IHEU protests to the UN

IHEU, in collaboration with two other NGOs, has been campaigning for the past two years to persuade the UN Commission for Human Rights to condemn "those who call to kill in the name of God or religion". Our efforts have been met by attempted censorship, ad-hominem attacks, vilification and abuse. For the full story see: www.iheu.org/uncampaign

A formal letter of complaint was sent to the chairman of the UN Sub-Commission on the promotion and Protection of Human Rights following a blatant attack on our spokesman on 26th July.

Extracts from the letter the Association of World Education, the Association of World Citizens and IHEU sent to Mr. Vladimir Kartashkin, Chair of the 57th Session, UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights.

Formal Complaint

Ad-hominem Attacks on an NGO Representative and Attempted Censorship
Sub-Commission: 26 July 2005 (p.m.), plenum meeting, under item 2

We wish to register this formal complaint to you as Chairman of the 57th session of the Sub-Commission for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, and would ask you to accept our request that it be circulated to members of the bureau, the expanded bureau, and all members of the Sub-Commission.

This matter concerns several calumnies and ad hominem attacks that were made on Tuesday, 26 July 2005 against Mr David G. Littman - a representative of the Association for World Education - while he was delivering a joint oral statement on behalf of three NGOs: the Association for World Education, the International Humanist and Ethical Union, and the Association of World Citizens.

One member accused him of personally attacking Islam despite the fact that he was reading a joint statement for the three NGOs. Just as delegates of Governments represent their Governments and not their own personal views, so NGO speakers represent their organisations and not themselves. This policy is necessary for the effective functioning of work and should apply to any 'point of order' or 'right of reply.'

Our joint statement contains not one word of an "attack on Islam"; in fact, we condemned terrorist attacks carried out in the name of Islam by those "who defame Islam by calls to kill in the name of Allah or of Islam," and we then called on the Sub-Commission and the Commission "to adopt a clear resolution by consensus, or a Chairman's statement, in which any call to kill, to terrorise, or to use violence in the name God, or any religion is categorically condemned." These words were read out by Mr Littman and are on the UN's tape recording of the meeting and will probably appear in the summary record. Surely this is a matter on which all members of UN bodies would agree? This member also accused Mr Littman of being an "Islamophobe," adding: "Mr Littman has never - since I have been at this Sub-Commission - I have never heard him make a statement which did not attack Islam." UN records show that this is incorrect.

Another member suggested that a quotation by Mr Littman of article 8 of the Hamas charter was probably inaccurate, and that "it would not be the first time" he had done this. The Hamas Charter is posted on several websites and its quoted article 8 is easily verifiable by all. As an historian, Mr. Littman is careful never to quote anything that he had not checked personally; his statements have been on the public record since 1986, and such calumnies have never been proven by any delegate or member.

The same member also alleged that Mr. Littman was "pretending to speak for all the Jews in the world, but I can assure you, in the name of my Jewish wife that he does not speak for her." None of the three organisations for which he was speaking have any Jewish affiliation. Mr. Littman has on previous occasions referred to the fact that he was speaking for 1.5 million Reform and Liberal Jews worldwide (when authorised to do so), but it is totally irrelevant in this particular context (as is the personal information concerning the member's Jewish wife).

In view of the seriousness of these regular ad hominem attacks on representatives - especially of NGOs, and particularly at the Commission and the Sub-Commission - we are submitting a formal complaint and appeal for a legal opinion to be issued by the competent UN legal authority, and for a new general rule of procedure to be introduced, by which any ad hominem attack against a speaker would automatically be ruled 'out of order' by Chairpersons of UN bodies, especially at the Commission and the Sub-Commission on Human Rights.

Yours respectfully,

René Wadlow
Main Representative of the Association for World Education Main Representative of the Association of World Citizens

Roy W. Brown
President and Main Representative of the International Humanist and Ethical Union

Statement by Main Representative and President of IHEU, Roy Brown
Read by Léonore Reverdin, Wednesday 10th August 2005

57th Session, UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights (25 July - 12 August 2005) Agenda item 6(c): New priorities, in particular terrorism and counter terrorism

Mr Chairman,

We are intervening under sub-item 6 (c) with regard to terrorism, human rights, international solidarity, and the World Programme for Human Rights Education. The Sub-Commission will be aware that the President of IHEU together with the Main Representative of the Association for World Education and the Association of World Citizens, have sent you a formal letter of complaint regarding the ad-hominem attacks on our spokesman, Mr David Littman at the afternoon session of the Sub-Commission on Tuesday 26th July, when speaking about terrorism. We are making this complaint available.

In that letter we quoted the words of the late Commissioner for Human Rights, Sergio Veillo de Mello in which he reminded the Commission - and his words apply equally to the Sub-Commission - that: "Membership of the Commission on Human Rights must carry responsibilities. I therefore wonder whether the time has not come for the Commission itself to develop... a code of conduct for members while they serve on the Commission. After all, the Commission on Human Rights has a duty to humanity and the members of the Commission must themselves set the example of adherence to the international human rights norms - in practice as well as in law." (E/CN.4/2003/14, from his introduction, point 5)

Ad-hominem attacks invariably discredit those who make them, but they can also act as a form of censorship, diverting attention from the matter in hand, in this case, our request that the Sub-Commission, either through a clear resolution by consensus, or by a Chairman's decision, unequivocally condemn any call to kill, to terrorise, or to use violence in the name of God, or of any religion.

We make no reference to any particular religion in our request. We also recognise that not all violence in the world can be blamed on religion, nor is a single religion to blame for violence; there hardly exists a religion in the world that has not been called upon at one time or another to justify violence.

We would respectfully remind the members of the Sub-Commission that you have an awesome responsibility. The world looks to you for guidance on what is becoming a major issue of worldwide concern. We urge you to remember that you are not here to defend the interests of your respective governments - nor of your religions. You are here to defend humanity and the human rights of ordinary people. The first human right is the right to life, and without life all other rights are meaningless.

A resolution such as we have proposed would send a clear message to the world that killing the innocent in the name of religion is totally unacceptable. On the other hand, your failure to do so will cast grave doubt on where your priorities actually lie.

The world needs to hear your message. Please do not fail us.

Thank you.