Speaking Up for Religious Liberty:  NGO Action at the UN

Gianfranco Rossi

Representative to the United Nations

International Association for Religious Freedom

Geneva

                There are big problems concerning religious liberty in many countries of the world. There are different ways for trying to reach solutions to these problems. One of them is through the activities of non-governmental organizations at the United Nations. As an international organization, the UN has the authority and responsibility to pressure the governments of member states to solve religious liberty problems. In consultative status with the United Nations, the NGOs can make the UN, its various agencies, and its member states aware of issues by providing timely, factual information about violations of the right to freedom of religion and belief. Some of my personal experiences illustrate what UN NGOs can do in favor of religious liberty.

                The most important document of the United Nations dealing with religious liberty is the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief adopted by the General Assembly on November 25, 1981. The draft of the declaration was prepared by the UN Human Rights Commission in Geneva. Several non-governmental organizations contributed significantly. As an NGO representative, I took the opportunity to cooperate with some of the governmental delegations (Canada, the Netherlands, the Philippines, and the United States), suggesting to them the inclusion of a paragraph very important to some religious minorities. My suggestion was accepted, and so among the several liberties listed in Article 6 of the Declaration as being included in “the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief” is the freedom “[t]o observe days of rest and to celebrate holidays and ceremonies in accordance with the precepts of one’s religion or belief” (Section (h)). The quoting of this section has helped solve many problems in many countries concerning the liberty of Jews and Seventh-day Adventists to observe Saturday as their religious day of rest. In Italy, Poland, and Spain, for example, the right to observe the seventh-day Sabbath is even expressly guaranteed by law.

                Ever since the adoption of this declaration in 1981 the General Assembly and the Human Rights Commission have always included in their annual agendas an item concerning its implementation. This has prompted open discussion in New York and especially in Geneva. Member states and NGOs denounce violations of the declaration, call for increased respect of religious liberty, and request the HRC to take necessary measures. But because of political affinities, economic interests, or other reasons, the member states tend to be selective in their interventions for religious freedom. They speak about some countries; they do not speak about certain other countries.

                But according to former French Prime Minister Michel Rocard (addressing the HRC), “When the states keep silent, the NGOs speak.” Thus did Mr. Rocard clearly acknowledge the irreplaceable role played by NGOs. The NGOs will address matters to UN agencies when the governmental delegations keep silence. The duty of non-governmental organizations is not to speak against nations and governments, but for human rights and for religious freedom in the countries where human rights and religious freedom are violated.

                I recall Communist Albania, a country--the only one in the world!--that constitutionally and culturally  prohibited the right to freedom of religion as a way of life. On several occasions, I intervened before the HRC and appropriate subcommissions to deplore the violation of religious liberty. But the member states were silent.  Eventually, I succeeded in convincing some of the members of the Subcommission on Human Rights to adopt a resolution, subsequently endorsed by the full HRC, urging the Albanian government to respect human rights, including the right to religious liberty. Before its fall, Albania’s Communist regime changed its attitude regarding religious freedom.

                A similar case is that of Saudi Arabia, arguably the most religious liberty-repressive nation in the world.  Apart from Islam, all other religions are forbidden. But in this country we count approximately 500,000 Christians who are guest workers. Officially, they cannot have churches, nor may they gather in private homes to celebrate their religious rites with a pastor or a priest. The list of massive, systematic violations of human rights has lengthened over time. But what nation has ever intervened publicly at the HRC to denounce these violations? For years I have spoken to the HRC and to the Subcommission on Human Rights about the situation in Saudi Arabia. Earlier this year--1997-- I provided to the delegation of each nation member of the UN Human Rights Commission a letter with two important reports concerning the violations of human rights in Saudi Arabia. I have learned this effort was deemed a positive contribution. In an open address to the HRC, the representative of the Netherlands referred to the violations of human rights in Saudi Arabia--and he said he was speaking on behalf of the other nations in the European Community. Then, in private, the HRC decided to continue its examination of the situation in Saudi Arabia.

                Experience has taught me that determination and perseverance are required to change the status quo.

                The UN Human Rights Commission offers to NGOs much more than the privilege to present statements--oral and written. Here we have the opportunity to establish direct relations with the representatives of nearly every nation in the world. And since the member states do not like to have their human rights violations publicly exposed by the  NGOs, they are more disposed to discuss with NGO officers the solutions to perceived problems. I know this to be so from personal dialogues with, to offer a couple of examples,  Burundi’s and Russia’s delegations in Geneva. These discussions led to meetings in Bujumbura and Moscow which, in turn, produced happy results.

                Non-governmental organizations are able to contribute to the solution of religious liberty problems by submitting data to the UN’s special rapporteur on religious intolerance, Professor Abdelfattah Amor. I know him to be completely committed to the defense of religious freedom--with intelligence, courage, and wisdom. His clarification of an essential dimension of religious liberty--the freedom to change religion--is particularly helpful in Islamic countries where extremism requires the execution of Muslims who convert. In support of his clarification, the special rapporteur quoted from the second important UN document on religious freedom:  the General Comment on Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In 1993 this General Comment was adopted by the UN’s Human Rights Committee, a body of 18 experts of high moral character and recognized competence in the field of human rights established to promote implementation of the covenant. Here it is specified that, among other things, the right to religious freedom includes “the right to replace one’s current religion or belief with another.” 

                Because of the position of the Islamic nations, it was not easy for the committee to include this sentence in its General Comment. But two non-governmental organizations contributed to the process, one of them being the Association Internationale pour la Defense de la Liberte Religieuse. Over many months I wrote letters to and talked personally with committee members, especially those coming from Islamic countries. It was a major victory.

                The General Comment on Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights includes another paragraph particularly important to religious minorities and new religious movements because it clarifies the scope and the meaning of the right to religious freedom proclaimed in the article itself:

                “Article 18 is not limited in its application to traditional religions or to religions and beliefs with institutional characteristics or practices analogous to those of traditional religions. The Committee therefore views with concern any tendency to discriminate against any religion or belief for any reason, including the fact that they are newly established, or represent religious minorities that may be subject to hostility by a predominant religious community.”

                The ICCPR is an international legal instrument. The more than 135 nations which have ratified or acceded to the ICCPR are obligated to give the force of law to all the rights it proclaims, including the right to freedom of religion, and to report to the UN Human Rights Committee on measures adopted to make effective the identified rights.  Usually it takes a couple of days for the committee to examine the report of a signatory state. Committee members then put questions to the state’s representative regarding implementation of the covenant. They may even recommend specific action to implement Article 18's objectives for freedom of religion and belief. Legislative changes advancing religious liberty have resulted from this procedure. And NGOs can and do participate  by providing the committee with data regarding religious liberty in states which are parties to the covenant.

                Again, NGO cooperation with the United Nations is truly an important method for reaching practical solutions in matters of religious liberty.

                Prior to his present service with the International Association for Religious Freedom, Dr. Rossi was for many years the secretary general of the Association Internationale pour la Defense de la Liberte Religieuse based in Bern. This article was condensed and edited from an address Dr. Rossi presented at the International Religious Liberty Association’s Fourth World Congress on Religious Liberty, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1997.

TOP