throughout the region and extreme violence has occurred sporadically in several countries. Public authorities in some Muslim countries have not always conveyed the right signals about religious communities established in their respective countries.

6.    Two recent events were particularly tragic. On 31 October 2010, hostages were taken in the Syriac Catholic Cathedral of Our Lady of Salvation in Baghdad and ended in the massacre of worshippers: 58 died and 75 were wounded. A suicide bombing in a Coptic church in Alexandria killed 21 people and wounded 79 as worshippers were leaving midnight Mass on 1 January 2011.

7.    The Assembly condemns these attacks in unequivocal terms and expresses its sincere condolences to the families of the victims, its sympathy to the wounded and its solidarity with their families.

8.    It recalls that freedom of thought, freedom of conscience and freedom of religion, including the freedom to change one’s religion, are universal human rights, enshrined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which every member state of the United Nations has committed to guarantee. It wishes also to draw attention to Article 18 of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to the 1981 United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion and Belief, to the reports of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, and in particular the reports of 21 December 2009, 16 February 2010 and 29 July 2010, to Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No. 5) and to Article 10 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

9.    The coexistence of religious groups is a sign of pluralism and of an environment favourable to the development of democracy and human rights. The Assembly is convinced that the loss of Christian communities in the Middle East would also endanger Islam as it would signal the victory of fundamentalism.

10.    It wishes to raise awareness about the need to combat all forms of religious fundamentalism and the manipulation of religious beliefs for political reasons, which are so often the cause of present day terrorism. Education and dialogue are two important tools that could contribute towards the prevention of such evils.

11.    In the light of the increasing necessity to analyse and understand the evolution of cultural and religious developments in international relations and contemporary societies, the Assembly recommends that the Committee of the Ministers:

11.1.    develop a permanent capacity – in co-operation with the Commissioner for Human Rights and the Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs – to monitor the situation of governmental and societal restrictions on religious freedom and related rights in Council of Europe member states and in states in the Middle East, and report periodically to the Assembly;
11.2.    develop, as a matter of urgency, a Council of Europe strategy to ensure respect for freedom of religion (including the freedom to change one’s religion) as a human right, including a list of measures against states which knowingly fail to protect religious denominations;
11.3.    pay increased attention to the subject of freedom of religion or belief and to the situation of religious communities, including Christians, in its co-operation with third countries, as well as in human rights reports.
12.    The Assembly calls on member states to:

12.1.    reaffirm that the development of human rights, democracy and civil liberties is the common basis on which they build their relations with third countries and ensure that a “democracy clause” is included in the agreements between them and third countries;
13.    Following the adoption by the European Parliament of a resolution on the situation of Christians in the context of freedom of religion, on 20 January 2011, the Assembly calls on Turkey to clarify fully the circumstances surrounding the interruption of the celebration of Christmas Mass in the villages of Rizokarpaso and Ayia Triada in the northern part of Cyprus on 25 December 2010 and to bring those responsible to justice.

14.    The Assembly urges Iraq and Egypt to be transparent and determined in their attempts to bring the culprits of the attacks in Baghdad and in Alexandria to justice as rapidly as possible.

15.    The Assembly further urges all states in the Middle East to:

15.1.    condemn unequivocally not only deadly attacks on innocent people but also the use of violence in general, as well as all forms of discrimination and intolerance based on religion and beliefs;
15.2.    promote positive education about religions, including Christian minorities;
15.3.    support actively initiatives aimed at promoting the inter-religious dimension of dialogue.
16.    The Assembly calls on all religious leaders in Europe to condemn attacks on Christian communities and other faith groups, and to accept the basis of equal respect for each denomination.

17.    Finally, the Assembly calls on the European Union to enhance its monitoring of the situation of Christian and other religious communities in its political dialogue with the countries of the Middle East and to link its European Neighbourhood Policy, including financial aid, to the degree of human rights protection and awareness in those countries.

12.2. take account of the situation of Christian and other religious communities in their bilateral political dialogue with the countries concerned;
12.3. promote a policy, at national and Committee of Ministers’ level, which integrates the question of the respect for the fundamental rights of Christian minorities in foreign relations;
12.4. produce, promote and distribute educational materials addressing anti-Christian stereotypes and bias, as well as Christianophobia in general;
1.    12.5. refrain from encouraging the members of the Christian communities in the Middle East to seek refuge in Europe, except in cases where the survival of such communities becomes impossible; in the latter cases, member states should take fully into account the recommendations of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in dealing with asylum and return issues and fully comply with European Court of Human Rights judgments and interim measures under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court;
2.    12.6. develop a comprehensive policy on asylum based on religious grounds, which would acknowledge in particular the specific situation of those who convert to another religion;
3.    12.7. promote policies to help relocate Christian refugees in their home countries and to support communities offering a local refuge to the Christian minorities of the Middle East;
4.    12.8. support initiatives aimed at promoting dialogue among religious communities in the Middle East;
5.    12.9. promote and facilitate relations between the Christian diasporas and their original communities.

Recommendation 1927 (2010) - Islam, Islamism and Islamophobia in Europe

Author(s): Parliamentary Assembly - Council of Europe

Origin: Assembly debate on 23 June 2010 (23rd Sitting) (see Doc. 12266, report of the Committee on Culture, Science and Education, rapporteur: Mr Mogens Jensen; Doc. 12303, opinion of the Political Affairs Committee, rapporteur: Mr Hancock; Doc. 12305, opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, rapporteur: Mr Rafael Huseynov; and Doc. 12304, opinion of the Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men, rapporteur: Mrs Memecan). Text adopted unanimously by the Assembly on 23 June 2010 (23rd Sitting).

Eurovoc: DEMOCRACY, RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION, HUMAN RIGHTS, EUROPE, ISLAM, RULE OF LAW, MUSLIM.

1.    Referring to its Resolution 1743 (2010) on Islam, Islamism and Islamophobia in Europe, the Parliamentary Assembly emphasises the particular importance for the Council of Europe and its member states of increasing their action in this field. Under its Statute, it is a priority task for the Council of Europe to work towards ensuring freedom of thought, conscience and religion while combating religious intolerance and discrimination as well as religiously disguised attacks against the values it upholds. Member states should be guided by this recommendation and Resolution 1743 (2010).

2.    In order to construct on a daily basis a democratic society governed by the rule of law and universal human rights, the Council of Europe must step up its efforts to embed those values in European culture. Cultural and educational action by the Council of Europe is a necessary condition for both European integration based on common values and full understanding and respect for human rights, including political, social and cultural rights and freedoms. The Council of Europe should also seek to encourage other parts of the world to adopt and promote the values it upholds.

3.    Because of its Statute, geographical remit and experience, the Council of Europe should serve as the pan-European forum for discussing common strategies for strengthening democratic stability faced with Islamism, Islamophobia and other forms of political extremism in Europe. Therefore, the Assembly asks that the Committee of Ministers:

3.1.    ensure, through the general budget and voluntary contributions, that adequate funding is available for standard-setting and assistance and co-operation activities for member states and neighbouring regions in the fields of culture and education as well as migration and refugees;
3.2.    reinforce its activities to ensure that knowledge about Islam and other beliefs is taught at school and through lifelong education and that institutions of higher education and research in Europe provide Islamic studies in order to educate religious scholars, teachers and leaders;
3.3.    seek to enlarge geographically the Council of Europe treaties in the field of culture and education by opening them for signature by non-member states, in particular states from Eurasia, North Africa and the Middle East; this is particularly important with regard to the Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications concerning Higher Education in the European Region (ETS No. 165), the Council of Europe Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society (CETS No. 199) and the European Convention on Transfrontier Television (ETS No. 132) and its Amending Protocol (ETS No. 171);
3.4.    study the possibility of opening the geographical scope of the European Cultural Convention (ETS No. 18) to non-European states, for instance by drafting a protocol on education for human rights and democracy to this convention;
3.5.    actively seek accession by states in North Africa and the Middle East to the Council of Europe’s European Centre for Global Interdependence and Solidarity (North-South Centre) and, in particular, reinforce the programmes dealing with gender equality, specifically the combating of all forms of violence against women and the promotion of women’s participation in public decision making. In this context, the Assembly welcomes the accession of Morocco and Cape Verde to the North-South Centre;
3.6.    consider opening the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) to participation by non-member states, in particular from North Africa, the Middle East and Eurasia;
3.7.    consider opening the European Outline Convention on Transfrontier Co-operation between Territorial Communities or Authorities (ETS No. 106) for signature by non-member states, in particular from North Africa, the Middle East and Eurasia;
3.8.    set up joint programmes of activities of the Council of Europe with the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations;
3.9.    continue its important action on intercultural dialogue and its religious dimension, in particular its regular “exchanges on the religious dimension of intercultural dialogue”, and further the involvement of the Assembly in order to enhance the role of interparliamentary co-operation in this process;
3.10.    call on member states which have not already done so to sign and ratify the European Convention on the Legal Status of Migrant Workers (ETS No. 93) and the Convention on the Participation of Foreigners in Public Life at Local Level (ETS No. 144); the social and political inclusion of migrants and foreigners, who are often Muslims, will be essential for democratic cohesion and stability;
3.11.    seek to develop common political approaches by all member states towards non-European states which support Islamism in Europe and call, in this context, on member states which have not yet done so to sign and ratify the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism (ETS No. 90) and its Amending Protocol (ETS No. 190) and the Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism (CETS No. 196) in order to strengthen political and legal co-operation in this area;
3.12.    call on Switzerland to enact a moratorium on, and to repeal as soon as possible, its general prohibition on the construction of minarets for mosques, which discriminates against Muslim communities under Articles 9 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No. 5); the construction of minarets must be possible in the same way as the construction of church towers, subject to the requirements of public security and town planning;
3.13.    call on member states not to establish a general ban of full veiling or other religious or special clothing, but to protect women from all physical and psychological duress as well as to protect their free choice to wear religious or special clothing and ensure equal opportunities for Muslim women to participate in public life and pursue education and professional activities; legal restrictions on this freedom may be justified where necessary in a democratic society, in particular for security purposes or where public or professional functions of individuals require their religious neutrality or that their face can be seen;
3.14.    step up efforts to ensure that a convention to combat violence against women, including domestic violence, comes into being as swiftly as possible;
3.15.    invite states to guarantee women’s freedom of expression by penalising, on the one hand, all forms of coercion, oppression or violence that compel women to wear the veil or the full veil, and by creating, on the other hand, social and economic conditions enabling women to make informed choices though the promotion of genuine policies on equal opportunities for women and men which embody access to education, training, employment and housing.

Resolution 1743 (2010) - Islam, Islamism and Islamophobia in Europe

Author(s): Parliamentary Assembly - Council of Europe

Origin: Assembly debate on 23 June 2010 (23rd Sitting) (see Doc. 12266, report of the Committee on Culture, Science and Education, rapporteur: Mr Mogens Jensen; Doc. 12303, opinion of the Political Affairs Committee, rapporteur: Mr Hancock; Doc. 12305, opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, rapporteur: Mr Rafael Huseynov; and Doc. 12304, opinion of the Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men, rapporteur: Mrs Memecan). Text adopted unanimously by the Assembly on 23 June 2010 (23rd Sitting). See also Recommendation 1927 (2010).

Eurovoc: DEMOCRACY, RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION, HUMAN RIGHTS, EUROPE, ISLAM, RULE OF LAW, MUSLIM.

1.    The Parliamentary Assembly notes that Islamic radicalism and manipulation of religious beliefs for political reasons oppose human rights and democratic values. At the same time, in many Council of Europe member states, Muslims feel socially excluded, stigmatised and discriminated against; they become victims of stereotypes, social marginalisation and political extremism. The Assembly is deeply concerned about Islamic extremism as well as about extremism against Muslim communities in Europe. Both phenomena reinforce each other.

2.    The Assembly recalls that Islamism is the view that Islam is not only a religion but also a social, legal and political code of conduct. Islamism can be violent or mainstream and peaceful, but in both cases it does not accept the separation between religion and state, which is a fundamental principle of democratic and pluralistic societies. The Assembly also recalls that discrimination against Muslims is unacceptable and must be combated. A great majority of European Muslims share the principles at the basis of our societies and it is essential to fight against Islamophobia, which stems mainly from lack of awareness and from negative perceptions associating Islam with violence. Failing to address these issues, many European governments pave the way to the rise of extremism.

3.    Muslims are at home in Europe where they have been present for many centuries, as the Assembly noted in its Recommendation 1162 (1991) on the contribution of the Islamic civilisation to European culture. Islam, Judaism and Christianity – the three monotheist religions – share the same historic and cultural roots and recognise the same fundamental values, in particular the paramount value of human life and dignity, the ability and freedom to express thoughts, the respect for others and their property, and the importance of social welfare. Those values have been reflected by European philosophies and have been included in the European Convention on Human Rights (“the Convention”; ETS No. 5).

4.    Article 9 of the Convention guarantees freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the right to manifest one’s religion or belief, either alone or in community with others, in public or in private, in worship, teaching, practice and observance. Article 10 of the Convention enshrines freedom of expression, including the right to express religious or philosophical views or oppose and criticise them. Both freedoms constitute the necessary requirements for a democratic society. However, they are not absolute and may be subject to limits imposed under strict control. Moreover, in accordance with Article 17 of the Convention, they must not be abused for the destruction or undue limitation of any of the rights and freedoms set forth in the Convention.

5.    The Assembly has already stressed the importance of reconciling these two freedoms in its Resolution 1510 (2006) on freedom of expression and respect for religious beliefs, as well as its Recommendation 1805 (2007) on blasphemy, religious insults and hate speech against persons on grounds of their religion. The Assembly firmly condemns death decrees and threats against people who criticise Islam or political views linked to Islam. It regrets, however, the initiatives taken by a number of United Nations member states that have resulted in the Human Rights Council adopting resolutions on action against defamation of religions, and in particular Islam, as this strategy constitutes a threat to freedom of expression.

6.    Recalling its Recommendation 1804 (2007) on state, religion, secularity and human rights, the Assembly emphasises that democratic standards require a separation of the state and its organs from religions and religious organisations. Governments, parliaments and public administrations that democratically reflect and serve their society as a whole must be neutral towards all religious, agnostic or atheist beliefs. Nevertheless, religion and democracy are not incompatible, in particular as religions may play a beneficial social role. Member states should therefore encourage religious organisations to support actively peace, tolerance, solidarity and intercultural dialogue.

7.    The Assembly notes with concern, however, that some Islamic organisations active in member states have been initiated by governments abroad and receive financial support and political guidance from those governments. The objectives of such organisations are hence not religious. National political expansion into other states under the disguise of Islam should be brought to light. In keeping with Article 11 of the Convention, member states can limit the activities of such organisations on condition that such limitations satisfy the requirements set forth in paragraph 2 of Article 11. Therefore, member states should require transparency and accountability of Islamic as well as other religious associations, for instance by requiring transparency of their statutory objectives, leadership, membership and financial resources.

8.    As the Assembly indicated in its Recommendation 1774 (2006) on the Turkish presence in Europe: migrant workers and new European citizens, member governments and parliaments as well as the Council of Europe must give priority to fostering the social inclusion of Muslims and other religious minorities. The many efforts undertaken by member states to better integrate migrants are to be commended, but this integration is often still far from reality, in particular with regard to Muslim migrants. Thus, the Assembly invites member states to be proactive in dealing with social, economic and political inequalities.

9.    The Assembly calls on member states to effectively address the social and economic exclusion of Muslims and other minorities in Europe – including through the adoption, implementation and regular monitoring of comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation, policies and practices to protect them from the day-to-day discrimination they face and to ensure better access to legal remedies when their rights have been violated.

10.    While organisational structures of Muslim communities in member states are desirable in order to facilitate contacts with governmental and administrative bodies, member governments and parliaments should also seek to establish direct political contacts with Muslims as equal citizens. Such direct contacts could be facilitated, for example, through public hearings at local and regional levels as well as through regional and national discussion platforms on the Internet. Referring to Recommendation 170 (2005) of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe on intercultural and inter-faith dialogue: initiatives and responsibilities of local authorities, the Assembly calls on national parliaments to ensure that local authorities in their countries have the necessary legal, administrative and financial frameworks for local activities intended to foster social inclusion and intercultural dialogue.

11.    It is necessary that persons belonging to a minority culture in their country do not isolate themselves and do not attempt to develop a parallel society. Thus the Assembly calls on the representatives of the Muslim communities to encourage intercultural dialogue and fight against divisions which would otherwise lead to societal frictions and conflicts. Recalling its Resolution 1605 (2008) and Recommendation 1831 (2008) on European Muslim communities confronted with extremism, the Assembly invites Muslims, their religious communities and their religious leaders to combat any form of extremism under the cover of Islam. Islam is a religion which upholds peace. Muslims should be the first to react with dismay and opposition when terrorists or political extremists use Islam for their own power struggle and thus disrespect the fundamental value of human life and other values enshrined in Islam.

12.    The Assembly deplores that a growing number of political parties in Europe exploit and encourage fear of Islam and organise political campaigns which promote simplistic and negative stereotypes concerning Muslims in Europe and often equate Islam with extremism. It is inadmissible to incite intolerance and sometimes even hatred against Muslims. The Assembly calls on member states to pursue political action in accordance with General Policy Recommendation No. 5 (2000) of the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) on combating intolerance and discrimination against Muslims. It reiterates that it is for the member states to reject political statements that stir up fear and hatred of Muslims and Islam, while complying with the stipulations of the Convention, in particular Article 10.2.

13.    The Assembly also remains concerned at policies and practices – by both national as well as regional and local authorities – that discriminate against Muslims and at the danger of the abuse of popular votes, initiatives and referenda to legitimise restrictions on the rights to freedom of religion and expression which are unacceptable under Articles 9 and 10 of the Convention. In this context, the Assembly is particularly concerned about the recent referendum in Switzerland and urges the Swiss authorities to enact a moratorium on and repeal as soon as possible, the general prohibition on the construction of minarets for mosques.

14.    Recalling its Resolution 1464 (2005) on women and religion in Europe, the Assembly calls on all Muslim communities to abandon any traditional interpretations of Islam which deny gender equality and limit women’s rights, both within the family and in public life. This interpretation is not compatible with human dignity and democratic standards; women are equal to men in all respects and must be treated accordingly, with no exceptions. Discrimination against women, whether based on religious traditions or not, goes against Articles 8, 9 and 14 of the Convention, Article 5 of its Protocol No. 7 and its Protocol No. 12. No religious or cultural relativism may be invoked to justify violations of personal integrity. The Parliamentary Assembly therefore urges member states to take all necessary measures to stamp out radical Islamism and Islamophobia, of which women are the prime victims.

15.    In this respect, the veiling of women, especially full veiling through the burqa or the niqab, is often perceived as a symbol of the subjugation of women to men, restricting the role of women within society, limiting their professional life and impeding their social and economic activities. Neither the full veiling of women, nor even the headscarf, are recognised by all Muslims as a religious obligation of Islam, but they are seen by many as a social and cultural tradition. The Assembly considers that this tradition could be a threat to women’s dignity and freedom. No woman should be compelled to wear religious apparel by her community or family. Any act of oppression, sequestration or violence constitutes a crime that must be punished by law. Women victims of these crimes, whatever their status, must be protected by member states and benefit from support and rehabilitation measures.

16.    For this reason, the possibility of prohibiting the wearing of the burqa and the niqab is being considered by parliaments in several European countries. Article 9 of the Convention includes the right of individuals to choose freely to wear or not to wear religious clothing in private or in public. Legal restrictions to this freedom may be justified where necessary in a democratic society, in particular for security purposes or where public or professional functions of individuals require their religious neutrality or that their face can be seen. However, a general prohibition of wearing the burqa and the niqab would deny women who freely desire to do so their right to cover their face.

17.    In addition, a general prohibition might have the adverse effect of generating family and community pressure on Muslim women to stay at home and confine themselves to contacts with other women. Muslim women could be further excluded if they were to leave educational institutions, stay away from public places and abandon work outside their communities, in order not to break with their family tradition. Therefore, the Assembly calls on member states to develop targeted policies intended to raise Muslim women’s awareness of their rights, help them to take part in public life and offer them equal opportunities to pursue a professional life and gain social and economic independence. In this respect, the education of young Muslim women as well as of their parents and families is crucial. It is especially necessary to remove all forms of discrimination against girls and to develop education on gender equality, without stereotypes and at all levels of the education system.

18.    Female genital mutilation under the pretext of Islamic or other customs should be considered as a crime as it violates the right to physical and moral integrity of all individuals and especially of girls. Member states must do their utmost to put an end to this crime and provide practical help to children and their parents, including in particular through education. The Assembly recalls in this context its Resolution 1247 (2001) on female genital mutilation.

19.    The Assembly accordingly urges member states to take every step to prevent and combat all forms of oppression or violence undergone by women and, in particular, as part of the negotiations for the future Council of Europe convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence, to support the provisions enabling women irrespective of their origin or status to have access to protection, prevention and rehabilitation facilities.

20.    Stereotypes, misunderstandings and fears with regard to Islam are typical symptoms of a widespread lack of adequate knowledge among non-Muslims in Europe. Similarly, many Muslims in Europe lack adequate knowledge of Islam let alone other religions, which can make them vulnerable to “Islamism” as a religiously disguised form of political extremism. In this context, the Assembly recalls its Recommendation 1720 (2005) on education and religion and calls on member states to ensure that knowledge about Islam, Judaism and Christianity is taught at school and through lifelong education.

21.    Teaching about religions should be supported by member states, to raise public awareness of the common origin and values of Judaism, Christianity and Islam and their impact on modern European humanism. Institutions of higher education and research in Europe should provide Islamic studies in order to educate religious scholars, teachers and leaders and distinguish Islam from Islamism. The Assembly is confident that most European Muslims accept a common approach reconciling Islam with democratic values, human rights and the rule of law; indeed, many have done so for a long time.

22.    The Assembly also welcomes the White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue prepared by the Council of Europe during the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue in 2008 as well as other activities by the Committee of Ministers in this field. Member governments should use the White Paper in their related national action, including in schools and educational institutions.

23.    It is important to create synergies with other international organisations in this respect. Therefore, the Assembly invites the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations to co-operate more closely with the Council of Europe, in particular by setting up joint programmes of action. In this context, the Assembly invites the Secretary General of the Council of Europe to seek additional funding for such activities through member states and facilitate reciprocal secondment of staff between the two organisations.

24.    The Assembly invites the Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (ISESCO) and the Arab League Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization (ALECSO) to work with the Council of Europe on combating Islamism and Islamophobia or other religious discrimination as well as on promoting the respect for universal human rights. ISESCO and ALESCO can be particularly important in ensuring that their members respect the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) of the United Nations.

25.    In this context, the Assembly regrets that some member governments of ISESCO and ALECSO have adopted national legislation based on an interpretation of Sharia law or have pursued national policies which are in conflict with the ICCPR and the ICESCR: imposing severe penalties or even the death penalty on persons wishing to adopt a religion other than Islam is incompatible with Article 18 (2) ICCPR; imposing severe sanctions on, or passing public death decrees against, persons who have criticised Islam is incompatible with Article 19 of the ICCPR; calling for a “holy war” or violence against other countries or their citizens and glorifying terrorists as “holy martyrs” is incompatible with Article 20 (2) of the ICCPR; educating children to hate or fight persons of faiths other than Islam is incompatible with Article 13 (1) of the ICESCR.

26.    Contacts between Muslim and non-Muslim Europeans and Muslims in North Africa, the Middle East and Asia should be facilitated, in particular among young people, students and teachers. The Assembly invites, therefore, the European Youth Forum to expand its activities in this field. Co-operation between educational and cultural institutions as well as cities around the Mediterranean Basin should be supported, for instance in the framework of the Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications concerning Higher Education in the European Region (ETS No. 165) and the European Outline Convention on Transfrontier Co-operation between Territorial Communities or Authorities (CETS No. 106).