In the UK we have strong and robust legislation protecting against incitement to hatred, protecting the rights of individuals to practise religions freely and guiding positive race relations. While the implementation is not always perfect, the guiding principles are clear. Religion cannot be immune from criticism and discussion – nor should we expect or demand that. Criticism of religion cannot be allowed to cross the line into personal attacks on individuals because of the religion they choose to practise or the way they choose to practise so long as they do no harm to others.
This week the United Nations will host the Durban Review Conference in Geneva. The gathering is supposed to be about the fight against racism, xenophobia and discrimination worldwide but some countries are once again trying to hijack the agenda.
The conference, colloquially known as Durban II, has sparked controversy as Western countries have threatened a mass walk-out if certain criteria aren't met especially in the light of the disgraceful racism that was witnessed at the original Durban conference in 2001.
Amongst the red-line issues set down primarily by the European Union member states is the contentious issue of religious defamation; a policy designed to outlaw the criticism of religion in the wake of the publication of the Danish Cartoons. A recent decision by the UN Human Rights Council condemned criticism of religion as an abuse of human rights and, if implemented, will effectively close down all debate about religion.
Clearly the role of religion in modern society is a complex one but the principle of defamation of religion is much simpler. The idea behind the attempts by some states at the United Nations to ban criticism of religion is not to do with the principles of religion but rather a ban on criticising certain states and an attempt to impose values on the West in one of the few forums where it is possible (ironically through democratic debate not allowed in many of the countries that support the proposals). It also works to undermine the core of the human rights agenda which is the protection of individual rights rather than larger concepts.
The entire 'Durban II' process has been a disgrace with a group of countries seeking to hijack the agenda of an anti-racism and xenophobia conference to undermine and delegitimize the State of Israel. The antisemitism witnessed at the first Durban conference was humiliating for the UN and for all those who support a progressive agenda in dealing with issues of racism and discrimination. If Durban II fails to deal with repression suffered by the LGBT community and the lack of equality for women across the world then it will fail in its purpose but if it goes further and allows antisemitism, Holocaust denial and the repression of freedom of speech to occur within the United Nations then it threatens to finally destroy the already fragile United Nations Human Rights Council.
Yair Zivan
Campaigns Organiser Union of Jewish Students
