|
March 25, 2009 — Congressman Trent Franks (AZ-02), co-chair of the Congressional International Religious Freedom Caucus, today sent a letter to several foreign Ambassadors in Washington, D.C., urging their respective country's delegations to the United Nations Human Rights Council to vote "no" tomorrow on the "defamation of religions" resolution.
"Though justified by its proponents as protecting religious practice and promoting tolerance, the flawed “defamation of religions” concept in fact promotes intolerance and human rights violations, including violations of religious freedom and freedom of expression." Franks wrote. "The concept improperly subordinates internationally-guaranteed individual rights to the purported rights of religions. It also empowers repressive governments and religious extremists to suppress and punish whatever they deem to be offensive or unacceptable speech about a particular, favored religion or sect. The concept has been used in some states to justify actions that selectively curtail civil dissent, halt criticism of political or religious structures, and restrict the religious speech of minority faith communities, dissenting members of the majority faith, and persons of no religious faith."
"Many of the countries promoting this concept have laws that are similar to the defamation prohibition in their own countries. These laws allow criminal charges to be levied against individuals for defaming, denigrating, insulting, offending, disparaging, and blaspheming Islam, often resulting in gross human rights violations."
Congressman Franks urged opposition to this resolution because it reverses the universal standard protecting the rights of individuals to the freedom of expression and religious belief, while elevating the purported rights of "religions". The resolution would allow foreign governments to limit fundamental human rights when the state deems their beliefs to be merely "offensive". One notable example of this occurred in 2007, when Egyptian blogger Abdel Kareem Amer Soliman was sentenced to four years in prison, three of which were for charges of insulting Islam on his personal web blog.
Franks noted several recent examples of how domestic laws against defamation in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia have led to greater violations of human rights.
"International human rights law protects individuals, not religions or belief systems, and the individual right to freedom of religion or belief does not include the right to have one’s religion or belief be free from criticism." He stated in the letter. "Religious intolerance and discrimination can best be fought not through national or international legal prohibitions that purport to stop “defamation of religions,” but rather through efforts to encourage respect for the human rights of every individual."
The current resolution will come up for a vote at the Council in Geneva tomorrow.
|
