International Humanist and Ethical Union
World Population Foundation

Human Rights Council, Fourth Session 14 - 30 March 2007
Statement by IHEU main representative, Roy W. Brown, 29 March 2007

Defamation of Religions

Mr President.

We welcome the report of the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and in particular his conclusion that “There is no contradiction between freedom of religion and freedom of expression” [A/HRC/4/27 para 70]. This view however is clearly not shared by all members of the Council, nor by all special rapporteurs.

We refer to the draft resolution [A/HRC/4/L.12] “Combating Defamation of Religions”. On 14 March the spokesperson for the Organisation of the Islamic Conference referred to what she described as “a dire need to fill the judicial vacuum of deficiency in dealing with the question of respect for religions…” and asked for “effective and legally binding measures for combating defamation of all religions and incitement to racial and religious violence”.

This however is to confuse two quite separate issues: defamation of religion, and incitement to violence. All of us, Mr President, must condemn incitement to racial and religious violence, and in this connexion we hope that the OIC will condemn the death threats made last week by Islamic extremists against the Bengali writer Taslima Nasrin.

Mr President, no-one has a duty to respect any religion. Furthermore, lack of respect for a belief should not be confused with hatred of the believer. It is the believer that merits protection, not the belief.

And how are we to define defamation? Are we no longer to be permitted to condemn misogyny, homophobia, or calls to kill - if they are made in the name of religion? Are we obliged to respect religious practices that we find offensive? Is lack of respect for such practices to be considered a crime? Are ideas, are religions now to be accorded human rights? Surely, when religion invades the public domain it becomes an ideology like any other, and must be open to criticism as such. To deny the claims of religion is neither defamation nor blasphemy.

Finally, one can only express dismay at the demonising of European secularism by the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism. He clearly fails to understand that secularism – that is, state neutrality in matters of religion and belief - is not an expression of intolerance but a guarantee of religious freedom for all, a defence of the values on which our human rights are based, the very values that this Council should be seeking to protect.

Thank you, sir

[1] Defamation of Religions vs Freedom of Expression: Finding the Balance in a Democratic Society. http://www.iheu.org/system/files/Grinberg+report+2006.pdf