Month: July 2023
-
Arguments submitted at Europe’s top human rights court on COVID worship ban
Top EU official and former Special Envoy for Freedom of Religion or Belief, Dr. Ján Figeľ, challenges 2021 COVID restrictions on public worship at the European Court of Human Rights- Worship bans are “illiberal and non-democratic,” states Figeľ, who is bringing the potentially precedent-setting religious freedom case co-represented by ADF International
Strasbourg (28 July 2023) – Are blanket bans on public worship compatible with the international human right to the communal exercise of religious freedom? This is the question brought by former EU Special Envoy for Freedom of Religion or Belief, Dr. Ján Figeľ, who has filed a challenge at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on the 2021 COVID restrictions on public worship. Figeľ, co-represented by human rights organisation ADF International and local Slovak lawyer Martin Timcsak, now submitted his arguments to the court.
“Religious freedom as a basic human right deserves the highest level of protection. Prohibiting people from worship and communal religious exercise is profoundly illiberal and illegitimate. Worship bans were unfair and disproportionate. Our arguments submitted to the Court demonstrate clearly that blanket bans are violations of religious freedom under international human rights law,” stated Dr. Ján Figeľ.
Figeľ’s case might be the first where Europe’s top human rights court rules on the blanket bans on public worship during the Covid pandemic. The decision would set a precedent for 46 European States with 676 million citizens.
“In times of crisis, fundamental freedoms need to be protected, rather than weakened.”
In 2021 the Slovak Republic prolonged its COVID restrictions, banning religious services. Dr. Ján Figeľ and ADF International lead lawyer Dr. Adina Portaru argue that the restrictions violated both national and international law.
“We are committed to supporting Dr. Ján Figeľ and his defence of religious freedom. The international legal framework is very clear in its protection of this right as it benefits everyone – people of faith as well as people of no faith. Fundamental freedoms apply to all, and in times of crisis they must be protected rather than weakened,” said Dr. Adina Portaru, Senior Counsel for ADF International.
Individual or digital worship not sufficient
In the submitted arguments Figeľ’s legal team highlights that religious freedom specifically includes the right to communal worship under the law. The Slovak government previously had argued that spirituality can be lived out individually. However, as the ECtHR has upheld repeatedly, freedom of religion specifically includes the “freedom to manifest one’s religion not only alone and in private but also in community with others, in public and within the circle of those whose faith one shares”.
The Slovak government also put forward the option of digital worship as a justification for the blanket ban. Recent court rulings throughout Europe, however, arrive at different conclusions. Scotland’s highest civil court ruled on the same issue, holding that digital options “are best viewed as an alternative to worship, rather than worship itself”.
Restrictions were not “proportional, appropriate, and necessary”
The case rests on the fact that the Slovak blanket ban was neither proportional, nor appropriate or necessary.
“Nobody should be prohibited from peacefully exercising his or her convictions, and it was evident that religious worship could be conducted safely during the pandemic. Blanket bans ignore the central role that religion plays in the lives of believers. For people of faith, communal worship, spiritual nourishment, can be as important as bodily nourishment. That’s why international and European law and our very own Constitution holds religious freedom so dearly. I expect that the ECtHR will consider this holistically with a keen eye for the role of human rights in a democratic society,” said Dr. Ján Figeľ upon submitting the arguments.
Former Special Envoy for Freedom of Religion now defends human rights at home
Ján Figeľ served as European Commissioner in various positions between 2004 and 2009. In 2016 he was appointed as Special Envoy for Freedom of Religion or Belief outside the EU, a position he held until 2019.
“As Special Envoy, it was evident to me that the EU cannot credibly advance religious freedom throughout the world if its Member States fail to uphold fundamental freedoms at home,” Figeľ added.
A newly released video features Dr. Ján Figeľ and ADF International lead lawyer Dr. Adina Portaru in Bratislava/Slovakia.
Worldwide advocacy for religious freedom
Figeľ’s challenge has been backed by a civil society coalition of diverse representatives from the arts, academia, and politics with different faith backgrounds. Bishops and other faith leaders also have welcomed his case.
ADF International has been involved worldwide in cases regarding worship bans and violations of religious freedom in the context of Covid restrictions. In Uganda, the organisation supported a coalition of Christians and Muslims challenging a discriminatory prohibition of religious gatherings. Further, ADF International advocated to open churches for worship in Ireland, Scotland, and Switzerland.
-
Arguments submitted at Europe’s top human rights court on COVID worship ban
- Top EU official and former Special Envoy for Freedom of Religion or Belief, Dr. Ján Figeľ, challenges 2021 COVID restrictions on public worship at the European Court of Human Rights
- Worship bans are “illiberal and non-democratic,” states Figeľ, who is bringing the potentially precedent-setting religious freedom case co-represented by ADF International
Strasbourg (28 July 2023) – Are blanket bans on public worship compatible with the international human right to the communal exercise of religious freedom? This is the question brought by former EU Special Envoy for Freedom of Religion or Belief, Dr. Ján Figeľ, who has filed a challenge at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on the 2021 COVID restrictions on public worship. Figeľ, co-represented by human rights organisation ADF International and local Slovak lawyer Martin Timcsak, now submitted his arguments to the court.
“Religious freedom as a basic human right deserves the highest level of protection. Prohibiting people from worship and communal religious exercise is profoundly illiberal and illegitimate. Worship bans were unfair and disproportionate. Our arguments submitted to the Court demonstrate clearly that blanket bans are violations of religious freedom under international human rights law,” stated Dr. Ján Figeľ.
Figeľ’s case might be the first where Europe’s top human rights court rules on the blanket bans on public worship during the Covid pandemic. The decision would set a precedent for 46 European States with 676 million citizens.
“In times of crisis, fundamental freedoms need to be protected, rather than weakened.”
In 2021 the Slovak Republic prolonged its COVID restrictions, banning religious services. Dr. Ján Figeľ and ADF International lead lawyer Dr. Adina Portaru argue that the restrictions violated both national and international law.
“We are committed to supporting Dr. Ján Figeľ and his defence of religious freedom. The international legal framework is very clear in its protection of this right as it benefits everyone – people of faith as well as people of no faith. Fundamental freedoms apply to all, and in times of crisis they must be protected rather than weakened,” said Dr. Adina Portaru, Senior Counsel for ADF International.
Individual or digital worship not sufficient
In the submitted arguments Figeľ’s legal team highlights that religious freedom specifically includes the right to communal worship under the law. The Slovak government previously had argued that spirituality can be lived out individually. However, as the ECtHR has upheld repeatedly, freedom of religion specifically includes the “freedom to manifest one’s religion not only alone and in private but also in community with others, in public and within the circle of those whose faith one shares”.
The Slovak government also put forward the option of digital worship as a justification for the blanket ban. Recent court rulings throughout Europe, however, arrive at different conclusions. Scotland’s highest civil court ruled on the same issue, holding that digital options “are best viewed as an alternative to worship, rather than worship itself”.
Restrictions were not “proportional, appropriate, and necessary”
The case rests on the fact that the Slovak blanket ban was neither proportional, nor appropriate or necessary.
“Nobody should be prohibited from peacefully exercising his or her convictions, and it was evident that religious worship could be conducted safely during the pandemic. Blanket bans ignore the central role that religion plays in the lives of believers. For people of faith, communal worship, spiritual nourishment, can be as important as bodily nourishment. That’s why international and European law and our very own Constitution holds religious freedom so dearly. I expect that the ECtHR will consider this holistically with a keen eye for the role of human rights in a democratic society,” said Dr. Ján Figeľ upon submitting the arguments.
Former Special Envoy for Freedom of Religion now defends human rights at home
Ján Figeľ served as European Commissioner in various positions between 2004 and 2009. In 2016 he was appointed as Special Envoy for Freedom of Religion or Belief outside the EU, a position he held until 2019.
“As Special Envoy, it was evident to me that the EU cannot credibly advance religious freedom throughout the world if its Member States fail to uphold fundamental freedoms at home,” Figeľ added.
A newly released video features Dr. Ján Figeľ and ADF International lead lawyer Dr. Adina Portaru in Bratislava/Slovakia.
Worldwide advocacy for religious freedom
Figeľ’s challenge has been backed by a civil society coalition of diverse representatives from the arts, academia, and politics with different faith backgrounds. Bishops and other faith leaders also have welcomed his case.
ADF International has been involved worldwide in cases regarding worship bans and violations of religious freedom in the context of Covid restrictions. In Uganda, the organisation supported a coalition of Christians and Muslims challenging a discriminatory prohibition of religious gatherings. Further, ADF International advocated to open churches for worship in Ireland, Scotland, and Switzerland.
-
Náboženská sloboda je testom ostatných slobôd, uviedol Ján Figeľ pred americkými absolventmi
Ján Figeľ predniesol pred absolventmi HJ International Graduate School for Peace and Public Leadership v New York City prejav, v ktorom upozornil na nenahraditeľnosť a dôležitosť náboženskej slobody ako jedného zo základných kameňov demokratickej spoločnosti. Slovenský preklad prejavu priniesol denník Postoj.
Figeľ na začiatku svojho prejavu spomínal na roky, ktoré strávil ako vôbec prvý osobitný vyslanec pre podporu slobody náboženstva alebo viery mimo Európskej únie.
„Počas štyroch náročných rokov som navštívil veľa krajín s cieľom podporiť slobodu nespravodlivo prenasledovaných, medzináboženský dialóg a zodpovednosť. Najväčším zadosťučinením mi bolo vidieť oslobodenie viacerých väzňov svedomia v Sudáne a Pakistane,“ uviedol bývalý vyslanec.
Napriek tomu, že pri tejto práci videl množstvo utrpenia, zároveň bol aj svedkom „neochvejnej odvahy a nádeje“. Figeľ víta aj to, že po jeho vymenovaní za vyslanca viaceré európske krajiny vymenovali svojich osobitných vyslancov, veľvyslancov a splnomocnencov pre ochranu náboženskej slobody.
Figeľ následne upozornil na nelichotivý stav náboženskej slobody vo svete. „Výskumné centrum Pew Research Center vo Washingtone DC zverejnilo údaj, že 84 % svetovej populácie sa hlási k nejakej forme náboženskej príslušnosti. Zároveň však 79 % svetovej populácie žije v krajinách, kde sa kladú veľké alebo veľmi veľké prekážky náboženskej slobode,“ uviedol.
Obeťami vládneho útlaku, sociálneho nepriateľstva, násilného extrémizmu a terorizmu sú podľa jeho slov napríklad kresťania v Nigérii, Ujguri v Číne, Rohingovia v Mjanmarsku. Ohrozenie je však prítomné aj v niektorých demokratických krajinách, „napríklad v Japonsku, kde Združenie rodín pre svetový mier a zjednotenie čelí bolestivým tlakom“.
Podľa Figeľa môže byť náboženská sloboda obmedzená z dôvodu nevyhnutného verejného záujmu, ale musia byť splnené tri podmienky – zákonnosť, legitimita a primeranosť.
„Napríklad bolo správne alebo chybné uplatniť zo strany vlády rozsiahle obmedzenia na komunitné bohoslužby počas pandémie COVID-19? V slobodných a demokratických krajinách je potrebná kritická ostražitosť, aby sa v naradeniach vlády starostlivo rešpektovala aj náboženská sloboda,“ opísal tento princíp.
Následne sa s poslucháčmi podelil o „tri dôležité posolstvá“: po prvé, právo na náboženskú slobodu je predpokladom pre iné práva, po druhé, náboženská sloboda vyžaduje zrelosť a zodpovednosť, a po tretie, náboženská sloboda je neoddeliteľná od ľudskej dôstojnosti.
O prvej téze Figeľ uviedol, že medzinárodné právo definuje náboženskú slobodu spolu so slobodou myslenia a svedomia. Ide o jedno zo základných práv, ktoré určuje „osobné presvedčenie, životný štýl, základ kultúrneho a duchovného života, identitu a princíp príslušnosti k spoločenstvu podobne zmýšľajúcich“.
Rozsah aktivít, ktoré náboženská sloboda zahŕňa, preto zaručuje, že sa na miere jej dodržiavania dá odhadnúť aj miera dodržiavania ostatných práv.
O potrebe zrelosti a zodpovednosti Figeľ uviedol, že každá minca má dve strany – „slobodu a zodpovednosť, práva a povinnosti“. Aj integrácia stredoeurópskych národov do Európskej únie a NATO bola výsledkom zodpovednej slobody.
Vo veci vzťahu náboženskej slobody a ľudskej dôstojnosti Figeľ uviedol, že ľudská dôstojnosť je bod stretnutia medzi náboženským a sekulárnym svetom. „Všetci sme odlišní v identite, ale všetci sme si rovní v dôstojnosti,“ uviedol.
„Kultúra ľudskej dôstojnosti podľa mňa funguje na dvoch starobylých etických princípoch. Strieborný princíp etiky zdôrazňuje rovnosť, úctu a toleranciu. Hovorí: „Nerobte iným, čo nechcete, aby iní robili vám!“ Zlatý princíp etiky zdôrazňuje solidaritu a reciprocitu spravodlivosti a spoločného dobra. Hovorí: „Robte iným, čo chcete, aby iní robili vám!“ uviedol Figeľ.
„Zlo je rozšírené, pretože má silných spojencov: ľahostajnosť, nevedomosť a strach. Ak sme nedbalí, ak nevieme alebo sa obávame niečo povedať alebo urobiť pre tých, čo sú bez hlasu a obhajoby, zlu sa darí,“ uzavrel Figeľ svoj prejav spolu s výzvou na podporu globálnych organizácií zastávajúcich sa náboženskej slobody.
-
Náboženská sloboda je lakmusovým testom všetkých ľudských práv
V roku 2016 som sa stal vôbec prvým osobitným vyslancom pre podporu slobody náboženstva alebo viery mimo Európskej únie. Bol to čas masového vraždenia príslušníkov náboženských a etnických menšín v Iraku a Sýrii zo strany teroristov a militantov ISIS.
Počas štyroch náročných rokov som navštívil veľa krajín s cieľom podporiť slobodu nespravodlivo prenasledovaných, medzináboženský dialóg a zodpovednosť. Najväčším zadosťučinením mi bolo vidieť oslobodenie viacerých väzňov svedomia v Sudáne a Pakistane.
Videl som veľa ľudského utrpenia, ale aj nedobytnú odvahu a nádej. Od roku 2016 veľa európskych krajín nasledovalo moju iniciačnú rolu nominovaním národných osobitných vyslancov, veľvyslancov a splnomocnencov. Tak sa sloboda náboženstva alebo viery stala viditeľnou a vitálnou časťou európskej a medzinárodnej spolupráce.
Ak väčšine ľudí bude záležať na mieri, skutočne môžeme zažiť ľudskejšie a pokojnejšie 21. storočie.
Ale aká je realita náboženskej slobody v 21. storočí? Výskumné centrum Pew Research Center vo Washingtone DC hlási, že 84 % svetovej populácie vyznáva nejakú formu náboženskej príslušnosti. Zároveň však 79 % svetovej populácie žije v krajinách s veľkými alebo veľmi veľkými prekážkami pre náboženskú slobodu.
Skrátka, stovky miliónov ľudí sa nemôžu tešiť náboženskej slobode. Môžeme to vidieť v rámci vládneho útlaku, sociálneho nepriateľstva, násilného extrémizmu a terorizmu. Príklady? Kresťania v Nigérii, Ujguri v Číne, Rohingovia v Myanmarsku.
Náboženská sloboda je pod rastúcim tlakom aj v niektorých demokratických krajinách. Napríklad v Japonsku, kde Rodinná federácia pre svetový mier a zjednotenie čelí bolestivým tlakom.
Náboženská sloboda môže byť obmedzená z dôvodu nevyhnutného verejného záujmu, ale iba v súlade s tromi podmienkami: zákonnosti, legitimity a primeranosti.
Napríklad, bolo správne alebo chybné uplatniť zo strany vlády rozsiahle obmedzenia na komunitné bohoslužby počas pandémie COVID-19? Ostražitosť v slobodných a demokratických krajinách je kritická, aby vláda zákona a náboženská sloboda boli starostlivo rešpektované.
Rád by som sa podelil o tri dôležité posolstvá:
Právo na náboženskú slobodu je predpokladom pre iné práva
Medzinárodné právo definuje náboženskú slobodu spolu so slobodou myslenia a svedomia. Je to veľmi ústredné ľudské právo určujúce osobné presvedčenie, životný štýl, základ kultúrneho a duchovného života, identitu a princíp príslušnosti k spoločenstvu podobne zmýšľajúcich.
Právo na slobodu náboženstva alebo viery je tiež veľmi komplexným právom, keďže sa týka ich vyučovania, praktizovania, bohoslužby a dodržiavania v súkromí alebo vo verejnom živote, individuálne alebo v komunite, pre veriacich i neveriacich.
Preto sa dá povedať, že toto právo je lakmusovým testom všetkých ľudských práv. Právo na slobodu náboženstva alebo viery reprezentuje trojjediný rozmer osoby človeka: homo rationalis, homo moralis, homo religiosus. Naša racionalita, morálnosť a náboženskosť sú neoddeliteľné.
Náboženská sloboda vyžaduje zrelosť a zodpovednosť
Sloboda je krásna, ale krehká a zraniteľná dcéra, ktorá potrebuje byť blízko svojej múdrej a statočnej matky nazývanej Pravda. Sloboda bez pravdy neprežije a prestane existovať.
Krízu možno interpretovať ako nedostatok zrelosti a absenciu rovnováhy. Každá platná minca má dve strany: slobodu a zodpovednosť, práva a povinnosti. Preto kedykoľvek som stretol náboženských predstaviteľov – veľkých imámov, veľkých ajatolláhov, rímskeho pápeža, koptského pápeža, tibetského dalajlámu, hlavných rabínov, patriarchov a biskupov –, vždy som hovoril o náboženskej sociálnej zodpovednosti.
Integrácia stredoeurópskych národov do Európskej únie a NATO, do euroatlantického spoločenstva demokracií bolo výsledkom zodpovednej slobody.
Náboženská sloboda je neoddeliteľná od ľudskej dôstojnosti
Ak existuje bod stretnutia medzi náboženským a sekulárnym svetom, je ním ľudská dôstojnosť. Kvôli pravému pokoju medzi ľuďmi a národmi musíme ísť hlbšie: Všetci sme odlišní v identite, ale všetci sme si rovní v dôstojnosti.
Kultúra ľudskej dôstojnosti podľa mňa funguje na dvoch starobylých etických princípoch. Strieborný princíp etiky zdôrazňuje rovnosť, úctu a toleranciu. Hovorí: „Nerobte iným, čo nechcete, aby iní robili vám!“
Sloboda je krásna, ale krehká a zraniteľná dcéra, ktorá potrebuje byť blízko svojej múdrej a statočnej matky nazývanej Pravda.
Zlatý princíp etiky zdôrazňuje solidaritu a reciprocitu spravodlivosti a spoločného dobra. Hovorí: „Robte iným, čo chcete, aby iní robili vám!“
Vyzdvihnutie ľudskej dôstojnosti je také potrebné, že medzinárodní akademici, politickí a náboženskí lídri a experti prijali v roku 2018 Deklaráciu z Punta del Este (mesto na východnom pobreží v Uruguaji) o ľudskej dôstojnosti pre každého a všade (Punta del Este Declaration on Human Dignity for Everyone Everywhere). Tento živý dokument je otvorený pre signatárov z celého sveta.
Zlo je rozšírené, pretože má silných spojencov: ľahostajnosť, nevedomosť a strach. Ak nedbáme, ak nevieme a ak sa obávame niečo povedať alebo urobiť pre tých, čo sú bez hlasu a obhajoby, zlu sa darí.
Preto živme spojencov dobra: výchovu a vzdelávanie, činorodú angažovanosť a odvahu. Môžeme posilniť rastúce globálne hnutie za náboženskú slobodu, ako sú IRF Roundtables, IRF summit, G20 Interfaith Forum a Alianciu IRFBA.
Prednáška Jána Figeľa odznela 27. mája 2023 pre absolventov HJ International Graduate School for Peace and Public Leadership v New York City. Skrátený text bol uverejnený v denníku The Washington Times.
-
Religious freedom requires vigilance
HJ International Graduate School for Peace and Public Leadership (former UTS) held its forty-seventh Commencement in New York City. Ján Figeľ has received a Dr. h. c. Award and delivered a speech to the faculty and graduates. In 2016, I became the first-ever Special Envoy for the Promotion of Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) outside the European Union. It was a time of mass atrocities committed by terrorists and militants of so-called ISIS against religious and ethnic minorities in Iraq and Syria, and for four demanding years, I visited many countries to promote interfaith dialogue and responsibility. The most satisfying reward of that time was seeing the liberation of several prisoners of conscience in Sudan and Pakistan.
I have seen a lot of human suffering but also unbeatable courage and hope.
Since 2016, many European States followed my pioneering role by nominating their special envoys, ambassadors and plenipotentiaries. Thus, the FoRB protection has become a visible and vital part of European and international cooperation.
If the majority of people come to care about peace, we may indeed see a more humane, more peaceful 21st century. But what is the reality of religious freedom in the 21st century?
The Pew Research Center in Washington, D.C., reports that 84% of the global population claims some form of religious affiliation. However, 79% of the global population lives in countries with high or very high obstacles to religious freedom. In short, hundreds of millions of people do not enjoy full religious freedom.
We can see this in government oppression, social hostilities, violent extremism and terrorism. Examples? Christians in Nigeria, Uyghurs in China, Rohingyas in Myanmar. Religious freedom is under growing pressure even in some democratic countries: In Japan, the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification is facing painful times.
Religious freedom can be restricted due to necessary public interest, but only in line with three conditions: Legality, legitimacy, proportionality. (For instance, was it right or wrong for governments to put extensive restrictions on communal worship services during COVID-19 pandemics?) Vigilance is crucial for rule of law and for religious freedom to be duly respected in free and democratic countries.
I wish to share three important messages.
The right to religious freedom is the basis for other rights
International law defines FoRB as a freedom of thought, conscience and religion. It is a very central human right – defining issues of personal conviction, lifestyle, the basis of cultural and spiritual life, identity, and the principle of belonging to the community of the like-minded.
FoRB is also a very complex right, as it concerns teaching, practice, worship and observance, in private or in public life, alone or in a community, for believers and non-believers. Therefore, one can say FoRB is a litmus test of all human rights.
FoRB represents the triune dimension of the human person: Homo rationalis, h. moralis, h. religiosus. Our rationality, morality, religiosity are inseparable.
Religious freedom requires maturity and responsibility
Freedom is a beautiful but fragile, vulnerable child. She needs to stay close to her wise and brave mother called, Truth. Freedom without truth will die, and will cease to exist. Crisis can be interpreted as a lack of maturity and an absence of balance. There are two sides of each valid coin: Freedom and responsibility, rights and duties.
Whenever I met religious leaders—the grand imams, grand ayatollahs, the Roman Catholic pope, the Coptic pope, the Tibetan dalai lama, and chief rabbis, patriarchs and bishops—I always spoke about religious social responsibility. The integration of Central European nations into the EU and NATO, into Euro Atlantic community of democracies was a result of responsible freedom.
Religious freedom is inextricable from human dignity
If there is a meeting point between the religious and secular worlds, it is human dignity. For true peace, we must dig deeper: We are all different in identity, but we are equal in dignity.
To me, the culture of human dignity operates on two very ancient ethical principles: The silver one stresses equality, respect and tolerance. It says: “Don’t do onto others what you don’t want others to do onto you.”
The golden ethical principle stresses solidarity and reciprocity of justice and common good. It says: “Do unto others what you want others to do unto you.”
Upholding human dignity is so essential that in 2018, international scholars, religious and political leaders adopted the Punta del Este Declaration on Human Dignity for Everyone Everywhere. This living document is open to signatories from all over the world (www.dignityforeveryone.org).
Evil remains widespread because it has strong allies: Indifference, ignorance and fear. If we don’t care, if we don’t know, if we are scared to say or do something on behalf of the voiceless or the defenseless, evil flourishes.
Let us nurture allies of common good: Education, active engagement, and courage. We can strengthen a growing global religious freedom movement, such as the International Religious Freedom Roundtables, International Religious Freedom Summit, G20 Interfaith Forum, and the International Religious Freedom or Belief Alliance.
- Jan Figel, who lived half his life under a communist regime, became the chief negotiator for Slovakia to enter the European Union and became its first EU Commissioner.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/jul/6/religious-freedom-requires-vigilance
-
Religious freedom requires vigilance
HJ International Graduate School for Peace and Public Leadership (former UTS) held its forty-seventh Commencement in New York City. Ján Figeľ has received a Dr. h. c. Award and delivered a speech to the faculty and graduates. In 2016, I became the first-ever Special Envoy for the Promotion of Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) outside the European Union. It was a time of mass atrocities committed by terrorists and militants of so-called ISIS against religious and ethnic minorities in Iraq and Syria, and for four demanding years, I visited many countries to promote interfaith dialogue and responsibility. The most satisfying reward of that time was seeing the liberation of several prisoners of conscience in Sudan and Pakistan.
I have seen a lot of human suffering but also unbeatable courage and hope.
Since 2016, many European States followed my pioneering role by nominating their special envoys, ambassadors and plenipotentiaries. Thus, the FoRB protection has become a visible and vital part of European and international cooperation.
If the majority of people come to care about peace, we may indeed see a more humane, more peaceful 21st century. But what is the reality of religious freedom in the 21st century?
The Pew Research Center in Washington, D.C., reports that 84% of the global population claims some form of religious affiliation. However, 79% of the global population lives in countries with high or very high obstacles to religious freedom. In short, hundreds of millions of people do not enjoy full religious freedom.
We can see this in government oppression, social hostilities, violent extremism and terrorism. Examples? Christians in Nigeria, Uyghurs in China, Rohingyas in Myanmar. Religious freedom is under growing pressure even in some democratic countries: In Japan, the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification is facing painful times.
Religious freedom can be restricted due to necessary public interest, but only in line with three conditions: Legality, legitimacy, proportionality. (For instance, was it right or wrong for governments to put extensive restrictions on communal worship services during COVID-19 pandemics?) Vigilance is crucial for rule of law and for religious freedom to be duly respected in free and democratic countries.
I wish to share three important messages.
The right to religious freedom is the basis for other rights
International law defines FoRB as a freedom of thought, conscience and religion. It is a very central human right – defining issues of personal conviction, lifestyle, the basis of cultural and spiritual life, identity, and the principle of belonging to the community of the like-minded.
FoRB is also a very complex right, as it concerns teaching, practice, worship and observance, in private or in public life, alone or in a community, for believers and non-believers. Therefore, one can say FoRB is a litmus test of all human rights.
FoRB represents the triune dimension of the human person: Homo rationalis, h. moralis, h. religiosus. Our rationality, morality, religiosity are inseparable.
Religious freedom requires maturity and responsibility
Freedom is a beautiful but fragile, vulnerable child. She needs to stay close to her wise and brave mother called, Truth. Freedom without truth will die, and will cease to exist. Crisis can be interpreted as a lack of maturity and an absence of balance. There are two sides of each valid coin: Freedom and responsibility, rights and duties.
Whenever I met religious leaders—the grand imams, grand ayatollahs, the Roman Catholic pope, the Coptic pope, the Tibetan dalai lama, and chief rabbis, patriarchs and bishops—I always spoke about religious social responsibility. The integration of Central European nations into the EU and NATO, into Euro Atlantic community of democracies was a result of responsible freedom.
Religious freedom is inextricable from human dignity
If there is a meeting point between the religious and secular worlds, it is human dignity. For true peace, we must dig deeper: We are all different in identity, but we are equal in dignity.
To me, the culture of human dignity operates on two very ancient ethical principles: The silver one stresses equality, respect and tolerance. It says: “Don’t do onto others what you don’t want others to do onto you.”
The golden ethical principle stresses solidarity and reciprocity of justice and common good. It says: “Do unto others what you want others to do unto you.”
Upholding human dignity is so essential that in 2018, international scholars, religious and political leaders adopted the Punta del Este Declaration on Human Dignity for Everyone Everywhere. This living document is open to signatories from all over the world (www.dignityforeveryone.org).
Evil remains widespread because it has strong allies: Indifference, ignorance and fear. If we don’t care, if we don’t know, if we are scared to say or do something on behalf of the voiceless or the defenseless, evil flourishes.
Let us nurture allies of common good: Education, active engagement, and courage. We can strengthen a growing global religious freedom movement, such as the International Religious Freedom Roundtables, International Religious Freedom Summit, G20 Interfaith Forum, and the International Religious Freedom or Belief Alliance.
- Jan Figel, who lived half his life under a communist regime, became the chief negotiator for Slovakia to enter the European Union and became its first EU Commissioner.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/jul/6/religious-freedom-requires-vigilance
-
The EU must not support a caretaker government in Bangladesh
Almost nine years ago, newly appointed EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini was being lauded for leading the world in standing up to the junta who usurped power away from the elected government in Thailand four months prior. Alongside the accolades came a foreboding warning: Once the military has its grip on power, it will not easily let it go. Specifically, it was suggested that the military will rewrite the constitution in such a way that its own grip on power will be built into the system in perpetuity.
As expected, the new constitution was promulgated in 2017, cementing the military’s powers. Much delayed elections were finally held in 2019, seeing the junta leader shed his uniform for a suit and tie to transition into Thailand’s new ‘civilian’ PM. Unfortunately, in the nine years which have transpired, the EU and much of the Western world have dropped sanctions and abandoned principle, returning to full cooperation with Thailand’s undemocratic government, choosing to take part in the charade rather than stand up for democracy.
In May of this year, a second election was held under the new constitution. This time, nine years after the coup d’Etat which swept the military into power, a landslide victory for pro-democracy parties Move Forward and Pheu Thai and a complete sidelining of the plain-clothed military political parties. Yet, as Nikkei Asia reports, three weeks after the elections, the pro-democracy coalition’s nominated PM is still in limbo while the powers that be deliberate whether to allow him to assume his rightful office.
In contrast, earlier this year the EU adopted further restrictive measures against leaders of the junta which usurped power in Thailand’s immediate neighbour to the West, Myanmar, in February 2021. One can only hope that the EU will not buckle in Myanmar as it has in Thailand and stay steadfast in its resolve to support the Burmese people in their aspiration for a fully democratic transition.
All eyes must now turn one more country to the West, with general elections scheduled in Bangladesh for January 2024. Following a highly criticized and disputed general election in 2018, Bangladesh’s main opposition party, Bangladesh National Party (BNP) and Islamist party Jamaat-e-Islami both demand the next elections be held under a caretaker government, at the threat of boycott. Veteran Bangladeshi PM of 15 years Sheikh Hasina has vowed never again to hand over power to an unelected body and has rejected this demand outright.
The last caretaker government was taken over by the military, extended its 90-day term and postponed elections by over two years from 2006-2008. Ironically, in full role-reversal, it was then-opposition Awami League (today’s ruling party)’s boycott of the 2006 elections which triggered the declaration of the State of Emergency and military intervention. Political leaders of all parties from across the political spectrum were jailed and indicted on various trumped-up charges by the caretaker government – a common practice by juntas designed to exclude popular political leaders from ever contesting future elections. In fact, both of BNP’s current co-leaders, Khaleda Zia and her son Tarique Rahman, are ineligible to run in the upcoming elections due to convictions which date back to the military-backed caretaker government of 2006-2008. Incumbent Sheikh Hasina too had been jailed during this period – which may play a major factor in her outright rejection of the opposition’s demands.
The caretaker government was a unique arrangement which does not exist anywhere else in the world, and in 2011 Bangladesh’s Supreme Court ruled that the system of interim administrations was unconstitutional. The Awami League government has reasoned that in the previous elections, a caretaker government was needed because the Election Commission (EC) never had a legal basis in Bangladesh. But in January 2022, the country passed a new law promulgating the formation of the EC.
In response to pressure from the US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken in June 2023, PM Sheikh Hasina has committed to hold free & fair elections and has welcomed international observers to monitor elections. Recent local elections in the strategic city of Gazipur in June 2023 were held peacefully and without incident, despite an independent candidate defeating the ruling party’s candidate by a narrow margin. BNP did not contest these elections – a possible harbinger of things to come. With both sides at an impasse and a likely boycott of elections by opposition, the stage is set for yet another military intervention in the region. The military seems to be chomping at the bit with anticipation. If they are to be deterred, the international community must make it clear to the generals that the consequences will be swift, harsh and personal.