The OIC Human Rights

Human Rights in Islamic Countries

Archive for the ‘Freedom of Religion’ Category

OIC seeks rights debates based on Islamic values

Posted by Human Rights in Islamic Countries on March 11, 2014

Iyad Madani, OIC SG

JEDDAH: HABIB SHAIKH | Published — Tuesday 4 February 2014

One of the major challenges of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is finding ways to enrich global human rights debates with Islamic values and principles, said Iyad Madani, the newly appointed OIC secretary-general.

In a statement issued at the fourth session of the OIC’s Independent Permanent Human Rights Commission (IPHRC), on Sunday here, Madani said that current international human rights laws are based on Western values.

He said the OIC was looking particularly at limitations on freedom of expression, gender equality, applying human rights in accordance with the OIC member states’ constitutional and legal systems, and stopping the spread of extremism.

With reference to the United Nations’ Universal Declaration on Human Rights and major UN human rights instruments, he said most OIC countries have “willingly adopted and implemented international human rights norms. However, there are a number of issues that go beyond the normal scope of human rights and clash with Islamic teachings,” Madani said in the statement.

Freedom of expression is considered a fundamental right, but despite “repeated incidents of hatred and violence resulting from discrimination based on stereotyping and stigmatization of individuals, communities and religions, some countries continue to refuse any limitations or responsible use of this right,” Madani said.

“Muslim countries wanting to ensure respect for the sanctity and reputation of religious values, scriptures and personalities for the promotion of peace in society are criticized for limiting this freedom through blasphemy laws.”

“One of the main issues related to the gender equality debate is the very definition of the term gender. While OIC countries prefer to use the notion of equality between men and women, Western countries push for the term ‘gender,’ which goes beyond the normal definition of man and woman into the direction of how one perceives him or herself rather than his or her actual physical appearance.”

“Another challenge facing the commission is that all references to human rights in the OIC documents stipulate that these principles should be applied in accordance with the member states’ constitutional and legal systems.”

He said there needs to be a way found to define these stipulations, and create “a yardstick that each individual member state can look at to measure the distance between the Islamic human rights model and its own laws and practices,” he said.

Another important challenge was how to “deprive the extreme voices” in member states from claiming they represent Islam.

“The road ahead is full of challenges, but the OIC now has the framework and mechanism to move ahead, and the commission is the spearhead of this effort,” Madani said.

He said that the OIC takes pride in the fact that Islam was the first religion that laid down universal fundamental rights for humanity. The OIC had since its inception taken care to promote human rights and fundamental freedoms, safeguard the rights of women and their participation in all spheres of life, and assist Muslim minorities and communities outside the member states to preserve their dignity, and cultural and religious identities.

The OIC charter stipulated the formation of the IPCHR, as one of its organs to promote civil, political, social and economic rights in conformity with Islamic values.

In its 10-year strategic plan, approved in Makkah in 2005, the OIC asserted that it was important for member states to revive the Muslim Ummah’s pioneering role on rights issues. They should expand the scope of political participation, ensure equality, civil liberties and social justice, promote transparency and accountability, and eliminate corruption.

The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam embodies the OIC’s most complete statement on human rights in Islam. Other documents followed suit including the covenant on the Rights of the Child in Islam and the OIC Plan of Action for the Advancement of Women.

“The commission has done commendable work on the human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories; on the issue of discrimination and intolerance against Muslims and on the issue of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar,” Madani said.

The commission also established four working groups to address these issues in an effective and sustained fashion: on Palestine, on the Rights of Women and of the Child, on Islamophobia and Muslim minorities, and on Right to Development. It also created an ad hoc working group to establish a proper framework for interaction between the IPHRC and member states’ human rights institutions and civil society organizations.

Source: Arab News


Posted in 4th Session, Freedom of Religion, Human Rights and Islam | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Ihsanoglu calls for an international warning system against instances of religious intolerance

Posted by Human Rights in Islamic Countries on February 4, 2013

Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), called for an effective international mechanism that could act as an early warning system against instances of discrimination and intolerance on religious grounds. He proposed an international Observatory, perhaps at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), with a broad mandate to monitor and document all instances of discrimination and intolerance on religious grounds.

The Secretary General was speaking at the high-level international meeting on 22 January 2013, in London, UK, upon the invitation of Baroness Saiyda Warsi, Senior Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, to develop a common understanding on the way forward on the issue of intolerance on religious grounds.

The Secretary General pointed out that the OIC has an Observatory monitoring Islamophobia and the OSCE has a mechanism to monitor hate crimes, but what is needed is an international observatory with global coverage that would monitor intolerance and discrimination against all religions and their respective followers. He said that this would help develop an empirical basis to understand the extent of the problem, which in turn would figure into evolving an effective and concerted international response.

Ihsanoglu also called for building on the consensus that went into the UN Human Rights Council resolution 16/18 on combating intolerance on religious grounds and the Istanbul Process for implementing the resolution. He also pointed out that the recent meeting of eminent lawyers and human rights practitioners in Istanbul agreed that the provisions of existing legal instruments, including articles 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), suffice in covering OIC’s concerns, and that according equal weight to the concerns on both sides could form a good point of departure for developing a common understanding.

The London meeting comes after the 67th Session of the UN General Assembly last month, which adopted the resolution on combating religious intolerance for the second year in a row, and before the 22nd session of the HRC in February. The London meeting is the third in a series of meetings after Istanbul, the second was held in Washington DC. in December 2011. The Secretary General announced that the OIC will host the fourth meeting during the first half of this year.

Posted in Freedom of Religion, International Human Rights | Leave a Comment »

Panel of legal experts prepares the groundwork for a political OIC strategy on religious intolerance against Muslims

Posted by Human Rights in Islamic Countries on January 23, 2013

OIC Newsletter Issue Number 2 | 10/01/2013

A panel of legal and human rights experts prepared the groundwork for the political strategy of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to tackle religious intolerance against Muslims and the growing incidents of Islam bashing. The two-day meeting held in Istanbul of the Panel of Eminent Persons on Combating Intolerance and Discrimination against Muslims expanded on a working paper drafted by the OIC General Secretariat for a politically tenable strategy that is anchored firmly in international law.

With the increasing trend of Islamophobia, such as the reprehensible episodes of burning of copies of the Holy Qur’an by a Pastor, the Utoya massacre in Norway, and most recently the release of the trailer of ‘The Innocence of Muslims’ on YouTube, in addition to indications of institutionalization and constitutionalization of Islamophobia, there is mounting public pressure on OIC Member States to draw a line and take concrete action, according to OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu.

“The OIC strategy must be proportionate to expectations of the Muslim World – being their political voice. It must be substantive and credible to shift the initiative away from the street to the table of meaningful and result oriented multilateral discourse,” said Ihsanoglu in his opening remarks to the meeting on January 7, 2013. “We must emphasize that there is no hierarchy of human rights whereby a single right can trump others. OIC believes that the relevant provisions of international law on freedom of opinion and expression support our position. If so, it must clearly be brought out with cogent legal arguments. Or we should look for other legally tenable options to engage the negotiating partners in a result-oriented fashion,” he added.

As mandated by the 39th Council of Foreign Ministers held in Djibouti last November, the significance of the Panel lies in furnishing a set of available options, in terms of legal merits and demerits, on combating discrimination and intolerance against Muslims. A legal opinion is formed based on purely technical analysis. The output of the Panel’s work will be presented to the OIC leadership at the forthcoming 12th OIC Summit in Cairo on 2-7 February 2013, which is expected to take a political decision on an OIC approach to dealing with this issue.

The deliberations of the Panel will also be useful during the high-level meeting at Wilton Park in the UK on 22 January 2013, which is part of the Istanbul Process launched by the Secretary General to implement UN Human Rights Council resolution 16/18 on combating religious intolerance. In that context, the Panel addressed the issue of criminalization of incitement to imminent violence and accorded it a special focus. Furthermore, the work of the Panel could contribute significantly towards the ongoing international discourse on combating intolerance and discrimination on religious grounds.


Posted in Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Religion, News of the OIC Countries, OIC Journal | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Istanbul Process: OIC “Workshops” Speech Crime

Posted by Human Rights in Islamic Countries on January 23, 2013

Edward Cline (2012.02.27 ) 

Stealth and violent jihadists have discovered the alchemist’s secret of turning gold into lead – that is, of turning freedom of speech into a risky and unwanted liability. It’s really quite simple, obvious for all to see. The formula is similar to the “good cop/bad cop” routine of detective movies.

Start with a cartoon of Mohammad, or a dozen of them, or with public remarks that directly or indirectly hold Islam and Muslims responsible for terrorism, or publish a scholarly, cogent paper on the totalitarian and brutal natures of Islam, or give a mooning “arse-lifter” on a public street the literal boot in a heart-felt moment of disrespect for a manqué bowing to meteorite and who’s in your way.

Of course, the remarks, the charges, the papers, and even the disrespect are responses to about thirty years of irrational Muslim behavior.

Any one of those actions will precipitate riots, calls for death to apostates and insulters of Islam, noisy, ugly demonstrations, chants of “Islam will dominate,” the waving of black jihad flags, and general pandemonium across the globe. And a few dozen or few score deaths at the hands of the insulted. All incidents starring Muslims. Not to mention the self-censorship of newspapers and book publishers, who abandon the issue for safety reasons; who, to borrow a line from “Seinfeld,” draw their heads into their shells like frightened turtles.

When the fires have been put out and the streets cleared of debris and the signs stashed away until the next defamation or insult, things will be quiet for a while.

Then will come calls to tone down the anger and the rhetoric – addressed, not to the rioters, murderers, and Muslim clerics – but to those whose words, cartoons, or actions “offended” the congenitally offendable. The calls will be made by those responsible for keeping law and order and establishing policy. In order to maintain civil order and manageable budgets, it is decreed that anyone criticizing Islam or making fun of Islam and Muslims, will be charged with hate speech, or exhibiting disrespect for one of the world’s oldest religions, or some such, in order to prevent more destructive and costly demonstrations. It’s a matter of cause and effect, you see. If Muslim feelings weren’t hurt, if their beliefs weren’t examined or satirized or opened to the cruel sunlight of rational scrutiny, Muslims wouldn’t resort to mayhem, rape, murder, and car-burning.

It’s quite simple. Almost scientific. Just like global warming.

The calls come basically from two sets of liberals: those who are outraged that Islam has been insulted or defamed, because they are so tolerant and non-judgmental and it makes them feel good and virtuous to be so tolerant and non-judgmental; and from those who are intimidated by brute force and ugly chants and irrational behavior of any kind, and they’d just rather people shut up in the name of “community cohesion” so they won’t need to hear or see the brute force and ugly chants of those less “cohesed” than they might want to imagine.

The pattern has been repeated numerous times over the last few decades. It works. It gets results. Why? Because our political and intellectual establishments are governed by egalitarianism, multiculturalism, and moral relativism. That is, by the irrational. And irrational policies benefit only the irrational, and punish the rational. There are two classes of irrationalists: those who areirrational on principle – otherwise known as nihilists – and those whose minds have been enfeebled by egalitarianism, multiculturalism, and moral relativism. Both classes can be identified by their political correctness.

But it takes some shoulder-rubbing and much intensive study to distinguish between the nihilists and the white-tailed deer, between those who want to just shut you up and reduce you to rags, and those who flee at the first sign of a wolf.

Having proven that their mumbo-jumbo works on the cowardly and credulous infidels, the irrationalists are taking their alchemy to a new level: a ban – by hook or by crook, by shame or by sedition, by ostracism or by force – of any and all criticism of Islam and Muslims, by way of the United Nations and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). The OIC is a gang that works within that club of tyrannies, dictatorships, religious régimes, and clueless, compliant, and wimpy “democracies.”

On February 13th, Bernama, the Malaysian state news agency, announced:

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is to hold a media workshop in Brussels on Feb. 15 to 16 pertaining to the smear campaigns against Islam in newspapers and media institutions in the West. […]

Muslim, and non-Muslim leading civil society organisations, journalists, intellectuals and academicians are among the participants of the workshop, which will consist of brainstorming sessions to develop mechanisms for cooperation with external partners, and to develop an action plan to address the phenomenon of Islamophobia.

On February 15th, the OIC announced the “workshop.”

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation is holding a workshop in Brussels as of 15th February 2012, on the subject of Islamophobia, the first workshop of its kind aimed at establishing information mechanisms to face up to the slanderous campaigns against Islam in the media.

This workshop, held under the title of “Smearing Islam and Muslims in the Media”, is being attended by major civil society institutions in the Islamic world along with the press community from the Islamic and Western worlds, in addition to many intellectuals and academics. It constitutes a watershed event in terms of effecting a real shift away from mere theorizing towards a more pragmatic action aimed at countering the phenomenon of Islamophobia.

It is now late February, and search as one might, one will not find a press release about what had been “work-shopped” and resolved. Who were the attendees? What Western academics, intellectuals and journalists were on the session rosters? What “mechanisms” were suggested and discussed? We Islamophobes, whose mouths may be gagged and our hands crippled by Muslims or by our own government, rendering our pens and keyboards useless, would like to know.

And we would also like to know which newspapers have been conducting smear campaigns against Islam. Which other media institutions? But for a pitiful handful of newspapers, such as The Wall Street Journal, The New York Post and Britain’s Daily Mail, I do not know of any other publication that is guilty of that charge, that is, of having written objectively about Islam. Perhaps, occasionally, Canada’s National Post. And the Daily Mail has actually identified Muslim culprits, and called them Muslims. I know of no other mainstream print magazines that have waged an information war on Islam. The rest, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, are either frightened turtles, or Gila monsters for Islam.

The only other realm of information that can be charged with waging a “smear campaign” against Islam and Muslims is the blogosphere. It, and not the mainstream media, is the prime media institution in which real information about Islam and Muslims can be found. So, the whole “workshop” idea is merely an means to come up with ideas to shut down whatever blog sites have bad-mouthed or “defamed” Islam.

Robert McDowell, in his Wall Street Journal article of February 21st, “The U.N. Threat to Internet Freedom,” wrote:

On Feb. 27, a diplomatic process will begin in Geneva that could result in a new treaty giving the United Nations unprecedented powers over the Internet. Dozens of countries, including Russia and China, are pushing hard to reach this goal by year’s end. As Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said last June, his goal and that of his allies is to establish “international control over the Internet” through the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), a treaty-based organization under U.N. auspices.

Of the 193 members of the ITU, 57 of them are OIC members, meaning that the ITU cannot help but be influenced by OIC’s clout, aside from that of Russia and China, both of them established dictatorships. One can guess what the new “treaty” will advocate or accomplish: the suppression of freedom of speech across the globe.

The OIC announcement does not mention the role of the United Nations in this “brainstorming” for “social justice,” but Bernama does:

The organisation noted that the workshop is of particular importance as it will be held only weeks before the convening of the United Nations Human Rights Council meeting in Geneva in March, at which Resolution 16/18 will come to a vote for the second time after its unanimous endorsement in the previous session.

Resolution 16/18 aims to combat intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatisation of discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief….The resolution was an outcome of bilateral talks between the OIC and a number of Western countries, including the U.S. Two meetings were held in Istanbul and Washington, respectively, to develop operational mechanisms to implement the resolution at the level of the United Nations.

Resolution 16/18…was backed by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the most recent Istanbul Process Conference in Washington in December.

“Operational mechanisms”? What a subtle term for blackmail, extortion, harassment, political and economic pressure, the enforcement of politically correct speech codes, tire-slashing, anonymous phone call threats, envelopes filled with white powder, perhaps a little creative road-rage, house trashing, and strange men loitering beneath the street lamp or in the shadows outside your home. What else could the euphemism mean? Other than direct, brute force?

And Lady Macbeth reappears for an encore audition. Doubtless she will be a star witness and co-conspirator in Geneva next month. It will be all cocktails, canapés and censorship chatter before the vote. This subject has been discussed before, last August, in “Hillary Clinton Auditions for Lady Macbeth.” And because of the paucity of information about the Washington Conference last December, and about the Brussels “workshop,” all we can do is repeat what was reported before. We plead ignorance of what transpired during those conferences – which is how the OIC would have it.

“Resolution 16/18 aims to combat intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatisation of discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief”?

But what creed and what group are notorious for all those things? Because the OIC is behind Resolution 16/18, the “combat” will not be launched against Islam and Muslims. But it is precisely Islam and its consistent practitioners that are perpetrators of rabid and violent intolerance, and of stereotyping and stigmatizing themselves through their actions and agenda and sensitivity to the least criticism.

The resolution’s stated intention is an instance of Grand Taqiyya, or, the Big Lie, of saying one thing to the public (or to dhimmi Western diplomats) but meaning something else entirely. The Koranpermits it. The Hadith permits it. And Reliance of the Traveler, that mammoth Islamic handbook on the methodology of conquest, permits it. To wit:

“Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible (N:i.e. when the purpose of lying is to circumvent someone who is preventing one from doing something permissible), and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory… it is religiously precautionary in all cases to employ words that give a misleading impression…Reliance of the Traveler, p. 746 – 8.2 (Shaffi Fiqh)

In May of 2006, in my Rule of Reason commentary, “Moving towards freedomless speech,” I noted that:

The Mohammedan enforcer of politically correct speech is ready with his scimitar, watching your every movement and listening to your every word, eager to behead unrepentant infidels of the First Amendment. “Slay them wherever you find them.” Or take them to court.

The enforcer no longer need be a Muslim. He can be a Presbyterian, or a Catholic, or a Baptist, or an agnostic, working for the government at the behest of the United Nations, authorized by Resolution 16/18 to silence you. It can be Hillary Clinton, whose State Department hosted the December 2011 OIC conference on what to do about the First Amendment. To accomplish the “praiseworthy” goal of silencing all criticism of Islam, the OIC can depend on the DHS, which now monitors all Internet traffic, looking for those “red flags” of “hate speech,” “bigotry,” and “Islamophobia.”

Hillary Clinton is up to her neck in complicity to subvert freedom of speech in America, and in aiding and abetting the OIC’s methods and ends. Nina Shea and Paul Marshall reported in The Wall Street Journal last December, before the Washington conference:

Last July in Istanbul, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton co-chaired a “High-Level Meeting on Combating Religious Intolerance” with the Saudi-based Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). Mrs. Clinton invited the OIC to Washington for a conference to build “muscles of respect and empathy and tolerance.” That conference is scheduled for Dec. 12 through Dec. 14.

For more than 20 years, the OIC has pressed Western governments to restrict speech about Islam. Its charter commits it “to combat defamation of Islam,” and its current action plan calls for “deterrent punishments” by all states to counter purported Islamophobia. […]

OIC pressure on European countries to ban “negative stereotyping of Islam” has increased since the 2004 murder of Theo Van Gogh for his film “Submission” and the Danish Muhammad cartoon imbroglio in 2005. Many countries (such as France, Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, Finland, Italy and Sweden), hoping to ensure social peace, now prosecute people for “vilifying” Islam or insulting Muslims’ religious feelings.

Shea and Marshall conclude, not quite believing then that the march of events could overcome their optimism:

Encouraging a more civil discourse is commendable, and First Amendment freedoms mean the U.S. won’t veer down Europe’s path any time soon.

It has been veering down that path since at least 9/11. The First Amendment is no longer sacrosanct, no longer a guarantee of freedom of speech – not if our own government is seeking to regulate it for its own statist ends in an unholy alliance with this nation’s dedicated enemies.

Those who value that particular liberty should initiate “workshops” of their own, to combat the frightened turtles and Gila monsters at large in America and abroad.


Posted in Freedom of Religion, OIC Meeting | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Opening remarks by His Excellency the Secretary General during the High Level meeting on intolerance

Posted by Human Rights in Islamic Countries on January 23, 2013


(London – January 22, 2013) 

Baroness Warsi, 
Hon’ble Ministers, 
Dear colleagues, 

Let me begin by thanking you Madam for taking the commendable initiative to organize this high level meeting. I also acknowledge the presence of Ministers and other colleagues who responded to your kind invitation. In addition to making the most of the traditional British hospitality, we are all gathered here to address an issue of utmost contemporary significance. We must aim at developing a common understanding on the way forward. I will briefly share some ideas in this regard. 

Combating discrimination and intolerance forms a most daunting challenge of our times. It constitutes a matter of vital concern at the OIC. The increasing trend of Islamophobia is indeed ominous in a globalized world. There has been an alarming increase in intolerance and discrimination against Muslims. The fifth report of OIC Islamophobia Observatory reveals an alarming upsurge. It has been a period punctuated by utterly reprehensible episodes including – burning of the holy Quran – the Utoya massacre in Norway – and most recently the release of the trailer of ‘innocence of Muslims’. In confirming our worst fears, increasing frequency of such events and their aftermath vindicated OIC’s warnings of serious repercussions. The long term implications go beyond these repercussions. 

During the last five years, a succession of unfortunate steps taken even by some governments in the West – indicating institutionalization and constitutionalization of Islamophobia – are disturbing. Most disconcerting is the emerging pattern of its abuse as an instrument of local, regional and international politics – documented by our Observatory over the last five years. Religion has come to play an increasingly important role in the calculus of international relations. The situation is likely to exacerbate in the wake of the current economic recession. It must accordingly figure in our strategic calculations. Tensions must not be allowed to simmer but addressed through concerted action. They could jeopardize peaceful coexistence in an interdependent and interconnected world. 

Gatherings like the one today are, therefore, increasingly important. In a world faced with the menace of terrorism, incitement to hatred, discrimination, and violence, cannot and must not be ignored. We would, otherwise, be faced with the unaffordable risk of the agenda hijacked and set by radicals and non-state actors. We need to act to wrest the initiative away from the street to the table of meaningful and result oriented multilateral discourse. 

Dear colleagues, 

The consensual passage of HRC resolution 16/18 has been widely acknowledged as a positive development. The Resolution forms a triumph of multilateralism must also be seen as a poster child of OIC-US-EU cooperation. It demonstrated OIC’s ability to forge consensus on a most sensitive of issues in contemporary international relations. The resolution codified the eight points identified in my address to the 15th Session of the Human Rights Council. These points constitute areas of action at the national and the international levels. I am gratified that they could form the basis of consensus. It afforded the opportunity to focus on the real issues away from the politicization and polarization of a decade. 

We did not stop at mere passage of a resolution. The Istanbul Process initiated with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to build further on the consensus building that went into resolution 16/18 must be carried forward. Our meeting today is a part of this Process. I appreciate that it has come to be recognized as the way forward by all stakeholders. Its merit lies in acceptance as the least common denominator. This approach carries a lot of potential in terms of evolving an international consensus to deal with the matter while addressing genuine concerns of all parties. The real test, however, lies in implementation. The consensus would, otherwise, be fragile. The approach signified by the resolution 16/18 is not an end in itself. It is a means to an end. We need to build on it. 
It must be appreciated that there is mounting public pressure on OIC Member States to take concrete action. A recently held panel of eminent lawyers and human rights practitioners – at the OIC – endorsed the 16/18 approach and the Istanbul Process as the avenues for engagement. It was agreed that there is no need to move towards an entirely new instrument. The provisions of existing instruments, including articles 19 and 20 of ICCPR, suffice in covering OIC’s concerns. It is the voids or gaps in interpretation, implementation and information that need to be plugged. There are differences that must be ironed out to develop a common understanding. I believe according equal weight to the concerns on both sides could form a good point of departure. 
Within the framework of the Istanbul Process, we must continue to address interrelated issues. Grey areas need to be squarely addressed in search of durable and consensual solutions. The two Istanbul Process events in Washington and London have addressed important areas with regard to the eight points. The Process must be carried forward. I take this opportunity to inform that OIC will be hosting the next event in the Istanbul Process. We look forward to sustaining a candid and frank exchange of views on each of the eight areas of action. This engagement would help us build on the consensus signified by the Resolution 16/18.The text has evolved as reflected by the latest UNGA resolution 67/178.It must continue to evolve on a consensual basis. 

Let me conclude by drawing attention to the need for an effective international mechanism that could act as an early warning system. I understand that the idea of an international observatory at the OHCHR in Geneva enjoyed support at the Winton Park event last month. OIC has its own Observatory with a mandate limited to monitoring Islamophobia. I understand that another mechanism to monitor hate crimes is in place at the OSCE. It also has a limited mandate. We need an Observatory at the international level with the broad mandate to monitor and document all instances of discrimination and intolerance on religious grounds. It must have a global coverage. It would monitor intolerance and discrimination against all religions and their respective followers. This would help us develop an empirical basis to understand the extent of the problem. That, in turn, would figure into evolving an effective and concerted international response to this matter of vital concern. OIC has been supportive of such an Observatory. In fact I indicated this support in the same statement at the Human Rights Council in September 2010 where the eight points were mentioned. I am reiterating this idea hoping that an agreement, in principle, can be reached at this meeting. It would form at least one concrete outcome of this important gathering. 

I conclude my remarks and would be listening carefully to all the interventions. 

I thank you Baroness. 
I thank you all.


Posted in Freedom of Religion, Human Rights and Islam | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Speech OIC SG Annual Coordination Meeting Of The CFM Of The OIC Member States

Posted by Human Rights in Islamic Countries on October 2, 2012

Speech Of His Excellency Prof. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu Secretary General Of The Organisation Of Islamic Cooperation To The Annual Coordination Meeting Of The Council Of Foreign Ministers Of The OIC Member States

New York, 29/09/2012 | 

United Nations Headquarters, New York

Honourable Ministers,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is my distinct pleasure to welcome you all as we are gathered at this “Annual Coordination Meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the OIC Member States”, on the sidelines of the 67th Session of the United Nations General Assembly.

Our last regular Council of the OIC Foreign Ministers (CFM) meeting was held in Astana chaired by H E Foreign Minister Yerzhan Kazikhanov, under the auspices and able leadership of H.E. President Nursultan Nazarbayev. To the President, the government and people of Kazakhstan go our sincere gratitude and appreciation for the brilliant organization of the 38th session of CFM they so aptly managed.

Honourable Ministers,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Our meeting today provides an opportunity to examine and exchange views on the various issues inscribed on the agenda of the UN General Assembly that bear on our interests. As customary, our meeting also offers us a good occasion to explore the ways and means of enhancing the collective performance of the OIC group here.

But before I proceed any further, I would like to briefly inform you about some major events that took place in the last two months and carry some importance to our work.

First and foremost, I would like to convey our most sincere appreciation and gratitude to the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah Ben Abdelaziz for his lofty initiative to convene the Fourth Extraordinary Islamic Summit Conference held in Makkah Al Mukarramah, a few weeks ago. The Summit highlighted the concept of Islamic Solidarity, the importance of Joint Islamic Action, and the need to restoring unity and harmony in the Muslim world. It also sought to address the sources of differences and conflicts in the Muslim world, and called for dialogue among Islamic school of thought. The initiative of the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques also contained the establishment of a Centre for dialogue among Islamic Mezhabs.

Mr. Chairman
I am happy to report to you that as we are in the General Secretariat engaged in daily contacts with our mission in New York, and through it, with the OIC Group, we can testify to the fact that the performance of our Group has proven to be efficient and potent. By closely surveying and keeping track of the voting pattern of our Member States on important issues that require a special attention within the framework of Islamic solidarity, we are today able to affirm that we have indeed managed to create a substantially strong voting power in the United Nations System to be reckoned with.

The various coordination meetings of the representatives of our Member States have been throughout the year instrumental in consolidating the cohesion of our Group. To be sure, for our Group to remain as strong, and hopefully stronger, as well as respected by the others, we also need to foster our unity and to constantly nurture our unison. Likewise, we have to be very careful and vigilant on how to use our strong position wisely in a way that will help us to scale up our benefits without alienating others.

Another indication of our newly acquired strength at the global level is what we have achieved at the UN Human Rights Council, when we convinced the Council to unanimously pass Resolution No. 16/18 which will help us defend Muslim rights and shield Islam and Muslims from discrimination on the basis of their religion.

One operative paragraph of this landmark resolution stipulates that [Quote “condemns any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, whether it involves the use of print, audio-visual or electronic media or any other means” unquote. Eight relevant points which I proposed emphasizing the thrust of the above mentioned resolution which is Quote “adopting measures to criminalize incitement to imminent violence based on religion or belief” unquote -were also adopted by the UN Human Rights Council by consensus. We believe, this new instrument with its eight points will go a long way in legally protecting Muslims from attack or discrimination on the basis of religion or culture.

In order to ensure the implementation of this Resolution by our European and American partners, we launched another initiative. This initiative in the form of a high level meeting was co-chaired by the Secretary General of the OIC representing the Muslim world, and the U.S. Secretary of State representing America, and was attended by the High Representative of the EU Foreign Policy representing Europe. The meeting came to be known as “Istanbul Process”. A second meeting of this process was held at the U.S. State Department in Washington D.C. A third meeting is expected to be held in London to signify Europe’s involvement in the process.

The key objective of this process is to encourage the implementation of the 16/18 Resolution as well as to adopt necessary and required measures to ensure the respect of our religious beliefs, our sacred symbols, personalities and scriptures.

Honourable Ministers,
Nonetheless, if we look at the incidents that took place in the past weeks, we should feel alarmed that whatever our achievements are in this regard, they are being challenged by a very small group of misguided people on both sides. The Middle East and North Africa region has witnessed in the last few weeks a wave of violent agitation against U.S. diplomatic missions. The protestations were provoked by the production of a film about which the US administration at the highest level announced that it had nothing to do with it.

In the aftermath of the production of the said film, “Innocence of Muslims” that denigrates Islam and the Prophet Mohammad (Peace be upon Him) and the violent repercussions that followed causing numerous deaths, destruction of property, and culminating in the killing of the United States Ambassador in Libya, the question of Islamophobia and negative profiling of religion has come again strongly to the forefront and dominated the attention of Muslims, the world over.

I strongly condemned the tragic killing of the American officials and the attacks on the US diplomatic missions in Cairo because I do believe that expressing anger or outrage should by no means get to killing people or destroying property. We did not stop at issuing statements on the OIC level only. We went further and issued joint statement along with EU, Arab League and the African Union condemning strongly both instigators and perpetrators of violence and calling for calm and restraint.

If anything, these incidents demonstrate the serious consequences of abusing the principle of freedom of expression at one side and the abuse of right to demonstration on the other side. These recent incidents brought again to the fore the dire need for respecting religions and their symbols.

Many Muslim quarters called for the adoption of a United Nations resolution denouncing the stigmatization of religion. In order to respond to these calls and ensure the implementation of the 8 point plan under Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18 and General Assembly Resolution 66/167, the OIC General Secretariat feels the need to develop measures to ensure filling the gaps of implementation of these Resolutions by national authorities. What is urgently needed now is the mobilization of the collective resources of all Member States, equipped with a well-considered comprehensive strategy, capable of defeating this hate campaign.

Having said the above, let me tell you that the exercises we have been involved in since 2005 starting immediately after the cartoon crisis and the successes and failures we have at the diplomatic level, would not produce any substantive result until and unless we address the root causes of this problem which can be described in a single word as ‘ignorance’. In order to stop and break the vicious circle of hate mongering actions and violent uncalled for reactions we must relate our initiatives to the mass. I believe through only two ways we can address this ‘ignorance’ effectively i.e. by reaching out to the mass through firstly encouraging the mass Media to vigorously and diligently disseminate the true image of religion and beliefs focusing on their basic tenets of peace and tolerance and not on actions taken by some misguided people in the name of those religions or faiths. Secondly, we all should recognize that we all are the part of one single human race and possess same human values. Today’s world is the result of the accumulated experiences of successive civilizations. Thus we should exert our all-out efforts to develop an education system for our next generation promoting better understanding of these facts.

Honourable Ministers,
The establishment of the OIC Independent Permanent Human Rights Commission (IPHRC) constitutes a most important development. The Commission was launched at its first formal session in Jakarta where it elected a lady as its first Chairperson. The Commission’s work would help mainstream the human rights dimension across the programs and activities of OIC. The Commission has met twice in Jakarta and Ankara this year and the Commissioners successfully met the first statutory stipulation of finalizing the rules of procedure in time for submission to the CFM in Djibouti for endorsement. We are actually working within an integrated approach aimed at enhancing cooperation among Member States in mainstreaming the Human Rights perspective in the activities of the Organization.

Honourbale Ministers,
Distinguished Delegates,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Palestine’s acceptance as a full-fledged member of UNESCO is an international recognition of the Palestinian cultural identity and it was possible because of joint cooperation among the OIC Group, regional groups and friendly States. I thank all for their cooperation.

Israel, recently, has escalated its illegal practices aimed at isolating the holy city of Al-Quds and altering its cultural and demographic character. In the face of this Israeli illegal practices, which targets the past, present and future of the holy city of Al-Quds, I would like to reiterate the appeal that I have launched at the conference ‘In Defense of Al-Quds’ held last February in Doha for an immediate and responsible action and to implement the strategic plan to develop the vital sectors in the city of Al-Quds. The blockade imposed by Israel on the Gaza Strip is illegal as well as a collective punishment of a civilian population, with serious humanitarian repercussions. It is our duty to work seriously toward lifting this unjust blockade, ending the suffering of the Palestinian people and facilitating the reconstruction of the Gaza strip.

Over the past three decades, the Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslim citizens have been subjected to gross violation of human rights, killing, and forced displacements by Myanmar security forces. Renewed violence against Rohingya Muslims on June 3, 2012 caused great alarm and concern to the OIC.

The United Nations declared that the Rohingya people are an ethnic religious and linguistic minority from Western Burma, and that the practices of Myanmar government vis-à-vis the Rohingya population violate international norms by stripping Rohingyas unjustly of their rights to a citizenship. In defence to the Muslim Minority in Rohingya we have managed to put pressure to bear on the government of Myanmar to restore the dignity and rights of the Muslim population of Rohingya, through many sources among which is the UN Human Rights Council at the United Nations.

We have also dispatched an OIC fact finding mission to Myanmar that succeeded in convincing Myanmar government to open an OIC humanitarian office in Rangoon. They have also invited me to visit Myanmar. I would like to add that I wish to visit as soon as the position of the government of Myanmar and their willingness to remedy the fundamental rights issues of the Rohingya Muslims are made clear through accepting signing a joint statement or communiqué to be issued in conjunction with my visit.

Honourable Ministers,
Distinguished Delegates
In a nutshell, I can say that our positions on different issues in the world affairs have a direct bearing on the Muslim world and have enlisted greater respect by the world’s community. Today, our proactive actions have brought us to the position of a global actor with constructive approach to cooperation with other international actors.

On the other hand, the OIC with its forward looking vision for the twenty first century enshrined in its Ten Year Program of Action and the Charter has established itself as a trusted agent of moderation and modernization in the Muslim World.

The onus is now on all of us to continue to enhance these two roles of our Organization for an enlightened future of our own people.

I thank you.




Posted in Freedom of Religion, OIC Meeting | Leave a Comment »

Islam Dorong Toleransi Moderasi dalam pemikiran agama perlu dikembangkan

Posted by Human Rights in Islamic Countries on May 15, 2012


Republika, 15 Mei 2012

Tindakan tak toleran dan menjurus pada kekerasan atas nama agama tak mencerminkan ajaran Islam.
Hal ini disampaikan Ketua AdInterim Komisi Independen HAM Organisasi Konferensi Islam (IPHRC-OKI) Siti Ruhaini Dzuhayatun dalam diskusi publik di Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Syarif Hidayatullah, Jakarta, Senin (14/5).

Dialog dalam penyelesaian masalah, termasuk dengan sesama Muslim, sangat dianjurkan. Menurut Ruhaini, Piagam OKI menyatakan bersatunya umat Islam dalam organisasi ini bertujuan memajukan nilai perdamaian, toleransi, dan keadilan. “Nilai-nilai inilah yang dapat digunakan untuk melestarikan univer salitas Islam,“ katanya.

Dengan demikian, negaranegara yang bergabung dengan organisasi ini mampu menuntun warga negaranya yang Muslim, khususnya mampu berlaku toleran terhadap nonMuslim dan saudara Muslim yang berbeda pandangan.
Dalam konteks ini, kata Ruhaini, OKI mengembangkan reformasi, moderasi, dan modernisasi di negara-negara anggotanya.

Bukan hanya itu, melalui aksi 10 tahun, mulai 2005 hingga 2015, OKI menentang semua bentuk ekstremisme, tindakan kekerasan, serta terorisme.
“Kami juga menentang berkembangnya Islamofobia,“ jelasnya. Ia menganjurkan agar moderasi pemikiran agama dikembangkan untuk mengatasi sikap intoleransi yang terkadang muncul.

Dengan demikian, kelompok ekstrem didorong agar tak membiarkan dirinya melakukan tindakan kekerasan. Sebab, di masyarakat ada keberagaman yang tak bisa dihindarkan.
“Bila tak dicoba, dampaknya akan buruk bagi citra umat Islam serta membuka jalan bagi kelompok tertentu memanfaatkan kondisi ini,“ jelas Ruhaini.

Direktur Center for the Study of Religion and Culture (CSRC) UIN Syarif Hida yatullah Irfan Abubakar melihat, kekerasan yang ditempuh sekelompok orang terjadi karena perbedaan melihat konsep kebebasan beragama. Bagi sebagian masyarakat, kebebasan itu dinilai berbahaya bagi kualitas keimanan dan umat Islam. Menurut dia, dari sinilah muncul golongan keras.

Meski, ia mengakui, kebebasan itu milik semua orang, termasuk mereka yang dianggap sebagai kelompok garis keras. Dalam survei yang dilakukan lembaganya, jelas Irfan, ditemukan bahwa tingkat religiusitas masyarakat di Indonesia tinggi. Meski demikian, didapati pula fakta bahwa mereka tak menganggap tindakan bertoleransi dengan cara menghargai kelompok lain sebagai bagian penting religiusitas.


Posted in Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Religion, Human Rights and Islam, Independent Permanent Human Rights Commission (IPHRC), Indonesia | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

Kaum Muslim Moderat Harus Lebih Lantang

Posted by Human Rights in Islamic Countries on May 15, 2012

Senin, 14 Mei 2012 | 23:09 WIB

JAKARTA, — Kaum Muslim moderat di Indonesia masih merupakan mayoritas dan menjadi arus utama. Namun, mereka diminta untuk bersuara lebih lantang, terutama dalam menolak tindakan intoleran atas nama agama, apalagi disertai dengan kekerasan.

“Penolakan atas tindakan intoleran harus disuarakan lebih keras oleh mayoritas umat Islam yang moderat. Jika tidak, sikap antiperbedaan pendapat dan kebebasan berpikir itu akan semakin mendapat tempat di negara yang menjamin kebebasan berpendapat dan berkeyakinan,” kata anggota Komisi Independen Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) Organisasi Kerja Sama Islam (OKI), Siti Ruhaini Dzuhayatin, di Jakarta, Senin (14/5/2012).

Menurut Siti Ruhaini Dzuhayatin, ada sejumlah kasus yang menggambarkan toleransi di kalangan masyarakat Indonesia belakangan ini semakin tergerus. Salah satunya, penolakan dan pembubaran diskusi dengan pemikir Muslim asal Kanada, Irshad Manji, di Jakarta dan di Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM) Yogyakarta.

Pada saat bersamaan, kontroversi atas keberadaan jemaah Ahmadiyah dan Syiah juga masih terus bergulir.

Untuk mengantisipasi kondisi itu, kaum Muslim moderat yang merupakan arus utama umat Islam di Indonesia diharapkan tidak tinggal diam atas perilaku tidak toleran dan kekerasan atas nama agama.

“Jika kekerasan ini dibiarkan, dan kelompok mayoritas moderat tidak bersuara, situasinya bakal semakin mengkhawatirkan,” katanya.

Komisi HAM OKI sudah membahas soal ini. “Semua komisioner sepakat, kelompok minoritas harus dilindungi, termasuk di Indonesia. Indonesia harus menunjukkan keseriusan untuk menjaga aset penting sebagai bangsa, yaitu hasrat untuk hidup bersama dan menerima perbedaan,” katanya.

Posted in Freedom of Religion, Human Rights and Islam, Independent Permanent Human Rights Commission (IPHRC), Indonesia, OIC Human Rights News | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

UN HRC Resolution: Combating intolerance, incitement to violence and violence against based on religion/belief

Posted by Human Rights in Islamic Countries on March 22, 2012

Human Rights Council

Nineteenth session (Agenda item 9)

Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related form of intolerance, follow-up and implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action

19/…      Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of, and discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against, persons based on religion or belief

The Human Rights Council,

       Reaffirming the commitment made by all States under the Charter of the United Nations to promote and encourage universal respect for and observance of all human rights and fundamental freedoms without distinction as to, inter alia, religion or belief,

       Reaffirming also Human Rights Council resolution 16/18 of 24 March 2011 and General Assembly resolution 66/167 of 19 December 2011,

       Welcoming the panel discussion on strengthened international efforts to foster a global dialogue for the promotion of a culture of tolerance and peace at all levels, based on respect for human rights and diversity of religions and beliefs, held during the seventeenth session of the Human Rights Council pursuant to paragraph 9 of resolution 16/18,

       Reaffirming the obligation of States to prohibit discrimination on the basis of religion or belief and to implement measures to guarantee the equal and effective protection of the law,

       Reaffirming also that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides, inter alia, that everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion or belief, which shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching,

       Reaffirming further the positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information can play in strengthening democracy and combating religious intolerance,

       Deeply concerned about incidents of intolerance, discrimination and violence against persons based on their religion or belief in all regions of the world,

       Deploring any advocacy of discrimination or violence on the basis of religion or belief,

       Strongly deploring all acts of violence against persons on the basis of their religion or belief, as well as any such acts directed against their homes, businesses, properties, schools, cultural centres or places of worship,

       Concerned about actions that wilfully exploit tensions or target individuals on the basis of their religion or belief,

       Noting with deep concern the instances of intolerance, discrimination and acts of violence in many parts of the world, including cases motivated by discrimination against persons belonging to religious minorities, in addition to the negative projection of the followers of religions and the enforcement of measures that specifically discriminate against persons on the basis of religion or belief,

       Recognizing the valuable contribution of people of all religions or beliefs to humanity and the contribution that dialogue among religious groups can make towards an improved awareness and understanding of the common values shared by all humankind,

       Recognizing also that working together to enhance implementation of existing legal regimes that protect individuals against discrimination and hate crimes, increase interfaith and intercultural efforts, and to expand human rights education are important first steps in combating incidents of intolerance, discrimination and violence against individuals on the basis of religion or belief,

       1.             Expresses deep concern at the continued serious instances of derogatory stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of persons based on their religion or belief, as well as programmes and agendas pursued by extremist organizations and groups aimed at creating and perpetuating negative stereotypes about religious groups, in particular when condoned by Governments;

       2.             Expresses its concern that incidents of religious intolerance, discrimination and related violence, as well as of negative stereotyping of individuals on the basis of religion or belief, continue to rise around the world, and condemns, in this context, any advocacy of religious hatred against individuals that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, and urges States to take effective measures, as set forth in the present resolution, consistent with their obligations under international human rights law, to address and combat such incidents;

       3.             Condemns any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, whether it involves the use of print, audio-visual or electronic media or any other means;

       4.             Recognizes that the open public debate of ideas, as well as interfaith and intercultural dialogue, at the local, national and international levels can be among the best protections against religious intolerance and can play a positive role in strengthening democracy and combating religious hatred, and convinced that a continuing dialogue on these issues can help overcome existing misperceptions;

       5.             Notes the speech given by Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference at the fifteenth session of the Human Rights Council, and draws on his call on States to take the following actions to foster a domestic environment of religious tolerance, peace and respect, by:

       (a)           Encouraging the creation of collaborative networks to build mutual understanding, promoting dialogue and inspiring constructive action towards shared policy goals and the pursuit of tangible outcomes, such as servicing projects in the fields of education, health, conflict prevention, employment, integration and media education;

       (b)           Creating an appropriate mechanism within Governments to, inter alia, identify and address potential areas of tension between members of different religious communities, and assisting with conflict prevention and mediation;

       (c)           Encouraging training of Government officials in effective outreach strategies;

       (d)           Encouraging the efforts of leaders to discuss within their communities the causes of discrimination, and evolving strategies to counter these causes;

       (e)           Speaking out against intolerance, including advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence;

       (f)            Adopting measures to criminalize incitement to imminent violence based on religion or belief;

       (g)           Understanding the need to combat denigration and negative religious stereotyping of persons, as well as incitement to religious hatred, by strategizing and harmonizing actions at the local, national, regional and international levels through, inter alia, education and awareness-building;

       (h)           Recognizing that the open, constructive and respectful debate of ideas, as well as interfaith and intercultural dialogue at the local, national and international levels, can play a positive role in combating religious hatred, incitement and violence;

       6.             Calls upon all States:

       (a)           To take effective measures to ensure that public functionaries in the conduct of their public duties do not discriminate against an individual on the basis of religion or belief;

       (b)           To foster religious freedom and pluralism by promoting the ability of members of all religious communities to manifest their religion, and to contribute openly and on an equal footing to society;

       (c)           To encourage the representation and meaningful participation of individuals, irrespective of their religion, in all sectors of society;

       (d)           To make a strong effort to counter religious profiling, which is understood to be the invidious use of religion as a criterion in conducting questionings, searches and other law enforcement investigative procedures;

       7.             Encourages States to consider providing updates on efforts made in this regard as part of ongoing reporting to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights;

       8.             Calls upon States to adopt measures and policies to promote the full respect for and protection of places of worship and religious sites, cemeteries and shrines, and to take measures in cases where they are vulnerable to vandalism or destruction;

       9.             Calls for strengthened international efforts to foster a global dialogue for the promotion of a culture of tolerance and peace at all levels, based on respect for human rights and diversity of religions and beliefs.

Distr. by UN HRC Extranet / Original: English/ 16 March 2012

Posted in For Your Information, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Religion, Human Rights and Islam, International Human Rights, Pakistan | Tagged: , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

OIC Secretary General strongly condemns attack on mosque in Pakistan

Posted by Human Rights in Islamic Countries on August 22, 2011

OIC Secretary General strongly condemns attack on mosque in Pakistan


The Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), Professor Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, has strongly condemned the horrendous terrorist attack against a mosque in North-Western Pakistan, on Friday 19th August 2011, in which more than 40 people were reportedly killed and dozens of other innocent worshippers in the mosque injured. The Secretary General expressed his shock and dismay at the horrific attack that targeted worshippers praying in a holy place during the sacred month of Ramadan.

Prof. Ihsanoglu has expressed his sincere condolences to the families of the victims, the people and the Government of Pakistan. He further stated that the perpetrators and supporters of these shocking crimes have definitely no place among Muslims.

While reiterating the OIC’s support to Pakistan in fighting extremism and terrorism, the Secretary General called on the Pakistani authorities to spare no effort in identifying the perpetrators of this terrorist act and bringing them to justice.




Posted in Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Religion, News of the OIC Countries, Pakistan | Leave a Comment »

The Struggle for Secularism in Europe and North America (Dossier 30-31)

Posted by Human Rights in Islamic Countries on August 5, 2011

The Struggle for Secularism in Europe and North America (Dossier 30-31)

Edited by Algerian sociologist and WLUML founder, Marieme Hélie-Lucas, this bumper dossier brings you papers by over 15 contributors, including Karima Bennoune: The Law of the Republic Versus the ‘Law of the Brothers’: A story of France’s law banning religious symbols in public; Pragna Patel: Cohesion, Multi-Faithism and the Erosion of Secular Spaces in the UK: Implications for the human rights of minority women; and Gita Sahgal: ‘The Question Asked by Satan’: Doubt, dissent and discrimination in 21st-century Britain.

Marieme Hélie-Lucas explains in her introduction that the dossier “addresses a burning issue: the specificity of the struggle that women – be they Muslim or ‘of Muslim descent’ – are waging in Europe and North America, and the way in which their struggle and their strategic decisions are perceived elsewhere, outside the context… Progressive forces in Europe are afraid to… be labelled ‘Islamophobic’ and racist. Bending to both the pressure from fundamentalists (a tactic we know well for they use the same one to silence us in our countries) and to the guilt feelings inherited from the colonial past, progressive forces fear above all to confront Muslim fundamentalists (and not other fundamentalisms), as they know that fundamentalists will accuse them to be ‘against Islam’, as they claim they are Islam and the only legitimate representatives of the true Islam.”

Posted in Document and Articles, Freedom of Religion, Other Rights | Leave a Comment »

Kebijakan Pakistan terhadap Ahmadiyah: Sebuah Tesis yang Terbantahkan!

Posted by Human Rights in Islamic Countries on July 15, 2011

Brief Paper yang bertajuk Ahmadiyah di Pakistan: Kebijakan Diskriminatif dan Politik Islam Fundamentalis ini merupakan suatu tulisan singkat yang mengungkap kebijakan Pemerintah Pakistan terhadap kelompok Ahmadiyah. Sebagai suatu Negara tempat di mana Ahmadiyah muncul, Pakistan menggunakan Ahmadiyah sebagai salah satu propaganda kepentingan politik, sehingga tidak jarang kebijakan tersebut berubah-ubah sesuai dengan kepentingan para elit.

Paper brief ini hendak menyatakan bahwa kebijakan melarang atau memosisikan Ahmadiyah sebagai non-muslim dan bukan bagian dari agama Islam justru tidak memberikan solusi bagi kedamaian dan ketenangan jemaat Ahmadiyah. Sebaliknya, kebijakan tersebut justru semakin meningkatkan aksi-aksi kekerasan dan persekusi yang menimpa mereka. Dengan begitu, tulisan ini membantah tesis sementara orang yang menganggap bahwa Pakistan memiliki praktik terbaik (best practice) dalam menangani Ahmadiyah, serta membantah anggapan dengan memosisikan Ahmadiyah di luar Islam, permasalahan akan beres dan aman.

Silahkan download brief paper

sebagai tambahan lihat laporan Tim Kerja yang dibentuk oleh Pakistan pada saat terjadi kekerasan pertama yang menimpa Pakistan (Munir Report)


Posted in Freedom of Religion, Other Rights | Leave a Comment »