Wednesday, February 20, 2019

The EU's Work On Freedom Of Religion Or Belief Is Being Challenged From Within


Feb 19, 2019,11:43 pm

Contributor

Getting the European Union (and its different mechanisms) to engage effectively on the subject of freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) has always been difficult. FoRB has never been high on the EU’s agenda. Especially where the events occur outside of the EU. The EU was, after all, set up as an economic (and political) union. Yet, in recent years, the EU has been more active on the issue of human rights, tackling severe human rights violations.



European Union flags waving in front of the European Commission building in Brussels, Belgium. (Photo by Dursun Aydemir/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images)
GETTY


Over the years, the EU has addressed the issue of FoRB in a number of ways. For example, in 2013, the EU adopted Guidelines on the promotion and protection of the right to FoRB. These Guidelines continue to inform the EU’s external action. The EU has been vocal to condemn religiously motivated mass atrocities perpetrated around the world, especially, those perpetrated by Daesh. It has proved a vocal force calling for accountability. The EU has also been delivering humanitarian assistance to the persecuted communities.

A significant step was taken when in May 2016, President of the European Commission, Mr Jean-Claude Juncker, announced that Mr Jan Figel would be appointed as the first Special Envoy for the promotion of freedom of religion or belief outside the EU (EU Special Envoy on FoRB) with a mandate for one year, which is renewable. According to that Decision of the President of the European Commission, “The Special Envoy for the promotion of freedom of religion or belief outside the EU shall report on an annual basis in the context of the dialogue between the Commission and churches and religious associations or communities, led by the First Vice-President in charge of Better Regulation, Inter-institutional Relations, the Rule of Law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights.”

This was the first mandate of its kind. However, in recent years, it has become very clear that the mandate needs to be strengthened to maximize the impact of the office.

In pursuit of this aim, Mr Andrzej Grzyb MEP, a Rapporteur for the Committee on Foreign Affairs, produced a report on the “EU Guidelines and the mandate of the EU Special Envoy on the promotion of freedom of religion or belief outside the EU.” Mr Grzyb made several sensible recommendations to strengthen the role. He suggested raising the visibility of the role, providing adequate human and financial assistance, and enabling a full mandate and capacity to implement the EU Guidelines. The report was adopted by an overwhelming majority of 41 in favor, one against and two abstentions.

Despite the important recommendations and the overwhelming support for the report, some voices from within the EP continue to diminish the importance of this step. The criticism is not directly related to the proposals but rather to the wording of the report and specifically, a list of vulnerable groups affected by religious persecution that includes, among others, non-believers, atheists, women and girls and of individuals based on their sexual orientation. Among others, the critics suggest that some of these groups should not be mentioned in the report (specifically, women and girls and individuals because of their sexual orientation).


Such criticism misses a very important and fundamental point about the right to FoRB. The right to FoRB does not only concern the right to have a religion or belief and manifest it. It also incorporates the right not to have a religion or not to be forced to manifest or follow a religion. This much is very clear from the wording of Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the commentaries to Article 18 and various statements made by the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to FoRB.

Furthermore, for example, women and girls must be specifically mentioned whenever the issue of religious persecution is discussed. Women and girls are particularly vulnerable to religious persecution – both because of their religion and because of their sex. The best example is of Yazidi and Christian women and girls targeted by Daesh. They were attacked because of their religion and sexually enslaved, raped and abused because of their sex. Daesh used rape and sexual violence as a weapon to wage their “religious war” on infidels. Women and girls belonging to religious minority groups are among the most vulnerable to persecution. They deserve their place on the list. They deserve the issue to be adequately addressed.

It is also crucial to consider the inclusion of individuals targeted because of their sexual orientation. Turning again to the example of the Daesh atrocities, Daesh also targeted individuals because of their sexual orientation. Among the reported atrocities, Daesh stands accused of throwing them from high buildings or burning in cages. Daesh justified such atrocities with the fact that these persons did not follow their perverted interpretation of Islam. Hence, such atrocities can be classified as religious persecution.

It is deeply concerning that the criticism of the report, that may ultimately diminish its importance in strengthening the EU’s work on FoRB outside of the EU, is predicated on such a basic misunderstanding of the protection and scope of the right to FoRB. Such criticisms also demonstrate a lack of understanding of the scope of mass atrocities like those perpetrated by Daesh, or other acts of violence. In relation to religious persecution, especially that which amounts to genocide and crimes against humanity or war crimes, there needs to be understanding that there are groups of people who are more affected than others as a result of their characteristic. We need to be vigilant to spot the religious persecution but also in identifying the groups most affected and then in protecting them adequately.

The recommendations of the new EU report will add leverage to the fight against religious persecution around the world. It gives hope to those affected that there is a future for them. It gives recognition of the suffering endured by various groups and re-energizes the attempts to recognize human dignity for everyone everywhere. Such attempts should not be diminished from inside of the EU.

Ewelina U. Ochab is a human rights advocate and author of the book “Never Again: Legal Responses to a Broken Promise in the Middle East.”




No comments: