FX 21 – Combatting intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief

As we begin 2024, there are worrying signs that the international consensus around tackling religious intolerance, symbolised by the 16/18 action plan, is fraying, and the practical on-the-ground progress achieved since 2011 risks becoming undone.

Burnings of the Quran and increasing incidents of Islamophobia and antisemitism in the context of the conflict in Gaza are just a few of many recent examples, and they must be seen against a background of heightened religious hostility and discrimination in almost every part of the world. Such incidents, along with other forms of religious intolerance and discrimination, such as increasing populist rhetoric and polarisation based on religious identity in the political discourse across countries, increasing hate speech on social media platforms, and targeting of persons belonging to religious minorities, amongst other factors, reflect a general increase in religious intolerance and discrimination.

In July 2023, the OIC called an urgent debate at the Council on ‘countering religious hatred constituting incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.’ The positions of the different sides during the debate, and during the negotiations on the outcome resolution, were reminiscent of the polarised discussions in the context of the old resolutions on ‘defamation of religions.’

At one level, it should be easy for all States to denounce blatant acts of religious intolerance, such as burning holy texts, or protesters holding up antisemitic or Islamophobic placards; just as the international community should easily be able to condemn the persecution of or discrimination against Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, Baha’i, or other religious minorities in different parts of the world. However, it becomes more complicated when discussions turn to whether such acts of intolerance should be prohibited under national or international law. As was evident from the positions taken by States during the aforementioned urgent debate, differences centre on the interplay between different human rights, especially the right to be free from religious discrimination, intolerance, or hatred on the one hand, and the right to freedom of expression on the other. Specifically, what is the threshold between legitimate free expression (as covered by art. 19 of the ICCPR) and ‘advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence’ (which, according to art. 20 of the ICCPR, ‘shall be prohibited by law’) on the other?

Unless steps are taken to re-establish trust and recommit to the 16/18 framework and to the Istanbul Process, there is a real risk that the polarised views displayed in the context of last year’s urgent debate and resolution will spill over into the negotiations on the latest iterations of the Council’s resolutions on freedom of religion or belief, and on combatting religious intolerance, both due to be tabled in March.

Through resolution 53/1, the Council decided to organise a panel discussion at its 55^th session, on the drivers and root causes of religious hatred. The panel discussion provides both risks and opportunities. The risk is we will see a continued polarised debate on the difficult and complex human rights questions, putting at risk the consensus-based framework set out in resolution 16/18. Yet the debate also offers an opportunity for States to recommit to 16/18 and the Istanbul Process, and to have an honest exchange about the difficulties all countries face in addressing incitement to religious discrimination, hostility, or violence, while at the same time fully protecting other important rights and freedoms, such as freedom of expression and freedom of assembly.

Against this background, the Friday Exchange will focus on a number of questions, including:

1. What opportunities and risks exist in relation to the 55^th session of the Human Rights Council?
2. Do all States, especially from the Western and OIC groups, remain committed to the 16/18 action plan? Is there a need to reaffirm that commitment?
3. Is it possible, or even desirable, to maintain the current ‘balance’ between the Council’s initiatives on freedom of religion or belief, and on combatting religious intolerance?
4. What confidence-building measures can States take to avoid further divergence and division on the matter of incitement to religious discrimination, hostility, or violence, as well as on human rights and religion more broadly?