Blasphemy and the United Nations

Blasphemy became a serious matter for the United Nations in 1999. In that year, Pakistan brought before the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (CHR), under the agenda item on racism, a resolution entitled "Defamation of Islam." The resolution expressed deep concern at the negative stereotyping of Islam, and urged the members of the United Nations to combat religious intolerance against Muslims. Each year between 1999 and 2006, the Commission approved similar resolutions. In March 2006, the Human Rights Commission became the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). The UNHRC approved similar resolutions for 2006 and thereafter. Beginning in 2005, the United Nations General Assembly adopted annually a resolution entitled "Combating Defamation of Religions."
1999
In April 1999, at the urging of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), Pakistan brought before the United Nations Commission on Human Rights a resolution entitled "Defamation of Islam." The purpose of the resolution was to have the Commission stand up against what the OIC claimed was a campaign to defame Islam. In 2003, 2004, and 2005, by similar votes, the CHR approved resolutions entitled "Combating defamation of religions." 101 states voted in favour of the resolution, 53 voted against, and 20 abstained.
2006
In March 2006, the HRC became the UNHRC. The UNHRC approved a resolution entitled 'Combating Defamation of Religions', and submitted it to the General Assembly. In the General Assembly, 111 member states voted in favour of the resolution, 54 voted against, and 18 abstained. Russia and China, permanent members of the UN Security Council, voted for the Resolution.
2007
On 30 March 2007, the UNHRC adopted a resolution entitled "Combating Defamation of Religions." The resolution called upon the High Commissioner for Human Rights to report on the activities of her office with regard to combating defamation of religions.
On 30 March 2007, the UNHRC adopted a resolution entitled "Elimination of all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief." The resolution called upon the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief to report on this issue for the Human Rights Council at its sixth session.
In August 2007, the Special Rapporteur, Doudou Diène, reported to the General Assembly "on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance on the manifestations of defamation of religions and in particular on the serious implications of Islamophobia on the enjoyment of all rights." Among other recommendations, the Special Rapporteur recommended that the Member States promote dialogue between cultures, civilizations, and religions taking into consideration:

On 4 September 2007, the High Commissioner for Human Rights reported to the UNHRC that "Enhanced cooperation and stronger political will by Member States are essential for combating defamation of religions."
On 18 December 2007, the General Assembly voted on another resolution entitled "Combating Defamation of Religions." 108 states voted in favour of the resolution; 51 voted against it; and 25 abstained.The resolution required the Secretary General to report to the sixty-third session of the General Assembly on the implementation of the resolution, and to have regard for “the possible correlation between defamation of religions and the upsurge in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world.”
2008
On 27 March 2008, the UNHRC passed another resolution about the defamation of religion. The resolution :
21 members were in favour of the resolution; 10 were opposed; 14 abstained.
The High Commissioner presented her report about defamation of, and contempt for, religions on 5 September 2008. She proposed the holding of a consultation with experts from 2 to 3 October 2008 in Geneva about the permissible limitations to freedom of expression in accordance with international human rights law. In another report, dated 12 September 2008, the High Commissioner noted that different countries have different notions of what "defamation of religion" means.
Githu Muigai, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, addressed the UNHRC on 19 September 2008. He delivered the report prepared by Doudou Diène. The report called on Member States to shift the present discussion in international fora from the idea of "defamation of religions" to the legal concept: "incitement to national, racial or religious hatred," which is grounded on international legal instruments.
On 24 November 2008, during the Sixty-third Session, the General Assembly's Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian & Cultural) approved a resolution entitled 'Combating defamation of religions'. The resolution requests "the Secretary-General to submit a report on the implementation of the present resolution, including on the possible correlation between defamation of religions and the upsurge in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world, to the General Assembly at its sixty-fourth session." 85 states voted in favour of the resolution; 50 states voted against the resolution; 42 states abstained.
2009
In February 2009, Zamir Akram, permanent representative of Pakistan to the United Nations Office at Geneva, in a meeting of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, commented on the "defamation of religion." He said "there was an impression that Pakistan was trying to put in place an international anti-blasphemy provision in the context of the Durban Review Conference." Akram said the impression "was totally incorrect." Akram's delegation said:
In advance of 26 March 2009, more than 200 civil society organizations from 46 countries, including Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Secular, Humanist and Atheist groups, urged the UNHRC by a joint petition to reject any resolution against the defamation of religion.
On 26 March 2009, the UNHRC passed a resolution, proposed by Pakistan, which condemned the "defamation of religion" as a human rights violation by a vote of 23-11, with 13 abstentions. The resolution:
Supporters of the resolution argued that the resolution is necessary to prevent the defamation of Islam while opponents argued that such a resolution was an attempt to bring to the international body the blasphemy laws prevalent in some Muslim countries.
On 1 July 2009, Githu Muigai, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, submitted to the UNHRC the report requested by it on 26 March 2009. The report "reiterates the recommendation of his predecessor to encourage a shift away from the sociological concept of the defamation of religions towards the legal norm of non-incitement to national, racial or religious hatred."
On 31 July 2009, the Secretary General submitted to the General Assembly the report that it requested in November 2008. The Secretary General noted, "The Special Rapporteurs called for anchoring the debate in the existing international legal framework provided by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights — more specifically its articles 19 and 20." The Secretary General concluded, "In order to tackle the root causes of intolerance, a much broader set of policy measures needs to be addressed covering the areas of intercultural dialogue as well as education for tolerance and diversity."
On 30 September 2009, at the UNHRC's twelfth session, the United States and Egypt introduced a resolution which condemned inter alia "racial and religious stereotyping." The European Union's representative, Jean-Baptiste Mattei (France), said the European Union "rejected and would continue to reject the concept of defamation of religions." He said, "Human rights laws did not and should not protect belief systems." The OIC's representative on the UNHRC, Zamir Akram (Pakistan), said, "Negative stereotyping or defamation of religions was a modern expression of religious hatred and xenophobia." Carlos Portales (Chile) observed, "The concept of the defamation of religion took them in an area that could lead to the actual prohibition of opinions." The UNHRC adopted the resolution without a vote. met to update the measures for combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance that the Durban I conference had formulated. The committee achieved little because of conflict over a variety of issues including "defamation of religion." The United States said that defamation of religion is “a fundamentally flawed concept.” Sweden, for the European Union, argued that international human rights law protects individuals, not institutions or religions. France insisted that the UN must not afford legal protection to systems of belief. Syria criticized the "typical and expected Western silence" on "acts of religious discrimination." Syria said "in real terms defamation means targeting Muslims."
Zamir Akram (Pakistan) wrote to the Ad Hoc Committee on 29 October 2009 to explain why the OIC would not abandon the idea of defamation of religion. Akram's letter states:
The letter says defamation of religion has been "wrongly linked with malafide intentions to its perceived clash with" the freedom of opinion and expression. The letter declares:
In New York, on 29 October 2009, the UN's Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian & Cultural) approved a draft resolution entitled "Combating defamation of religions" by a vote which had 81 for, 55 against, and 43 abstaining.
On 18 December 2009, the General Assembly approved a resolution deploring the defamation of religions by a vote of 80 nations in favour and 61 against with 42 abstentions.
2010
On 25 March 2010, 20 members of the UNHRC voted in favour of a resolution entitled "Combating defamation of religions"; 17 members voted against the resolution; 8 abstained; 2 were absent.

Main Menu

See Also

Main Menu