UNITED
NATIONS
Distr.
Economic and Social GENERAL
Council
E/CN.4/1999/58
11 January 1999
ENGLISH
Original: ENGLISH/FRENCH/
SPANISH
COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
Fifty-fifth session
Item 11 (e) of the provisional agenda
CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS, INCLUDING RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE
Report submitted by Mr. Abdelfattah Amor, Special Rapporteur, in
accordance with Commission on Human Rights resolution 1998/18
CONTENTS
Paragraphs Page
Introduction
I. INITIATIVES BY THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR
TO IDENTIFY LEGISLATION AND CONDUCT
STUDIES IN THE FIELD OF TOLERANCE AND
NON-DISCRIMINATION CONCERNING RELIGION OR
BELIEF AND TO DEVELOP A CULTURE OF TOLERANCE
A. Legislation
1- 2 3
3-13 3
3-5 3
4
4
B. Studies 6
II. INITIATIVES BY STATES AND NON-GOVERNMENTAL
ORGANIZATIONS
14 - 16
III. IN SITU VISITS AND FOLLOW-UP 17 - 22
E
C. Culture of tolerance 7 - 13
6
8
GE.99-10095 (E)
E/CN.4/1999/ 58
page 2
CONTENTS ( continued)
Paragraphs Page
IV. POSITION AS REGARDS COMMUNICATIONS SENT BY
THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR AND REPLIES RECEIVED
FROM STATES SINCE THE COMMISSION'S
FIFTY-FOURTH SESSION 23 - 114 9
A. Summary of communications sent and
replies received 24 - 103 10
B. Jthalysis of communications 104 - 114 26
V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 115 - 127 28
A. Internal factors 118 - 122 30
B. External factors . . 123 - 127 31
Annex: Follow-up of the missions to Australia and Germany . . . . 33
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 3
I n t r o du c t ion
1. At its forty-second session, the Commission on Human Rights decided, in
resolution 1986/20 of 10 March 1986, to appoint for one year a special
rapporteur to examine incidents and governmental action in all parts of the
world inconsistent with the provisions of the Declaration on the Elimination
of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief,
and to recommend remedial measures for such situations.
2. In accordance with that resolution, the previous and current Special
Rapporteurs have submitted the following reports to the Commission on Human
Rights since 1987: E/CN.4/1987/35; E/CN.4/1988/45 and Add.1; E/CN.4/1989/44;
E/CN.4/1990/46; E/CN.4/1991/56; E/CN.4/1992/52; E/CN.4/1993/62 and Add.1 and
Corr.1; E/CN.4/1994/79; E/CN.4/1995/91 and Add.1; E/CN.4/1996/95 and Add.1
and 2; E/CN.4/1997/91 and Add.1; E/CN.4/1998/6 and Add.1 and 2). Since 1994,
reports have also been submitted to the General Assembly (A/50/440; A/51/542;
A/52/477 and Add.1, A/53/279) . The present report is submitted in accordance
with Commission on Human Rights resolution 1998/18 of 9 April 1998.
I. INITIATIVES BY THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR TO IDENTIFY
LEGISLATION AND CONDUCT STUDIES IN THE FIELD OF
TOLERANCE AND NON-DISCRIMINATION CONCERNING RELIGION
OR BELIEF AND TO DEVELOP A CULTURE OF TOLERANCE
A. Legislation
3. The Special Rapporteur deems it necessary to establish a compendium of
national enactments on or relating to freedom of religion and belief (see
E/CN.4/1998/6, para. 16) . This initiative was taken in the framework of
the 1981 Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief and various resolutions of the
Commission on Human Rights and General Assembly; it also addresses the
recommendations made in the studies of several special rapporteurs and in the
reports of the Secretary-General in the field of religion and belief (see
E/CN.4/1998/6, chap. II).
4. The Special Rapporteur's aim is to create a basic reference work, to be
updated regularly. This international compendium would serve several
purposes:
(a) Provision of accurate information on the legal position of States
and its evolution in matters relating to religion and belief;
(b) Preparation of a comparative study of national legislation and its
conformity with international law to serve as a mutually influencing factor
between bodies of legislation and encourage States to communicate information
on their legislative advances;
(c) Examination of allegations received in the field of tolerance and
non-discrimination based on religion or belief;
(d) Preparation of in situ visits and their follow-up;
E/CN.4/1999/ 58
page 4
(e) Contribution to research and studies on religion and belief;
(f) Contribution to the preparation of the technical cooperation
programmes of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights on freedom of religion and belief.
S. To date the Special Rapporteur has received replies from the
following 48 States to his request for the text of the constitutions in force
or any equivalent instruments, and also legislation and regulations relating
to religious freedom and the practice of worship: Algeria, Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Chile, Cyprus, Cuba,
Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Estonia,
Ethiopia, Finland, France, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait,
Malta, Mauritius, Namibia, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of
Korea, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles, Slovakia, Sudan, Sweden,
Switzerland, Syrian Arab Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
Turkey, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Uruguay,
Venezuela, Viet Nam and Yugoslavia.
B. Studies
6. In order to encourage reflection on and analysis of matters of freedom
of religion and belief, while giving greater consideration to priority issues
such as economic, social and cultural rights, the right to development, gender
issues and women's rights, the Special Rapporteur wishes to undertake an
initial series of studies on the following topics:
(a) Discrimination against women attributable specifically to their
status as women within churches and religions;
(b) Proselytism, freedom of religion and poverty;
(c) Sects, new religious movements, communities based on religion,
belief and human rights.
These studies should be enhanced and supplemented through simplified access,
using modern technology, including the Internet (see sect. V) , to all research
on freedom of religion and belief conducted at the international level.
C. Culture of tolerance
7. The Special Rapporteur considers it essential that special attention
must continue to be paid to traditional “mandate fulfilment” activities,
namely, in most cases, a posteriori action on human rights violations. At the
same time, however, a strategy to prevent intolerance and discrimination must
be devised. Of importance in this regard is Commission on Human Rights
resolution 1998/74, entitled Human rights and thematic procedures, in which
the thematic special rapporteurs are requested to make recommendations for the
prevention of human rights violations (para. S (a)).
8. The Special Rapporteur is of the view that prevention can be ensured
mainly by the establishment of a culture of tolerance, notably through
education, which can make a decisive contribution to the inculcation of human
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 5
rights values and the emergence of attitudes and behaviour which reflect
tolerance and non-discrimination. Thus the schools, which are essential
components of the educational system, constitute an essential and unique means
of preventing intolerance and discrimination, through the dissemination of a
culture of human rights.
9. It is worth recalling that the 1968 International Conference on Human
Rights held in Tehran, which reviewed the progress made since the adoption of
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and formulated a programme for the
future, asked States to ensure that all means of education should be employed
so that youth might grow up and develop in a spirit of respect for human
dignity and equal rights. Also in 1968, the General Assembly requested States
Members to take steps, as appropriate and according to the scholastic system
of each State, to introduce or encourage the principles proclaimed in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in other declarations. In 1978,
UNESCO held an international congress on teaching of human rights, and a
similar meeting was held in Bangkok in 1987, under the auspices of the
United Nations Centre for Human Rights. Since then, both UNESCO and the
United Nations human rights services have sought to disseminate a culture of
human rights, and hence tolerance, through various activities. It should also
be noted that General Assembly resolution 49/184 of 23 December 1994
proclaimed the 10-year period beginning on 1 January 1995 the United Nations
Decade for Human Rights Education.
10. The Special Rapporteur notes with appreciation the following recent
initiatives of the Commission on Human Rights and General Assembly:
(a) The appointment of a Special Rapporteur whose mandate focuses on
the right to education and includes the following: “(iii) To take into
account gender considerations, in particular the situation and needs of the
girl child, and to promote the elimination of all forms of discrimination in
education.” (resolution 1998/33, para. 6 (a) (iii));
(b) The Commission's adoption of resolution 1998/21, entitled
Tolerance and pluralism as indivisible elements in the promotion and
protection of human rights. In the resolution, the Commission states that
promoting a culture of tolerance through human rights education is an
objective that must be advanced in all States, and that the Office of the
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and mechanisms of the
United Nations human rights system have an important role to play in that
regard; it reiterates the obligation of all States and the international
community, in particular, to promote a culture conducive to promoting and
protecting human rights, fundamental freedoms and tolerance, inter alia
through education leading to genuine pluralism, a positive acceptance of
diversity of opinion and belief, and respect for the dignity of the human
person (para. 2 (ffl;
(c) The General Assembly's adoption, on 4 November 1998, of
resolution 53/22, entitled United Nations Year of Dialogue among
Civilizations, in which the Assembly “1. Expresses its firm determination to
facilitate and promote dialogue among civilizations; 2. Decides to proclaim
the year 2001 as the United Nations Year of Dialogue among Civilizations;
3. Invites Governments, the United Nations system, including the
E/CN.4/1999/ 58
page 6
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, and other
relevant international and non-governmental organizations, to plan and
implement appropriate cultural, educational and social programmes to promote
the concept of dialogue among civilizations
11. With regard to the Special Rapporteur's present mandate, it is recalled
that the Commission on Human Rights, in paragraph 14 of resolution 1994/18,
encouraged the Special Rapporteur to examine the contribution that education
could make to the more effective promotion of religious tolerance. The
Special Rapporteur therefore conducted a survey, by means of a questionnaire
addressed to States, on problems relating to freedom of religion and belief
from the standpoint of the curricula and textbooks of primary or elementary
and secondary educational institutions. The results of such a survey could
help to shape an international educational strategy centred on the definition
and implementation of a common minimum curriculum of tolerance and
non-discrimination, for combating all forms of intolerance and discrimination
based on religion or belief.
12. The following 77 States replied to the questionnaire: Algeria, Andorra,
Armenia, Austria, Bahrain, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria,
Burkina Faso, Chile, China, Colombia, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus,
Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, France, Germany, Guatemala, Holy See,
Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia,
Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Mali, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico,
Morocco, Namibia, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Norway,
Oman, Pakistan, Paraguay, Philippines, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania,
Saint Lucia, San Marino, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Tunisia,
Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,
United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yugoslavia and Zambia.
13. These replies were used as the basis for a number of provisional
comments (see E/CN.4/1998/6, paras. 38 to 46) which need to be finalized in
order to elaborate a set of conclusions and recommendations to be used in
devising an international educational strategy of the kind mentioned above.
It is therefore of crucial importance that the Special Rapporteur should be
provided with the minimum resources necessary to enable him to complete this
vital task in a timely, serious and precise manner. In resolution 1998/18,
adopted at its fifty-fourth session, the Commission on Human Rights urged
States “to promote and encourage through the educational system, and by other
means, understanding, tolerance and respect in matters relating to freedom of
religion or belief” (para. 4 (g)) . To this end, there is an urgent need to
provide States with the results of the survey conducted by the Special
Rapporteur in the field of education, which they have supported through their
contributions.
II. INITIATIVES BY STATES AND NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS
14. The Oslo Conference on Freedom of Religion or Belief was held from 12
to 15 August 1998 in the context of the fiftieth anniversary of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. The goal of the Conference - an initiative of
Norwegian NGOs and institutes (Cooperation Council for Faith and Life Stance
Societies; Council on Ecumenical and International Relations, Church of
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 7
Norway; Diakonjemmet College Research Center; Institute for Human Rights,
University of Oslo) and the Tandem Project NGO, and financed by the Norwegian
Government - was to build an international coalition and to develop a plan of
action to strengthen the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on religious
intolerance and, therefore, the implementation of article 18 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, and the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of
Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief.
15. The Conference, which was attended by representatives of Governments,
religious communities (Buddhist, Christian, Jewish, Muslim, etc.) academic
institutions and NGOs, adopted the Oslo Declaration on Freedom of Religion or
Belief, the main principles of which are as follows:
(a) Change in the Special Rapporteur's title, to “Special Rapporteur
on Freedom of Religion or Belief”; study and application of articles 18 of the
Covenant and the 1981 Declaration as a way of solving problems of intolerance
and discrimination; creation of educational programmes using the 1981
Declaration as a universal standard to build a culture of tolerance,
understanding and respect; use by United Nations Member States of the 1981
Declaration and other instruments to promote mediation and negotiation and
resolve intolerance, discrimination, injustice and violence in conflicts where
religion or belief plays a role; research and development of other
informational resources and methodologies for collecting information,
initiating comparative studies, etc.;
(b) The last paragraph of the Oslo Declaration reads as follows:
[ The participants] urge the organizers and sponsors of the Oslo Conference,
in consultation with Conference participants:
[ i] to review the discussions and recommendations of the
Conference, with the purpose of creating an ‘Oslo Coalition
on Freedom of Religion or Belief', inviting support and
participation by Governments, religious or belief
communities, academic institutions and non-governmental
organizations, and
[ ii] to develop a strategic plan of action and seek funding to
carry out programmes and projects based on its
recommendations, in cooperation with the United Nations.”
In his closing statement, the Minister for International Development and Human
Rights said that “The Special Rapporteur should be given the necessary means
and resources to actively promote the cause of victims of intolerance based on
religion or belief all over the world. The Norwegian Government has this year
contributed an additional US$ 1.5 million to the High Commissioner for Human
Rights to this end.” The Special Rapporteur thanks the Norwegian Government
and the organizers of the Oslo Conference for their commitment to
strengthening his mandate.
16. The Special Rapporteur also welcomes the initiatives of Spain, which
organized a seminar on dialogue among the major monotheistic religions at
Toledo on 9 and 10 November 1998, and the Office of the United Nations High
E/CN.4/1999/58
page 8
Commissioner for Human Rights, which sponsored a seminar on “enriching the
universality of human rights: Islamic perspectives on the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights” (Geneva, 9-10 November 1998)
III. IN SITU VISITS AND FOLLOW-UP
17. In accordance with Commission on Human Rights and General Assembly
resolutions, the Special Rapporteur generally makes two in situ visits a year
to States with different political, economic, social and religious systems.
Ten visits have taken place since 1994: China (November 1994;
E/CN.4/1995/91); Pakistan (June 1995; E/CN.4/1996/95/Add.1); Iran
(December 1995; E/CN.4/1996/95/Add.2) ; Greece (June 1996; A/51/542/Add.1)
Sudan (September 1996, A/51/542/Add.2); India (December 1996;
E/CN.4/1997/91/Add.1); Australia (February-March 1997; E/CN.4/1998/6/Add.1);
and Germany (September 1997; E/CN.4/1998/6/Add.2); in January and February of
this year, the Special Rapporteur visited the United States of America and
Viet Nam (reports to be submitted to the fifty-fifth session of the Commission
as documents E/CN.4/1999/58/Adds.1 and 2). The Special Rapporteur has
received an invitation to visit Turkey in 1999. Requests to visit Indonesia,
Mauritius, Israel and the Russian Federation have not yet been acted on.
18. With reference to the difficulties of varying importance, encountered
during his visits to the United States of America and Viet Nam, the Special
Rapporteur reiterates that he alone is responsible for preparing and
conducting missions, in connection with which all the parties concerned must
strictly observe the rules and principles implicit in the special procedures
mandate for inquiring into religious intolerance, such as the Special
Rapporteur's independence, freedom of movement, freedom of assembly, and in
particular, freedom to meet any individual or organization he feels could
clarify various matters, with no constraints or repercussions whatever, etc.
19. The Special Rapporteur wishes to emphasize the desirability and
overriding importance, both for his mandate and for his official and
non-governmental interlocutors, of the above-mentioned rules and principles
being respected, if he is to be able to do his job properly, namely:
(a) In situ examination of incidents and governmental action
inconsistent with the provisions of the 1981 Declaration and of positive
experiences and initiatives in the field of tolerance and non-discrimination
based on religion or belief;
(b) Formulation of recommendations for use not only by the State
visited, but also by the international community.
In any event, the Special Rapporteur will continue to carry out his mandate in
a completely independent and objective manner, regardless of conditions, and
to render an account not only of the difficulties, but also of the cooperation
and initiatives encountered in his work.
20. In situ visits, therefore, are in no way a reflection of reservations or
nagging doubts; on the contrary, they promote dialogue and understanding which
should lead to a thorough and balanced review of the situation, eschewing all
Manicheism and combining positive and negative features that evolve in
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 9
different ways with time and in various countries. The Special Rapporteur
also believes that all States, without exception, should be visited according
to a programme reflecting short-, medium- and long-term needs.
21. In order to promote the dialogue mentioned above, the Special Rapporteur
initiated a visit follow-up procedure in 1996, providing States with an
opportunity to send their comments and any information on action taken or
envisaged to implement the recommendations made in the mission reports. Most
States have cooperated in this procedure; follow-up tables were sent to the
following countries, all of which replied, with the exception of Iran: China
(follow-up table and reply: 1996, A/51/542) ; Pakistan (follow-up table: 1996,
A/51/542; reply, A/52/477/Add.1); Iran (follow-up table: 1996, A/51/542; no
reply); Greece (follow-up table: 1997, A/52/477/Add.1; reply: 1997,
E/CN.4/1998/6); Sudan (follow-up table: 1997, A/52/477/Add.1; reply: 1997,
A/52/477/Add.1) ; India (follow-up table: 1997, A/52/477/Add.1; reply: 1998,
A/53/279) . Follow-up tables were recently sent to Germany and Australia (see
annex) . The Special Rapporteur reiterates his request to Iran, a country
which has always spoken in favour of cooperation, and hopes that it will do
more to put its words into action.
22. The Special Rapporteur wishes to thank States for their cooperation, as
well as NGOs, personalities and individuals for their valuable help during his
in situ visits.
IV. POSITION AS REGARDS COMMUNICATIONS SENT BY THE SPECIAL
RAPPORTEUR AND REPLIES RECEIVED FROM STATES SINCE THE
COMMISSION'S FIFTY-FOURTH SESSION
23. This section is concerned with communications sent since the
fifty-fourth session of the Commission on Human Rights, the replies or absence
of replies from the States concerned, and late replies. Before summarizing
and analysing the communications and replies received, the Special Rapporteur
would like to make the following comments, in the interest of clarification:
(a) Since 1995, United Nations budgetary restrictions limiting reports
to 32 pages have had a direct political impact on human rights mechanisms.
The Special Rapporteur has been able to publish neither the text of his
communications and the very enlightening replies received from States, nor the
analyses of these replies.
(b) The communications sent by the Special Rapporteur do not cover all
incidents and governmental action taken in all parts of the world inconsistent
with the 1981 Declaration. Only certain States are analysed below, but that
does not mean that there are no problems in others. In addition, the length
of a communication or the existence of several communications for a single
State does not reflect the extent of intolerance and discrimination in that
State. Similarly, the fact that a communication deals with one form of
intolerance or discrimination does not imply the absence of other forms of
violations in that State.
(c) The communications concern cases or situations of intolerance and
discrimination, but it is important to bear in mind that (i) cases may be
isolated incidents of an exceptional nature which do not preclude the
E/CN.4/1999/58
page 10
existence of a general situation that is positive, or cases which reflect a
general situation of intolerance and discrimination and (ii) certain
situations may affect freedom of religion and belief in general, various
aspects of those freedoms, or certain communities based on religion or belief.
(d) The communications do not cover all religions and all beliefs, and
the frequency with which religions and beliefs are the subject of
communications does not reflect their general situation in the world.
(e) The communications fail to bring out positive experiences of
unquestionable value, such as Spain's initiative with regard to religious
minorities or that of Egypt in combating religious extremism.
A. Summary of communications sent and replies received
24. Since the fifty-fourth session of the Commission on Human Rights, the
Special Rapporteur has sent 63 communications (including four urgent appeals
to Iran and the Sudan) to the following 46 States: Afghanistan (3), Albania,
Jthgola, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Buthan, China (2)
Cyprus, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Egypt (3) , Eritrea, Georgia,
Germany, Ghana, Greece, India (3), Indonesia (2), Iran (5), Iraq, Kazakhstan,
Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali,
Mauritania, Mexico, Morocco, Myanmar, Pakistan, Republic of Moldova,
Romania, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan (3)
Turkmenistan (2) , Turkey (2) , Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland, Uzbekistan and Yemen.
25. The following 22 States have responded to these 63 communications sent
to 46 States, for which the deadline for reply has expired: Afghanistan,
Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Buthan, China, Egypt, Eritrea, Greece,
Indonesia, Iran (2) , Lao People's Democratic Republic, Maldives, Mexico,
Morocco, Myanmar, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Turkey and Uzbekistan.
Afghanistan
26. All three communications concern the Taliban's policy of intolerance and
discrimination in the name of religion, which affects Afghan society as a
whole and women and Shiite Muslims in particular. Two communications reveal
that the Taliban has introduced what is in point of fact a system of apartheid
in respect of women, based on its interpretation of Islam: exclusion of
women from society, employment and schools, obligation for women to wear the
burga in public and restrictions on travel with men other than members of the
family. A third communication concerns violations committed by the
Taliban when they captured Mazar-i-Sharif on 8 August 1998, namely, killings
of thousands of civilians, including at least 70 men executed on
Jthduli Ali Mazari's tomb according to the halal ceremony, used for the
slaughter of animals; assassinations of Iranian diplomats, sometimes because
of their affiliation with Shi'ism; abduction and forced marriage of young
women to Talibans; and adoption of the Sunnite faith on pain of execution.
The Special Rapporteur believes that the maintenance, openly and publicly, of
an apartheid policy of this nature is abnormal, from the standpoint of human
rights.
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 11
27. In reply to the latter communication, the authorities officially
representing Afghanistan stated: “The incidents mentioned in your letter are
perfectly accurate, and we urge you to give these atrocities the widest
possible publicity.”
Albania
28. The principal religious communities complain of the slow process of
restoration of property confiscated under the former regime.
Germany
29. The tennis player Arnaud Boetsch and the musician Enrique Ugarte
reportedly lost contracts because of their affiliation with Scientology. A
police chief in Berlin was allegedly fired because of his affiliation with
Scientology, which he denied; he was eventually reinstated for lack of
evidence.
Jthgo la
30. The Jthgolese army reportedly massacred 21 Christians, including a
deacon, in the Cabinda enclave.
Saudi Arabia
31. Christians of Philippine and Netherlands nationality were allegedly
arrested after a bible was found near a residence in Riyadh. Five of them
were allegedly expelled from the national territory and eight others
transferred to detention cells pending expulsion.
32. Saudi Arabia replied, “No interdiction has been imposed on any
non-Muslim person to practice his religious belief in Saudi Arabia, although
the Saudi population is entirely of the Muslim religion. However, the Saudi
population respects the belief of non-Muslims, according to the general
regulation in force in Saudi Arabia and in conformity with the provisions of
article 18, paragraph 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights. Non-Muslim persons have the right to practise their religious
ceremony within their residence. Article 37 of the Basic System of
Saudi Arabia stipulates: Houses are inviolable. They shall not be entered
without permission from their owners. Regarding this case, those persons have
sought to transgress security by probably exercising religious activities
which irritated the fury and rage of some citizens. This action has called
for the intervention of the security forces to settle the problem. The
persons involved have been arrested to safeguard security and to avoid any
repercussions since they could become victims. All the persons involved have
been released and have left Saudi Arabia for their country. They have not
been expelled . . . The allegation specifying that those persons have been
subject to coercive detention and torture or ill-treatment, is absolutely
inadmissible and is not supported by conclusive evidence. The regulation in
force in Saudi Arabia guarantees the non-occurrence of such practices and the
law punishes the perpetrators firmly.”
E/CN.4/1999/58
page 12
33. The Special Rapporteur wishes to emphasize Saudi Arabia's attitude
towards freedom of religion, which takes into account the concept that there
should be no coercion in religious matters. The Special Rapporteur hopes that
this attitude will become increasingly widespread and accepted in practice.
Azerbaijan
34. The Jehovah's Witnesses and other communities allegedly experience acts
of intolerance aimed at forcing them to pay bribes to officials responsible
for registration procedures. A minister, a Muslim convert to the Christian
religion, was reportedly arrested twice in 1997.
Bangladesh
35. A group of extremist Muslims in Dhaka has allegedly been responsible for
acts of vandalism (damage to religious property, atmosphere of fear) against
the Christian community.
36. Bangladesh replied: “The Saint Francis Xavier Girls' High School is
adjacent to Shahi Mosque in Laxmibazar, Dhaka. There is a competing claim by
the school and mosque authorities with regard to possession of an abandoned
one-room structure and a wall on disputed land lying between the school and
the mosque. This is a long-standing dispute. A lawsuit on the matter is
pending with the Court. On 28 April 1998 around 11 a.m., a lawyer acting on
behalf of the school authorities claimed that the Court had issued a judgement
in their favour. In the presence of the police force, he ordered the
demolition of the wall and the structure, and with the assistance of some
workers they proceeded with the demolition work. This gave rise to a tense
situation which was quickly brought under control with the assistance of the
local administration. The necessary legal measures were taken and charges
have been filed with the local police station against those involved. The
situation soon returned to normal. Meanwhile, the members of the local
Christian community and the school authority met the Prime Minister and
apprised her of the matter. The Prime Minister guaranteed them full
protection and specifically reassured them that all measures would be taken
according to the law with regard to the disputed property. The matter is
receiving the active attention of the Government.”
37. The Special Rapporteur is pleased to note the reaction of the Bangladesh
authorities and draws attention to the need to help fringe groups in society
become more tolerant through the formulation of a policy of teaching tolerance
at all levels.
Belarus
38. The main religious communities complain of the slow process of
restitution of property confiscated under the former regime.
39. Belarus replied that questions relating to the restitution to religious
organizations and communities of former places of worship, or of other
buildings suitable for worship by way of compensation, have been referred to
the State Committee on Religion and Nationality. There have been cases of
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 13
restitution and compensation involving Jewish and Christian communities:
Golgotha Evangelical Baptist Church, Catholic Church and Orthodox Church.
Several religious communities enjoy advantages, such as tax exemption, with
respect to the reconstruction or renovation of restituted places of worship.
Material and financial aid is also provided by the local authorities. The
reply states, “It should be noted that the restitution process, certain
aspects of which involve relations between nationalities, is by definition
sensitive and delicate. The Belarusian Government considers that this
question should be settled through consultation between the authorities and
the representatives of various national and religious minorities, which should
be guaranteed equal rights and resources, care being taken not to violate the
fundamental rights and freedoms of the majority. Another challenge is to
avoid any action which might provide a particular religious community or
congregation with a dominant or special position in society, which could give
rise to conflicts between nationalities or religious conflicts.”
40. The Special Rapporteur expresses his appreciation of this policy and
understands the difficulties encountered; he hopes that it will have the
maximum impact in promoting human rights in general and freedom of religion
and belief in particular.
Belgium
41. New legislation reportedly establishes a “sect oversight organization”.
However, a report covering 189 organizations, including Baha'is, Hasidic Jews,
Evangelists, Pentecostalists and Adventists, is said to be based on rumour
rather than serious inquiries. Some communities were allegedly not invited to
the hearings of the Parliamentary Commission on Sects or were not given an
opportunity to defend themselves in time. Their inclusion in the
above-mentioned report has apparently caused difficulties for some communities
(in renting public premises, for example)
42. Belgium presented a detailed explanation of the functioning and mandate
of the Parliamentary Commission responsible for producing a policy to curb
sects and the dangers they represent to individuals, and in particular minors;
it provided definitions of the terms “ secte ” (“organized group of individuals
espousing the same doctrine within a religion” - the Commission considers
sects in this sense to be respectable and to reflect the normal exercise of
the freedom of religion and assembly guaranteed by fundamental rights) and
“ organisation sectaire nuisible ” (harmful sectarian organization) (“group
having or claiming to have a philosophical or religious purpose whose
organization or practice involves illegal or injurious activities, harms
individuals or society or impairs human dignity”) . The synoptic table of 189
groups in the Commission's report indicated that (a) the information in
question was provided either by official agencies (gendarmerie, judicial
police, State security police, general information and security service,
prosecution services) on the basis of interviews, or by direct or indirect
witnesses questioned under oath; (b) the group listing represented neither the
Commission's position nor a value judgement on its part; (c) a thorough
investigation was conducted of all movements and the table updated
accordingly. During the plenary debate in the House, the rapporteur explained
that the Commission had limited itself to a record-keeping role. In the
course of follow-up action, a law was adopted establishing an independent
E/CN.4/1999/58
page 14
centre for information and advisory assistance in connection with harmful
sectarian organizations. The law is aimed at certain practices of sectarian
organizations regarded as harmful to individuals and society or as impairing
human dignity; it also stipulates that the harmful nature of a sectarian group
is to be evaluated by reference to the principles contained in the Belgian
Constitution, laws, decrees and orders and in the international human rights
instruments ratified by Belgium.
43. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Belgian authorities for their
well-researched, specific and instructive reply, and notes that meticulous and
correctly-presented information makes it possible to avoid generalizations and
routine assumptions. In his opinion, Belgium's approach to the problem is
well worth following since it could result in a useful yardstick if it
succeeded in making a clear-cut practical and operational distinction between
what did and what did not constitute freedom of religion.
Bhutan
44. It is alleged that Buddhism is given preferential treatment and that the
practice of Buddhism is compulsory for all in schools, on pain of punishment.
In 1997 several Buddhist nuns and religious teachers were allegedly arrested
for taking part in peaceful demonstrations and their monasteries were closed
by the authorities.
45. Bhutan provided a detailed description of the country's situation and
the historical background of religions: the two principal recognized
religions are Buddhism and Hinduism, the Bhutanese being free to practise and
profess the religion of their choice. In accordance with a 1974 National
Assembly resolution, there are restrictions on proselytizing in public.
School curricula, with the exception of those of monastic schools, make no
provision for religious instruction or practice; however, a prayer common to
Buddhism and Hinduism is recited daily in all schools, and prayers are said in
boarding schools at the secondary level; no problems are raised by these
prayers. The Bhutanese authorities have stated that:
“Allegations of arrests of monks and religious teachers have been made
in the context of allegations of discrimination by the Royal Government
against the Nyingmpa school of Buddhism in favour of the Drukpa Kargyupa
school. This allegation is totally absurd, as no difference of
treatment exists between the two schools, which are well integrated and
coexist in total harmony . . . One hundred fifty persons were arrested in
eastern Bhutan in 1997 for their involvement in disturbance of the peace
and attempts to incite communal discord. On the basis of the
investigations carried out by the police, 38 persons were released
immediately and 112 were charge-sheeted in a court of law for
collaborating with subversive elements in Nepal, accepting money from
them and carrying out activities such as organizing mob demonstrations
by enticing innocent villagers with money and trying to incite sectarian
violence. On the day slated for the demonstrations in October 1997, a
conflict emerged between the above persons and the villagers who were
against the attempts of these people to incite communal violence. As a
result most of these 150 persons were apprehended by the local people
and handed over to the Royal Bhutan Police. It may be pointed out that
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 15
one Thinley loezer of the Drametse Buddhist school was the main person
responsible for inciting and instigating people in eastern Bhutan. It
was on his directives that many active collaborators spread false and
malicious allegations against the Royal Government, conducted several
meetings and plotted to take up seditious activities in eastern Bhutan.
To finance these activities, Thinley loezer received a total sum of
Nu 125,000 and a large amount of seditious literature from subversive
elements in Nepal.”
It was also explained that monasteries, like other places of worship, could
not be closed, and that a few recently-established schools of religious study
had been closed following an inspection which showed that they failed to meet
the minimum criteria with regard to curricula, teachers and premises; the
schools would be allowed to reopen when these conditions had been met.
Bulgaria
46. An atmosphere of intolerance in the Bulgarian media and society is said
to be adversely affecting minorities in the field of religion and belief
(Muslims, Jehovah's Witnesses, Church of God, Emmanuel Bible Center)
China
47. It is alleged that the authorities in the Tibet Autonomous Region
interfere with religious beliefs and practices (forced re-education campaign
for monks and nuns, limitation of their number in places of worship,
prohibition of photos of the Dalai Lama, detention of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima,
who has been recognized by the Dalai Lama as the Panchen Lama) . One
communication concerns lulo Dawa Tsering, a Tibetan monk whom the Special
Rapporteur met when he visited China in 1995 (E/CN.4/1995/91, paras. 115
and 175-177) . An urgent appeal followed by reminders, alleging that the monk
was being detained, had been sent in the context of preceding reports
(E/CN.4/1997/91, para. 10; E/CN.4/1998/6, para. 67). The Chinese authorities
had replied that lulo Dawa Tsering had enjoyed all the civil rights set forth
in the Chinese Constitution since the end of the period of conditional
release. This latest communication contains information alleging police
surveillance of lulo Dawa Tsering, who is reportedly unable to continue
residing in his monastery at Ganden or travel to his university at Lhassa.
48. China replied that the Government respected religious freedom, as the
law required, and did not interfere in the Tibetan people's religious freedom.
Concerning the patriotic re-education movement, it explained that, as citizens
of the People's Republic of China, Buddhist monks and nuns were duty-bound to
undergo patriotic re-education. It stated that religion must adapt to the
local society and to its development and operate within the confines of the
Constitution and laws. The patriotic re-education being conducted in Tibet's
temples and monasteries was not intended to restrict the masses' right to
religious freedom but to establish good order and guarantee freedom of
religion. Lastly, patriotic re-education enjoyed the approval of Buddhist
monks and nuns and the religious public, and there had been no instances of
arrests or expulsions of monks or nuns. The decline in the number of Tibetan
monks and nuns was explained as follows: (a) the 1,787 restored and
newly-opened places of worship, with their 4,600 resident monks and nuns, were
E/CN.4/1999/58
page 16
entirely adequate to satisfy the requirements of the religious public; (b) the
recent expansion of the Tibetan economy had provided many job opportunities
for Tibetans, especially young people, and had led to a reduction in the
number of people electing to join monastic communities; (c) since the 1990s,
preferential education policies in the Tibetan region had led young Tibetans
to study culture and science rather than enter monasteries. However, Tibetan
monks and nuns still accounted for 2 per cent of Tibet's population. The
reply stated that the Dalai Lama used religion (an example being the
designation of the Panchen Lama) to pursue separatist activities, of which the
great bulk of monks and nuns and religious believers in Tibet disapproved.
The reply denied the allegation that the child designated as Panchen Lama by
the Dalai Lama was being detained and the following explanation was given:
the security measures for the boy and his parents had been adopted at their
request following an abduction attempt by exiled Tibetan separatists. The
reply noted that Chadrel Rinpoche, Champa Chung and Samdrup (see
E/CN.4/1996/95, para. 40; E/CN.4/1997/91, para. 43 (e); E/CN.4/1998/6,
para. 73; A/52/477, para. 36) had been sentenced to prison terms for
imperilling the unity of the State and ethnic cohesiveness and damaging
stability and development in Tibet; it was noted that, as Chadrel and Champa
had infringed the State Secrets Law, it had been decided to hold the trial
in camera.
Cyprus
49. It is alleged that, in the areas controlled by the Turkish Army, a
policy of intolerance and religious discrimination is directed against
non-Muslims and their religious property (more than 500 places of worship and
cemeteries desecrated and the Saint Makar Armenian monastery converted into a
hotel, etc.).
Egypt
50. Professor Hassan Hanafi was allegedly declared an apostate by Al-Azhar
scholars because of his interpretations of Islam. One communication also
speaks of excesses committed by armed extremist groups - Al-Gihad and
Al-Gama'a al-Islamiya - against all segments of Egyptian society, and in
particular law enforcement officers, intellectuals and Copts. From May 1992
to December 1997, in the Provinces of Minya, Asyut and Qena, Upper Egypt,
several Copts were reportedly murdered by Al-Gama'a al-Islamiya because of
their Christian beliefs; in 1998, three Copts were allegedly executed. It is
also reported that Copts are victims of racketeering and that their churches
are attacked. According to another communication, in July 1998, security
forces in Maadi closed an unauthorized Coptic church. However, the procedure
for obtaining a construction or renovation permit is said to be so complicated
that such permits are virtually never granted.
51. In connection with the Hanafi case, Egypt replied that statements made
by this Cairo University professor during a talk had been criticized by a
certain Al-Azhar Scholars' Association which had regarded them as a departure
from the Muslim religion. The Egyptian authorities pointed out that the
association in question was not legally empowered to review or assess research
into Muslim religious teachings, and that no measures had been taken by anyone
against Professor Hanafi. Egypt also referred to the facts in the Abu Zeid
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 17
case (E/CN.4/1997/91, paras. 12-15) and the legislative amendments made to
streamline hisba proceedings, and noted that the decision ordering
Mr. and Mrs. Abu Zeid to separate had been suspended and later annulled.
52. The Special Rapporteur has already expressed his appreciation of Egypt's
legislation and policy to combat religious extremism. He would, however, like
to emphasize the fact that the position adopted by the Al-Azhar Scholars'
Association could jeopardize Professor Hanafi, and that it is for the State to
take appropriate measures to ensure the safety of citizens and of all
individuals living in its territory, on the understanding that extremism,
which is alien to freedom of religion, is likely to confirm the very fears it
raises. The allegations of various incidents against Christians, on which
Egypt has not presented its views and comments, could potentially confirm the
above-mentioned fears.
Eritrea
53. The authorities are reportedly considering the implementation of a
declaration imposing drastic limitations on religious communities by
prohibiting any activities other than religious services. As a result,
religious property, such as schools and clinics, could be confiscated by the
authorities.
54. Eritrea replied that its legislation was in conformity with the 1981
United Nations Declaration. In order to correct situations dating from the
pre-independence era, characterized by the provision of health care and
education on the basis of religious preference, the Government after
independence consulted various religious bodies and decided to establish,
jointly with the World Bank, a “Community Rehabilitation Fund” programme to
provide everyone with the services mentioned above. An agreement was drawn up
under which religious bodies would be able to engage in proselytism and run
theological institutions and charities and would contribute to the Community
Rehabilitation Fund. The administration of schools and clinics belonging to
religious bodies would be secularized, with current staffs retained and no
property confiscated. The Special Rapporteur is of the view that religious
communities are clearly eligible for protection under international standards
governing freedom of religion and belief. However, these instruments do not
cover political activities by religious communities, which are governed by
other provisions of international law.
Spain
55. Protestant organizations state that the authorities' closure of several
of their local radio stations constitutes discrimination against them, as the
Catholic Church allegedly encounters no difficulties in obtaining licences.
Russian Federation
56. A Jehovah's Witness and conscientious objector in the Kursk region was
allegedly sentenced to a prison term, a court having ruled that he belonged to
a sect and accordingly was not entitled to submit an application on the basis
E/CN.4/1999/58
page 18
of his religious belief. Pursuant to the Act of 1997 on Freedom of Religion
and Belief, members of communities which did not officially exist in the
Russian Federation during the past 15 years are not allowed to proselytize.
Georgia
57. Jehovah's Witnesses were reportedly arrested and convicted in Jthkhazia
because of their objection to military service. The Armenian, Catholic and
Jewish communities are said to be encountering difficulties in obtaining
restitution of property confiscated under the former regime.
Ghana
58. The Trokosi (“slaves of God”) tradition, according to which families
offer their virgin daughters to priests in order to placate the gods for
offences committed by relatives, is reportedly being used by the priests to
subject girls and women to slavery, including sexual slavery. A bill
introducing punishment for following this tradition is reportedly before
Parliament.
Greece
59. A German teacher was allegedly prosecuted for making several references
to Buddhism in his classes at a private school. Proceedings were also
reportedly instituted against a minister of the Greek Evangelical Church of
Thessaloniki for not having an “official house of prayer license”.
60. Greece replied, in respect of the first allegation, that the German
teacher had been acquitted of the charges against him by the Rodopi court of
first instance, and, in respect of the second, that the Thessaloniki police
department and public prosecutor's office had confirmed that no charges or
proceedings had been brought against the Greek Evangelical Church minister.
India
61. With regard to the situation of Christians, members of a Hindu
nationalist organization in Uttar Pradesh reportedly launched a campaign of
harassment against the Assembly of Church of Believers. In September 1998,
four nuns belonging to the Foreign Missionary Sisters in Tamil Nadu were
allegedly gang-raped. A number of Catholic and Protestant organizations
complain about the growing climate of insecurity for the Christian community;
for some, this situation stems from actions orchestrated by Hindu extremists.
62. On the subject of Indian women, a bill reserving seats for women in
Parliament and the state assemblies reportedly failed because of opposition
from Muslim representatives who justified their stand by arguments about
women's place in religion. A Muslim woman who has been elected mayor of
Deoband in Uttar Pradesh reportedly lost her mandate as a result of a vote of
confidence called for by the representatives of an Islamic seminary. A
representative of that seminary called “Dar' al Uloom” reportedly said that
the vote of an unveiled Muslim woman ran counter to Islam and that biology,
religion and prophecies had proven men to be superior to women.
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 19
Indonesia
63. In North Aceh province, in the north of Sumatra, a Muslim religious
figure was reportedly arrested for failing to read out the Friday prayer, as
required by an agreement concluded between the authorities and the mosque's
religious leaders. In February and May 1998, riots were allegedly aimed at
non-Muslims (attacks on individuals, places of worship and private property)
and especially Christians and Buddhists and girls and women of the Chinese
community (rapes, murders, etc.
64. In an extremely detailed document, Indonesia explained that
President B.J. Habibie had expressed, on behalf of the Government and people
of Indonesia, his profound regret and had denounced the atrocities committed
during the May 1998 riots. He had pointed out that the results of
investigations had enabled human rights organizations, including the National
Human Rights Commission, to establish that the acts perpetrated essentially
against the Chinese community were committed by organized groups. In addition
to steps taken to investigate the cases of human rights violations, the
Government has taken a series of measures to provide assistance to the victims
and forestall any incident ( inter alia : creation by the Ministry for Women's
Affairs of a forum comprising a psychiatrist's association, a legal aid body
and religious and Chinese leaders to formulate recommendations on assistance
and prevention to the Government; creation of a task force to protect women
from violence; creation of a National Committee for the Prevention of Violence
against Women; establishment of investigation teams; the President's
promise of better protection for Sino-Indonesians; and incorporation of
the National Programme on the Elimination of Violence against Women into
the 1998-2003 National Human Rights Plan)
65. Indonesia went on to say that “Although the May riots appeared to be
characterized by a phenomenon of racial discrimination and religious
intolerance, which targeted mostly non-Muslim Indonesian ethnic Chinese, the
long-established Indonesian tradition of mutual respect and dialogue among
diverse religious believers, without racial distinction, remains unchanged.”
The Special Rapporteur takes note of the measures adopted by the new
authorities and hopes that they take appropriate steps to ensure that freedom
of religion, especially that of minorities, is effectively protected.
Iran
66. An initial urgent appeal concerned the case of three Baha'is,
namely, Mr. Ata'ullah Hamid Nasirizadih, Mr. Sirus Dhabihi-Muqaddam and
Mr. Hidayat-Kashifi Najafabadi, who were reportedly condemned to death
in secret because of their religious beliefs and ran the risk of
execution. A second urgent appeal connected with the first alleged that
Mr. Sirus Dhabihi-Muqaddam and Mr. Hidayat-Kashifi Najafabadi had been
informed by the Mashad prison authorities that their sentence had been upheld.
In these two communications, the Special Rapporteur “urgently appealed to the
Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran to ensure that the sentences were
not carried out and that all judicial remedies and guarantees required by
international human rights standards be provided to the above-mentioned
persons”. A third urgent appeal concerned allegations of the hanging of a
E/CN.4/1999/ 58
page 20
Baha'i, Mr. R. Rawahani, accused of converting a Muslim woman, even though the
woman apparently claimed to be a Baha'i. This appeal also referred to a
senior member of the Islamic Revolutionary Court, who allegedly described the
report of the execution as a lie and stressed that no such sentence had been
passed by the Iranian courts. Other communications alleged, firstly,
confirmation of the sentencing of two Baha'is, Mr. Jamali' d-Din Hajipur and
Mr. Mansur Mihrabi, because of their affiliation to Baha'ism, labelled as a
sect and an unlawful organization, and, secondly, the arrests of 32 Baha'is
(one of whom was later released), members of the Baha'i Institute of Higher
Education, and confiscation of their property. According to another
communication, a policy of intolerance and discrimination is applied to the
Sunni community (obstacles to construction of places of worship and schools,
closure of mosques, executions and murders of Sunni religious and intellectual
dignitaries) . Lastly, Hojatoleslam Sayyid Moshen Sa'idzadeh, a writer, was
reportedly arrested for his writings on Islamic law and women's rights, in
which he called for equal rights.
67. In reply to the communication concerning the Sunnis, Iran explained
that, under its Constitution, the Government was committed to the protection
of the rights of all citizens and that Shiites and Sunnis were equal before
the law and enjoyed the same rights and freedoms. The Sunnis were not
perceived as being a minority within Iranian society and were in no way
subjected to discrimination on account of their faith. The Iranian
authorities said that they would cooperate fully with the Special Rapporteur
in an inquiry into the cases mentioned in his communication. In reply to the
second urgent appeal and, hence, to the first (updated in the second) , Iran
replied: “Following the rejection by the Supreme Court of the death sentence
on Mr. Syrus Zabihi and Mr. Hedayat Kashefi, the defendants, in accordance
with due process of law, were retried by another competent court in Mashad.
The court found them guilty of charges of acting against national security and
sentenced them to death. However, the verdicts are not finalized yet and
require further confirmation by the Supreme Court. In addition, should the
Supreme Court confirm the verdicts, the defendants can still resort to appeal
and/or clemency.”
68. The Special Rapporteur deems it important that Iran, heir to a great
civilization founded on tolerance, creative intelligence and moderation,
subtlety and nuance, should reconsider its attitude to the Baha'i faith, in
the interests of freedom of religion or belief, in compliance with its
international commitments and teachings to the effect that religion admits of
no constraint. Whatever perception certain Iranians may have of the Baha'i
question, it is for the State, which is responsible for all its citizens, to
focus on constants rather than variables and consider each individual and each
minority, as repositories of rights and obligations, to be worthy of respect
and attention and to have the right to consideration and protection.
I rag
69. Two Shiite religious dignitaries, namely, Ayatollah Shaykh Murtadha
Al-Burujerdi and Ayatollah Ali al-Gharavi, were reportedly assassinated by
government agents.
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 21
Kazakhstan
70. Jehovah's Witnesses were reportedly imprisoned for their objection to
military service. The authorities, pressured by Muslim representatives, are
said to have banned a Christian procession in Petropavlovsk.
Latvia
71. The only synagogue in the capital was allegedly the target of a bomb
attack; while the authorities reportedly condemned the act, police
investigations have led nowhere.
Malaysia
72. Certain individuals were allegedly arrested for preaching Shiite
teachings perceived by the authorities as injurious to national security and
the unity of Muslims. A Muslim woman who converted to Christianity was
apparently subjected to manifestations of intolerance by her family,
Muslim associations and the police, a situation that has forced her into
clandestinity.
Maldives
73. Police reportedly arrested nationals and foreigners for their
participation in propagating the Christian faith. Subsequently, some of them
were allegedly expelled while others were placed in detention. The prisoners
were reportedly forced to participate in Islamic prayers and reading of the
Koran. The Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs has reportedly enjoined the
population not to listen to a Christian radio programme broadcast from the
Seychelles. Lastly, the First Secretary of the Maldives High Commission in
Sri Lanka reportedly declared in a statement in Colombo that the Maldives was
a totally Islamic country and that it was a crime to disseminate the Christian
faith.
74. The Maldives replied that any allegation of persecution of Christians
was groundless: “Arrests and expulsions are based on breach of laws. Illegal
activities, if carried out by foreigners, constitute a violation of terms of
their stay, and might entail prosecution or cancellation of their visas.
However, nobody has been arrested in the Maldives or expelled from it for
professing any particular faith. Nobody is even questioned for professing any
religion.” According to the authorities, the allegations transmitted by the
Special Rapporteur were nothing but malicious propaganda.
Mali
75. An extremist group known as the “Pieds nus” and claiming to belong to
Islam reportedly murdered a magistrate who had passed a prison sentence on
certain “Pieds nus” who had engaged in acts of violence.
E/CN.4/1999/ 58
page 22
Mo r 0cc 0
76. Christian foreigners were allegedly arrested and heavily fined for
failing to declare the entry of 1,200 bibles; apparently the books had
previously been checked by the customs, the customs declaration requiring only
that weapons, drugs and alcohol be declared.
77. Morocco has emphasized that the sentences passed in this matter were not
for proselytism, but were based on the Customs Code.
Mauritania
78. The Penal Code reportedly punishes a Muslim's conversion to another
faith with the death penalty.
Mexico
79. Protestant evangelists in Chiapas were reportedly victims of acts of
intolerance by Catholics and Indian communities.
80. Mexico's reply was as follows: “The State Human Rights Commission of
Chiapas stated that on 8 April 1998 it lodged an official complaint in respect
of the acts referred to above. At the same time, in connection with the
appearance of Mr. Aldo Santos Jiménez in the Office of the Attorney-General of
Teopisca, Chiapas preliminary investigation No. AL6S/0026/998 was launched
on 1 April 1998 for the crime of robbery and damage to the Church of Christ
Fraternity as a result of the acts that occurred in the village of Nuevo Leôn
in the municipality of Teopisca, Chiapas. The investigation was completed
on 14 April 1998 and that municipality's technical investigation body decided
to exercise the public right of action against the following suspects:
Ciro Espinosa Lopez, Admn Rodriguez Trejo, Silviano VIsquez HernIndez,
Olegario Ozuna VIzquez, Juan Gonzalez Aguilar, Alberto Molina Constantino,
Aquilino VIzquez Diaz, Rosendo Gômez Lôpez, Emilio Alvarez Ozuna et al.
Myanmar
81. The State reportedly practises a policy of intolerance and
discrimination against Muslim religious minorities in the States of Arakan
and Karen (destruction of mosques and schools, revocation of citizenship,
admission of refugees on the Thai border in exchange for their conversion to
Buddhism, refusal of access to health services, education and public jobs) and
Christian minorities (destruction of places of worship, conversion of children
to Buddhism) in the States of Chin and Karen and the Sagaing Division.
Buddhist monks are allegedly also obliged to submit to the control of the
authorities.
82. Without providing any explanation, Myanmar has declared the allegations
of intolerance and discrimination against religious minorities to be unfounded
and entirely false. It would help if Myanmar's reply were supported by
suitable evidence, especially since the allegations are founded on concordant
and persistent information from a number of reliable sources.
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 23
Uzbekis tan
83. In the town of Nukus, a pastor responsible for evangelical activities
among Muslims was reportedly sentenced to two years' forced labour and
internal exile for organizing illegal church services. The authorities
allegedly called for the cessation of all Christian activities, including
proselytizing outside of churches.
84. Uzbekistan replied that its laws and their enforcement guaranteed
freedom of religion and belief. The Ministry of the Interior had no record of
the arrest and sentence of a pastor in the town of Nukus. The Special
Rapporteur is grateful to the authorities for their assurances of full
cooperation in more detailed investigations.
Pakistan
85. A number of Ahmadis were reportedly sentenced to life imprisonment for
blasphemy when they were preaching their faith, which some Muslims regarded
as an attack on their religious beliefs. Muslim militants allegedly killed
Judge Arif Iqbal Bhatti for acquitting Christians charged with blasphemy.
Bishop John Joseph reportedly committed suicide to protest the death penalty
passed on a Christian accused of blasphemy. Muslim extremists allegedly
committed acts of intolerance against the Christian community, at the same
time calling for the blasphemy laws to be maintained.
Lao People's Democratic Republic
86. A number of Christians were allegedly arrested at a Bible study meeting.
Some were reportedly convicted for creating divisions and undermining the
Government, and for receiving funds from abroad. In Huei Say Province a
priest was reportedly arrested for preaching his religion without official
authorization. In Xiengkhouang a soldier was apparently arrested for
converting to Christianity and for his links with the American Presbyterian
Church.
87. The Lao People's Democratic Republic has replied that its legislation
guaranteed freedom of religion and belief and that the Christian community
freely practised its religion and lived in harmony with the Buddhist
community. Any act that ran counter to the law was punished regardless of its
perpetrator's belief. The authorities declared that they were obliged to take
appropriate action against a group of individuals using religion for political
ends.
88. The Special Rapporteur wishes to stress that political manipulation of
religious matters may not, where it exists, be covered by international
standards relating to freedom of religion or belief. Political activities are
governed by separate international standards.
Republic of Moldova
89. The law on preaching is allegedly not in conformity with international
standards in that it fails to guarantee protection of freedom of religion
E/CN.4/1999/58
page 24
for members of religions not officially recognized. Travel abroad by
religious figures reportedly requires the authorization of the authorities.
Democratic People's Republic of Korea
90. The authorities reportedly discourage all religious activities apart
from those that serve the interests of the State.
Romania
91. The question of the restitution of religious property confiscated under
the previous regime was reportedly the cause of conflicts between religious
communities, particularly between the Orthodox Church and the Greek Catholic
Church.
92. Romania sent a detailed reply on progress made in the matter of freedom
of religion, namely: a bill on religions, providing for an inventory of goods
and property that previously belonged to churches; preparation of an emergency
order for the restitution of 200 properties; amendment of the land laws to
include the issue of restitution; a governmental decision establishing
alternative service for conscientious objectors, as well as a bill;
reorganization of the Secretariat for Religion; creation of a permanent
advisory organ composed of representatives of all recognized denominations to
advise the Government; progress - despite incidents - in the restitution of
property by the Orthodox Church to the Uniate Church.
93. The Special Rapporteur is grateful to Romania for its unfailing
attention to his communications and the quality of its replies.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
94. The Runnymede Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia apparently
called for an end to all prejudice against Muslims in the media and in the
workplace and for State grants to Muslim schools.
95. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland drew
attention to the absence of legislation covering religious discrimination in
Great Britain, unlike Northern Ireland. The Government was addressing this
issue and “with the agreement of Cabinet colleagues, the Home Secretary has
decided that the Home Office will commission research into the nature and
extent of religious discrimination in Great Britain”. After a period of
18 months, the appropriateness of actions to be undertaken would be decided on
the basis of that research. “The Home Secretary responded positively to the
report of the Runnymede Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia. The
Government is currently considering the report, which raises a number of
wide-ranging issues. Regarding State funding for Muslim schools, under the
1996 Education Act, it is open to independent promoters, including existing
independent schools, to seek approval from Government for the establishment of
new voluntary-aided schools. All proposals are judged on their individual
merits, taking into account educational needs and parental demand.” It was
also indicated that, in January 1998, the Government had approved State grants
for two planned independent Muslim schools in London and Birmingham.
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 25
Sudan
96. An urgent appeal was made in connection with the arrest and
disappearance of Nasir Hassan, a student at the Bishop Gwynne Theological
College in Juba, because of his conversion from Islam to Christianity. Other
communications alleged the closure by decree of the Catholic Club of Khartoum
despite the protests of the Catholic Church, as well as the arrest in Khartoum
of two Catholic priests accused of being linked to explosions, but apparently
victims of an attempt to discredit the Catholic Church.
Sri Lanka
97. Catholic, Protestant and Hindu places of worship are reportedly among
the main targets of violence.
98. Sri Lanka has explained that its legislation, international commitments
under international human rights instruments and policy guaranteed freedom of
religion and belief for all. It made particular mention of holidays that
coincided with the main religious festivals, Muslims' ability to obtain
special leave to participate in Friday prayers, the inclusion of religious
teaching in school curricula, the training of teachers for religious
instruction and the right of each student to choose to be instructed in the
religion of his or her choice. The attacks on Muslim and Buddhist places of
worship, including the Temple of the Tooth in Kandy, were committed by the
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam who were carrying out a campaign of terror.
Turkmenistan
99. Religious and denominational minorities, with the exception of the
Russian Orthodox Church, are reportedly the victims of acts of intolerance and
discrimination. The country's legislation allegedly does not recognize
conscientious objection based on religious belief, and conscientious objectors
are sent to prison.
Turkey
100. Religious dignitaries and sites (places of worship, cemeteries) of the
Christian communities, and particularly the Greek Catholic Church,
are reportedly the target of acts of violence, including bomb attacks
(particularly against the Patriarchate) ; it is also said that a priest was
murdered. The police and security services have apparently been unable to
identify and arrest those responsible for these acts. Moreover, the
authorities have allegedly closed down a Pentecostal church, the Oasis
International Christian Fellowship, although it apparently had official
authorization. A second communication alleges that in September 1998 the
Ministry of the Interior unilaterally appointed “an interim leader for the
Armenian Church in Turkey, in an apparent attempt to invalidate the Armenian
Church's elected choice of Acting Patriarch. In response, the Patriarchate's
religious Council issued a unanimous declaration rejecting the Government's
interference in its internal affairs.”
101. In response to the first communication, Turkey claimed that some of the
incidents described above were linked to thefts and not to acts of religious
E/CN.4/1999/58
page 26
intolerance, and that investigations were under way. It also reported that an
investigation was being organized into the bomb attack on the Patriarchate.
It further stated that no information concerning the closing of the
Pentecostal church had been found. Turkey said that the rights of religious
minorities were guaranteed by its Constitution and the Lausanne Treaty of
Peace. In conclusion, it said: “Therefore, allegations levelled against the
Turkish Government in your letter are absolutely unfounded. Acts of crime
committed by some, still unidentified, people cannot be attributed to the
State. The Turkish Government never tolerates such crimes. On the contrary,
all institutions of the Greek Orthodox minority and the Patriarch himself are
under the close protection of the Turkish security forces.” The Special
Rapporteur wishes to point out that his communications are in no way intended
as criticism of a State; on the contrary, their purpose is to elicit its views
and observations in the interests of dialogue. In the first place, the
communication transmitted to Turkey in no way suggested that the authorities
were involved in the acts against Christians (with the exception of the
allegation concerning the Pentecostal church) ; secondly, it referred to the
fact that the police investigations had been unsuccessful. It is clearly
established in international law that the State is responsible for the
security of its citizens and, more generally, for all persons living on its
territory, even when acts committed against them are allegedly carried out by
non-State entities. With regard to the second communication, Turkey explained
that the authorities had never intervened in the internal affairs of the
Armenian Patriarchate and had not influenced the outcome of the elections.
Ukraine
102. There are reportedly difficulties with the restitution of a Catholic
place of worship in Sebastopol confiscated under the previous regime.
Yemen
103. In July 1998 three nuns belonging to Mother Teresa's Missionaries of
Charity Order were reportedly killed by a Muslim extremist in the town of
Hodeida.
B. Analysis of communications
104. An analysis of the communications from the standpoint of the principles,
rights and freedoms enunciated in the 1981 Declaration reveals the following
seven categories of violation:
1. Violations of the principle of non-discrimination in matters
of religion and belief
105. The characteristics of these violations are as follows: policies, laws
and regulations, discriminatory practices and acts against (a) certain
communities with regard to religion and belief, particularly when such
communities are minorities or do not subscribe to the official religion or
recognized religions and beliefs, and (b) against women based on
interpretations of religion and on traditions supposedly based on religion or
belief.
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 27
2. Violations of the principle of tolerance in
matters of religion and belief
106. They reveal the following characteristics: policies, practices
and acts of religious intolerance on the part of the State and society,
particularly of communities in matters pertaining to religion and belief,
of politico-religious groups and other non-State groups, the most marked
manifestations of which are connected with the problem of religious extremism
(inter- and intra-religious) . Mention should also be made of the role of the
media in propagating a climate of intolerance.
3. Violations of freedom of thought, conscience and
religion or belief
107. This type of violation takes the following forms: policies, laws and
regulations, practices and acts contrary to the principle of conscientious
objection and the freedom to change and keep one's religion and belief.
4. Violations of the freedom to manifest one's religion or belief
108. The fourth category of violations comprises policies, laws and
regulations, practices and acts constituting controls, interference,
prohibitions and restrictions on freedom to manifest one's religion or belief.
5. Violations of the freedom to dispose of religious property
109. These violations display the following characteristics: policies,
practices and acts that impair the freedom to dispose of religious property in
the form of non-restitution of confiscated religious property; refusal of
access to places of worship (obstacles to, and even banning of, construction
or rental; restrictions on the number of followers); attacks against and
closure and destruction of places of worship, cemeteries and denominational
schools, and confiscation of religious property (including religious works)
6. Violations of physical integrity and health of persons
( religious figures and the faithful )
110. The sixth category comprises policies, practices and acts in the form of
threats, ill-treatment (including slavery and rape), arrests and detentions,
forced disappearances, and even death sentences, executions and killings.
7. Violations affecting women
111. This last category embraces the previous six categories of violations.
The most tragic illustration is the Taliban's anti-feminine policy in
Afghanistan: it is tantamount to veritable apartheid against women, as women,
and on the basis of specious interpretations of Islam. This obscurantism, the
product of religious extremism combining religion and politics in the
interests of power, excludes women from society and consigns them to a grey
area where they enjoy neither citizenship nor rights and where their
submission to the all-powerful man in the name of Allah is the order of the
day. Such aberrations are also overt in India among communities close to the
Talibans, who publicly declare that an unveiled Muslim woman's vote runs
E/CN.4/1999/58
page 28
counter to Islam and that women are inferior, according to religion and the
prophecies. In Ghana, in accordance with traditions claiming to be based on
religion, women are used as slaves, including sex slaves. Lastly, in addition
to assassinations, one of the most extreme manifestations and consequences of
obscurantism and barbarism against women in the name of religion is rape (in
various forms, such as gang rape, forced marriage, etc.) and, in the case of
the communications to which this report refers, of nuns, girls and women.
112. These most visible and shocking examples of manipulations and
interpretations specifically affecting women must not, however, divert
attention from more subtle, less spectacular forms of intolerance and
discrimination which are, nevertheless, just as effective in their aim of
enslaving women; a case in point is the refusal to adopt affirmative action on
behalf of women, especially in the context of parliamentary elections. We
should also recall that these discriminatory policies and practices in some
cases exclude any possibility of appeal and dialogue, even on the part of men,
as is illustrated by a male writer's alleged arrest because in his writings he
advocated sexual equality. Generally speaking, it is important to stress that
these violations may be committed not only by extremist groups and
communities, but more often than not by society (as shown by the alleged
pressure exerted on a Muslim woman who had converted to another religion) and
official institutions (c.f. communications on the attitude of parliaments to
women and their position in public and private life, etc.).
113. Replies were received from the following States after finalization of
the report submitted to the Commission on Human Rights at its fifty-fourth
session (E/CN.4/1998/G): Austria, Brunei Darussalam, Egypt, Gambia, India and
Kuwait (see A/53/279)
114. The Special Rapporteur has still not received replies from the
following 27 States to communications dispatched in connection with the report
to the Commission at its fifty-fourth session: Afghanistan, Albania, Angola,
Azerbaijan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Comoros, Gabon, Georgia, Iran, Latvia,
Mauritania, Mongolia, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria,
Pakistan, Portugal, Qatar, Russian Federation, Somalia, Sudan, United Arab
Emirates, Uzbekistan, Yemen and Yugoslavia. The Special Rapporteur invites
States that have not yet responded to allegations to express their views and
comments, and reminds them of the virtue of dialogue. Indeed, he is beginning
to wonder whether, by their silence, certain States do not wish to confirm the
substance of the allegations made.
V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
115. Fifty years after the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, article 18 of which is the cornerstone of freedom of religion and
belief, and despite the adoption of successive international human rights
instruments guaranteeing the right to freedom of religion and belief (art. 18
of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 13 of the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the
Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief) , one cannot help noticing the
persistence of manifestations of intolerance and discrimination based on
religion or belief in countries at different stages of development and with
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 29
different political, social and religious systems. An analysis of
communications transmitted since the fifty-fourth session of the Commission on
Human Rights and the fifty-third session of the General Assembly reveals the
following developments:
(a) A decline in anti-religious State policies and the manipulation of
religion in the interest of a political ideology; and yet
(b) The persistence of such policies in several countries, and even
the emergence of problems they have brought about, such as those connected
with the restitution of confiscated religious property;
(c) An upsurge of State policies directed against minorities in
matters of religion and belief, and particularly against unrecognized
communities, in other words “sects or new religious movements”;
(d) A growing number of policies and practices of intolerance and
discrimination on the part of non-State entities. The first category of such
entities comprises religious and denominational bodies responsible mainly
for inter- and intra-community violations. The representatives of these
communities and their followers act against members of their own faith who
belong to the same or different branches - examples being the status of women
referred to in the seventh category of violations (see paras. 111 and 112)
and the status of converts, referred to in the third category of violations
(para. 107) . These same representatives and believers are also at odds with
communities of a different faith. The second category of non-State entities
that sometimes overlaps the first comprises politico-religious parties or
movements like the Taliban. These two categories raise the issue of the links
between politics and the religion and their manipulation, which in this case
is a source of intolerance and discrimination, the most extreme form of which
is religious extremism;
(e) An increase in the number of policies and practices of intolerance
and discrimination against women as such, deriving from interpretations and
traditions attributed by men to religion. No religion or belief is safe from
this trend, which is apparent in various forms throughout the world.
Major challenges are therefore posed in particular by the proliferation of
manifestations of hatred, intolerance and violence based on sectarianism and
extremism, and it is no easy task to make a clear distinction between
religious conflicts and those of other kinds, particularly political and
ethnic.
116. Guarantees of freedom of religion and belief require, in addition to the
adoption of international human rights standards and national laws that
conform to international law, mechanisms and procedures designed to put them
into effect. The Vienna World Conference on Human Rights, in its Declaration
and Programme of Action, called upon all Governments to take all appropriate
measures in compliance with their international obligations and with due
regard to their respective legal systems to counter intolerance and related
violence based on religion or belief, including practices of discrimination
E/CN.4/1999/ 58
page 30
against women and including the desecration of religious sites, recognizing
that every individual has the right to freedom of thought, conscience,
expression and religion. It also invited all States to put into practice the
provisions of the 1981 Declaration.
117. The Special Rapporteur has identified a number of factors that are of
importance in combating and preventing intolerance and discrimination based on
religion or belief. Those factors are both inherent in his mandate as well as
external.
A. Internal factors
118. Efforts must be made to increase the financial, human and technical
resources allocated to the mandate, gradually to adopt a new methodology of
work, and to ensure consistency between the title of Special Rapporteur, his
mandate and its implementation.
1. Resources
119. The Special Rapporteur is convinced of the need to boost his mandate,
but has come up against a virtually insurmountable barrier, namely, the
paucity of resources allocated to his activities, his initiatives and his
recommendations as a whole. Being aware of the financial crisis faced by the
United Nations and the insignificant share of the regular budget allocated to
the Office of the High Commissioner, he has sought voluntary contributions for
his activities. In this connection, he wishes to thank the Norwegian
Government for its exemplary action in this field which has taken the form not
only of financial and political support for the Oslo Conference on Freedom of
Religion or Belief, but also of a financial contribution earmarked, as a
matter of priority, for activities relating to freedom of religion and belief.
Increased funds should provide the Special Rapporteur with the minimum human
resources necessary for the effective performance of the normal activities
connected with his mandate (communications and in situ visits) and the
implementation of his recommendations on studies and education (see paras. 6
to 13 above)
120. By and large, it would be desirable for these financial contributions to
be used for the development of other informational resources and methodologies
for inter alia collecting information, monitoring compliance, making available
in simplified form for analysis all religious, philosophical and scientific
research on freedom of religion or belief. To that end, the creation of an
Internet site on the 1981 Declaration would be an extremely promising project
meeting all the requirements implicit in the mandate (communications, in situ
visits, studies and an international compendium of enactments; see paras. 2 to
S above) . As regards sources of information, the Special Rapporteur, while
constantly mindful of his sources' authenticity and reliability, is of the
view that those in the developing countries should be strengthened in order to
assure human rights victims and advocates access to the special procedures;
they must not be left behind in matters of accessing information, particularly
in the context of modern communication technologies (fax, Internet, etc.).
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 31
2. A new methodology
121. These additional resources could also facilitate the adoption of a new
approach to the preparation of reports. The Special Rapporteur is of the view
that the general report should systematically cover all States and all
religions and beliefs; it should contain analyses of each State so that its
economic, social, cultural, civil and political context can be taken into
account when cases and situations of intolerance and discrimination are being
examined. It would also make for reflection on and a better understanding of
developments in the field of freedom of religion or belief, as well as the
stakes involved in freedom of religion or belief. For example, the record
number of communications concerning Iran this year will not have gone
unnoticed. Although aware of what still remains to be done, we must
acknowledge the strides made by President Khatami's policy, such as
progress in women's representation (posts of Vice-President of the State,
diplomats, magistrates, police officers, a woman mayor of a district in
Tehran, etc.), his statement calling for the non-application of the
fatwa against Salman Rushdie, his address to the last session of the
General Assembly and support for General Assembly resolution 53/22
“United Nations Year of Dialogue among Civilizations”. The Special
Rapporteur's communications should therefore be viewed not only from the
standpoint of their intrinsic importance, but also in the Iranian context and
the stakes involved. The communications concerning Iran may be interpreted
either as reflecting its maintenance of a policy of intolerance and
discrimination, particularly against the Baha'is, or as revealing a strategy
on the part of conservatives to thwart President Khatami's progressive
advances, or as both at once. It is therefore of vital importance that a
report should be prepared from that angle, using the approach described above.
3. Title and consistency of the mandate
122. The Special Rapporteur reiterates his recommendation that a more neutral
and encouraging title, such as “Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or
belief”, should be used. The present one, with its reference to religious
intolerance, antagonizes certain interlocutors and sometimes makes dialogue
difficult. A different title could embrace all aspects of freedom of religion
or belief. It must also be consistent with the mandate, covering not only
religion but also belief and intolerance, as well as discrimination, and
reflect the balanced dialogue-oriented approach followed by the Special
Rapporteur in his work, in accordance with the resolutions governing his
mandate.
B. External factors
123. With regard to the external factors that can help to combat and prevent
intolerance and discrimination, the Special Rapporteur wishes, first of all,
to stress that action to promote freedom of religion or belief is inextricably
linked to action to promote democracy and development. Extreme poverty, in
particular, is likely to render human rights illusory and favour extremism.
In other words, these factors cannot be divorced from human rights.
124. Efforts to guarantee freedom of religion or belief imply a prevention
strategy. Education can, especially through the schools, inculcate values
E/CN.4/1999/58
page 32
based on human rights and give rise to a human rights culture. In the
interest of devising a worldwide school strategy for combating intolerance and
discrimination based on religion or belief, the Special Rapporteur recommends
the organization of an international conference on education on the initiative
of States and/or NGOs or even the international coalition advocated and
launched by the Oslo Conference.
125. In acknowledging the need to lay the foundations of prevention at the
earliest opportunity, the Special Rapporteur deems it a matter of priority to
attack the dual scourge of extremism and discrimination against women:
(a) Extremism, whether or not it has a genuinely religious basis, is
not limited to any one faith and must be given no quarter. This is why the
Special Rapporteur reiterates his recommendation that a “minimum set of
standard rules and principles of conduct and behaviour in respect of religious
extremism” should be drawn up and adopted by the international community;
(b) Discrimination and intolerance against women, supposedly
prescribed by religion or tradition, must be resolutely condemned. To
that end, the Special Rapporteur reiterates his recommendation that a
seminar should be held on the status of women from the standpoint of
religion, traditions and human rights, so as not only to identify
manifestations of discrimination and intolerance, but also to formulate
practical recommendations and a plan of action for eradicating such practices.
126. The Special Rapporteur advocates the creation of an international
coalition around the 1981 Declaration in order to back up his activities and
considers that coordination with other institutions directly or indirectly
involved in the area of freedom of religion or belief, such as UNESCO, ILO and
other organizations like OSCE, is vital.
127. Such projects and ideas imply contributions by all the actors - State
and non-governmental alike - in the international community. They are thanked
for their very valuable cooperation in the service of the mandate since its
inception.
E/CN. 4/1999/58
page 33
Annex
Follow-up of the missions to Australia and Germany
1. Since 1996, the Special Rapporteur has defined and implemented a visit
follow-up procedure. This procedure consists in asking States which have
received an in situ visit to send their comments and any information on action
taken or envisaged by the authorities concerned to implement the
recommendations made in the mission reports. It takes the form of “follow-up
tables” which are sent to States and refer to the Special Rapporteur's
recommendations.
2. Paragraph 21 of this document contains the list of reports submitted
since 1996 to the General Assembly and to the Commission on Human Rights, in
which follow-up tables and the replies of States appear.
3. On 28 September 1998 a follow-up table was sent to the Australian
Government: it reproduced the text of paragraphs 114 to 127 of the report on
the visit to Australia (E/CN.4/1998/6/Add.1) . On the same day, a follow-up
table was sent to the German Government: it reproduced the text of
paragraphs 89 to 91, 96 to 98, 101 to 103 and 105 and 106 of the report on the
visit to Germany (E/CN.4/1998/6/Add.2).
