11 February 2015 marks the 36th anniversary of the Islamic regime in Iran. Karim Lahidji, President of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), answers questions about freedoms and liberties in Iran today. The very experienced and well-respected Iranian exile recalls briefly the historical background and states the record on freedom of religion in Iran: Read the rest of this entry »
Posts Tagged ‘freedom of religion’
Interview with Karim Lahidji on the 36th anniversary of the Islamic regime in Iran
February 18, 2015NGOs call for United Nations to pressure Laos on human rights during UPR
December 8, 2014On 3 December 2014 the Center for Public Policy Analysis (CPPA), the Lao Movement for Human Rights (LMHR), and a coalition of other NGOs called for United Nations to urge the government of Laos to cease ongoing human rights violations and to restore fundamental human freedoms. They are also calling for the release of Sombath Somphone and other imprisoned Lao and Hmong political and religious dissidents.
In advance of Lao People’s Democratic Republic (LPDR)’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) scheduled for 20 January 2015 in Geneva, the Geneva-based UPR-Info invited diplomats to hear the concerns of civil society organizations at a UPR pre-session in Geneva. Twenty one representatives from the Geneva-based missions attended the pre-session.
“We have deep concerns about violations of freedom of expression, enforced disappearances and religious freedom in Laos. Regretting that Lao PDR has not implemented recommendations it accepted at its first UPR in 2010, she urged States to raise concerns on these human rights abuses and presented concrete recommendations for human rights progress in Laos,” stated Thephsouvanh, speaking on behalf of the LMHR, which is also a member of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH).
Saudi Arabia criticises Norway over human rights record: that is news..
April 30, 2014Saudi Arabia has criticised Norway’s human rights record, accusing the country of failing to protect its Muslim citizens and not doing enough to counter criticism of the prophet Mohammed. The gulf state and other islamic countries called for all criticism of religions and of prophet Mohammed to be made illegal in Norway. It also expressed concern at “increasing cases of domestic violence, rape crimes and inequality in riches” and noted a continuation of hate crimes against Muslims in the country. Russia also called for Norway to clamp down on expressions of religious intolerance and and criticised the country’s child welfare system. They also recommended that Norway improve its correctional facilities for those applying for asylum status. All this happened when Norway submitted itself to scrutiny during the current session of the United Nations’ Universal Periodic Review.
The criticism may sound incongruent for those who know how often Russia and Saudi Arabia figure in reports from human rights defenders, including ib this blog, but – as the Norwegian Foreign Minister, Børge Brende, in Geneva told Norway’s NTB newswire prior to the hearing – “… that is the United Nations”.
Saudi Arabia criticises Norway over human rights record – News – The Independent.
Dutch Advisory Council broadly endorses Government’s human rights policy
January 10, 2014On 24 September 2013 the Dutch Advisory Council on International Affairs [AIV] published its advice on the Government’s policy letter (a kind of white paper) on human rights (“Respect and Justice for All”) of June 2013. The Council, which can be quite critical, has broadly endorsed the proposed policy. The link to the full document is below but the highlights are as follows: Read the rest of this entry »
Pussy Riot freed in Russia but the bigger issue is blasphemy laws everywhere
December 24, 2013
(Pussy Riot’s members with their distinctive coloured balaclavas)
The two remaining members of Russian punk band Pussy Riot, whose incarceration sparked a global outcry, have been released under an amnesty law, but Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and Maria Alyokhina dismissed the amnesty as a publicity stunt before the Sochi Winter Olympics in February.They both promised to continue their vocal opposition to the government. The women were jailed in August 2012 after performing a protest song in Moscow’s main cathedral. Alyokhina’s first words and actions after being freed serve as a sign that this fight is likely to go on. The case divided Russia with many feeling the women were being too harshly treated and made examples of as part of attempts to clamp down on opposition to the government. But others felt their actions were a gross offence to the Orthodox faith. The act was seen as blasphemous by many others e.g. in Greece here and was condemned by several Orthodox Churches. However, their conviction for “hooliganism motivated by religious hatred” was criticised by rights groups [AI declared them prisoners of conscience], celebrities [such as Sting, the Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Madonna and Yoko Ono ], anti-Putin activists and foreign governments.
This should make us look again a the issue of blasphemy in general. The crime of criticizing a religion is not always called blasphemy; sometimes it is categorized as hate speech (even when it falls well below any sensible standard of actually inciting hatred or violence) because it supposedly insults the followers of a religion. These crimes—of expressing ‘blasphemy’ or offending religious feelings—are still a crime in 55 countries, can mean prison in 39 of those countries, and are punishable by death in six countries.
Recently, Ireland and the Netherlands started the process of removing some or part of their blasphemy laws. The arguments in these debates have universal validity.
Human Rights First and other NGOs have reported on human rights abuses caused by the use of blasphemy laws around the world. These laws are often vague and can be subject to abuse, either by the authorities or citizens who can accuse a fellow citizen of blasphemy with a personal complaint to the prosecutor. The concept is inconsistent with universal human rights standards, which protect the rights of individuals rather than abstract ideas or religions. Those accused of blasphemy are frequently threatened or attacked even before any investigation. People take to the streets and violence stoked by religious extremists ensues. Blasphemy laws have been used to justify violence and oppression against minorities. Blasphemy laws enable governments to restrict freedom of expression, thought, and religion. Application of the laws can result in devastating consequences for religious minorities. This has been the case for Christians in Pakistan and Egypt, Ahmadi followers in Indonesia, and non-believers in Turkey and Saudi Arabia. In many instances, officials fail to condemn abuses or to hold the perpetrators of violence accountable. And the police often fail to stop violence against religious minorities or to protect those endangered on account of such laws.
In the past few years, several bodies of the United Nations have examined the relationship between freedom of expression and hate speech, especially in relation to religious issues. After extensive consultation with governments and civil society, the Rabat Plan of Action was published by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in October 2012. This document outlines how blasphemy laws are problematic. Since 2011, a new process dubbed the Istanbul Process was launched as a result of resolutions adopted at the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly. The idea is to combat religious intolerance without restricting freedom of speech but whether that is possible is a big question.
Lessons of the Debate Over Ireland’s Blasphemy Law | Human Rights First
http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/Blasphemy_Cases.pdf.
BBC News – Pussy Riot: Russia frees jailed punk band members.
“I have a dream…..” – King inspires Human Rights Defenders around the globe
September 2, 2013On 28 August 2013, 50 years after Dr. Martin Luther King delivered his historic “I Have a Dream” speech, Corinne Duffy of Human Rights First (HRF) gives an interesting palette of stories how his words and action continue to inspire HRDs everywhere: 
Pakistan: Christians, Muslims HRDs join against human rights violations
August 19, 2013
Joseph DeCaro of Worthy Christian News reports on 19 August 2013 how human rights defenders could play a role in preventing the escalation of religious conflict in Pakistan: Read the rest of this entry »
Malaysian NGO uses UN review to accuse government of harassing human rights defenders
March 17, 2013
In the lead up to the Malaysia’s Universal Periodic Review, a delegation from Suaram (Suara Inisiatif Sdn Bhd) under the accreditation of Aliran (Persatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara) attended the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva last week. The group submitted an oral statement as part of the Interactive Dialogue on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders urging the Malaysian Government to allow the Special Rapporteur Ms Margaret Sekaggya to carry out an independent inquiry. The statement touched on the intensified threats against Bersih steering committee members, native rights defenders in East Malaysia, Lynas activists and the ongoing harassment and intimidation against Suaram.
The group also submitted an oral statement as part of the Interactive Dialogue on Freedom of Religion or Belief. The statement highlighted a number of cases where freedom of religion was not respected, in relation to the ability of individuals to decide which faith they wished to practice. It highlighted how children in Malaysia are often exposed to religious instruction against their will, citing the example of the Orang Asli children who were slapped by a teacher at a school in 2012 for not reciting the doa (Islamic prayer). It also covered the controversial “Allah” issue and the bureaucratic obstructions that non-Muslims often face when constructing a place of worship in Malaysia.
The ongoing persecution and harassment of Malaysia’s human rights defenders is a blatantly obvious example as is ignoring the rights of minorities and indigenous people stated Suaram. http://aliran.com/11976.html
Human Rights First gives Obama its agenda for human rights
November 8, 2012
(Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Human Rights First (HRF), a New York based international NGO and member on the Jury of the Martin Ennals Award, reacted with speed to Obama’s reelection and issued a statement of what it thinks is ready for bi-partisan action on human rights:
1. Champion Women’s Rights. A record number of women will serve in the U.S. Senate in January. And Republicans and Democrats—men and women—agree on the importance of protecting women’s rights around the world. The Obama administration and Congress should work together to make sure that women’s rights are enshrined in the Egyptian constitution and that women in the region who stood side by side with men in demanding their freedom are fully represented in public life, including in elected legislatures, and not forced out of the public square.
2. Support Freedom. Last night, President Obama said, “We can never forget that as we speak people in distant nations are risking their lives right now just for a chance to argue about the issues that matter.” The United States should stand with those people. That means pressing our allies—like Bahrain—to stop cracking down on dissent. It means working effectively with the international community to bring an end to the human rights crisis in Syria. And it means supporting activists in repressive societies like Russia, China, and Cuba.
3. Protect Freedom of Religion. As the recent furor over the anti-Islam film showed, the second Obama administration will have to navigate difficult issues at the intersection of religion and foreign policy. In his second term, the President should push back against efforts to impose an international standard outlawing “defamation of religions,” which would be used, like national blasphemy laws in countries like Pakistan, to persecute religious minorities and restrict freedom of speech, and which would fuel sectarian violence and empower extremists.
4. Protect Gay and Lesbian People from Violence. Voters in Maryland, Maine, and Washington voted to legalize same-sex marriage-the first time gay marriage won at the ballot box. Wisconsin elected the first openly gay U.S. Senator. But while the tide of public opinion on gay rights has rapidly turned here, around the world, gay and lesbian people face discrimination and violence. In his second term, President Obama should build on the work of his first to provide protection for gay and lesbian people, including those forced to flee for their safety.
5. Provide Safe Haven for Refugees. Washington may finally be poised to tackle comprehensive immigration reform. While this issue has been politically challenging, there is broad bipartisan support for keeping America’s promise to be a refuge for those fleeing oppression. For starters, that means reforming the policies that land those seeking freedom in jail.
6. Close Guantanamo. Before it became a political football, national security experts and elected officials from both parties agreed that Guantanamo needed to close. President George W. Bush said he wanted to close it. Senator John McCain campaigned on it. And on his second full day in office, President Obama, flanked by retired Admirals and Generals, promised to do it. He doubled down on the Daily Show right before the election. Now it’s time to get it done. This is a legacy issue.
http://actions.humanrightsfirst.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=6824
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 