FM Livni: Israel will not participate and will not legitimize the Durban 2 Conference

By: WEA RLC Principal Researcher and Writer, Elizabeth Kendal          

THE OIC & THE UN: ISLAMOPHOBIA AND “DEFAMATION OF RELIGION”

(OIC: Organisation of Islamic Conference)

Durban I — the UN’s first World Conference on Racism, Racial 
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance — which was held in 
Durban, South Africa, in early September 2001 ended with a walkout over 
its virulent anti-Semitism. Yet sadly it now seems clear that the Durban 
Review Conference (or Durban II), which will be held in Geneva in April 
2009, is shaping up to be even worse.

As a prelude to Durban II, a Second Preparatory Session of the 20-state 
Preparatory Committee — of which Libya has been elected chair with 
Cuba, Pakistan and Iran as vice-chairs — was held in Geneva from 6 to 
17 October 2008. The resulting “Draft Outcome Document for the Durban 
Review Conference 2009” is now available on the United Nations Human 
Rights Council (UNHRC) website at LINK 1.

It is clear from the draft document, as well as from reports emanating 
from the subsequent 63rd UN General Assembly meeting held in Geneva 
during the first week of November, that a central focus of Durban II 
will be “Islamophobia”, which is being presented as “a new form of racism”.

Muslims, the draft declaration asserts, are at dire risk of a racial 
“holocaust” due to “a new form of racism” — “Islamophobia” — which is 
incited through “defamation of Islam”.

The draft declaration recommends that local, national and international 
laws and human rights covenants be reviewed and amended as necessary so 
that “defamation of Islam” is made a criminal offence, losing the 
protection it has long enjoyed under the “pretext” of “freedom of 
expression, counter terrorism or national security”. It recommends that 
legal instruments be established to punish offenders — that is, those 
who “defame” Islam by associating it with violence, human rights abuses 
or terrorism.

Anne Bayefsky, a York University professor and human rights lawyer who 
attended the Second Preparatory Session in Geneva, warns: “This is the 
new dimension of Durban 2, which in many ways makes it a greater threat 
than Durban 1. It’s really setting up a war of ideas, that has rough 
implications, between Islamic states and everybody else. . . .  Durban 1 
was called an assault on Israel; a demonisation of Israel as racist and 
analogous to Apartheid South Africa. But in addition, Durban 2 is an 
assault on freedom of expression and other essential democratic rights 
and freedoms.” (Link 2)

———————————

The draft declaration has built on the 17 August 2007 report by Mr 
Doudou Diene, the then UN Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of 
Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, and 
the OIC’s Observatory of Islamophobia.

For background see:
UN Human Rights Council:  Watershed days. 18 Sept 2007
WEA RLC News & Analysis by Elizabeth Kendal
http://www.worldevangelicals.org/commissions/rlc/reports/articles.htm?id=1411 

(This posting gives a thorough critique of Doudou Diene’s August 2007 
report and considers its implications in terms of the Islamisation of 
international human rights.)
AND
OIC:  Eliminating “defamation” of Islam. 25 March 2008
WEA RLC News & Analysis by Elizabeth Kendal
http://www.worldevangelicals.org/commissions/rlc/reports/articles.htm?id=1725 

(This posting analyses the OIC’s Observatory of Islamophobia which was 
launched at the OIC Dakar Summit in March 2008. The Observatory of 
Islamophobia, which is built on Doudou Diene’s August 2007 report to the 
UNHRC, must be seen in the context of the OIC’s “Ten Year Program of 
Action” through which it aims to address the most “prominent challenges 
facing the Muslim world today”. This posting also presents scenarios and 
means through which the OIC might fulfill its goal of establishing 
international instruments to punish — under the pretext of peace and 
human rights — those whom they charge with inciting Islamophobia 
through “defamation” of Islam.)

—————————————-

Canada and Israel have already pulled out of Durban II while several 
other Western states have threatened to boycott — most notably Denmark. 
As reported by Jette Elbaek Maressa in Jyllands-Posten (28 Oct 2008), 
Danish foreign minister Per Stig Moller told his Arab partners during a 
round trip to the Middle East that if the Organisation of Islamic 
Conference did not withdraw its proposal to make criticism of religion 
equivalent to racism, then Western countries will stay away from Durban 
II. “If the OIC pushes through this draft resolution, they shall not 
expect European or Western countries to be present at the table,” he 
said. (Link 3)

The Non-Government Organisation “UN Watch” has released a paper on the 
Durban II Draft Declaration. Entitled “Shattering the Red Lines: The 
Durban II Draft Declaration”, it examines a “small selection of the 646 
provisions of the Durban II draft declaration, highlighting several that 
breach the EU’s red lines” (i.e. the lines the EU determined should not 
be crossed).

In its opening summary, UN Watch charges that the draft declaration 
seeks “to distort human rights laws for the purposes of Islamic 
censorship” by “inserting a prohibition against ‘defamation of religion’ 
designed to restrict free speech and impose the censorship of Islamic 
anti-blasphemy laws”.

UN Watch’s paper provides a clear, thorough and yet concise overview and 
analysis of the most contentious elements of the Durban II draft 
declaration. It is recommended reading. (Link 4)

63rd UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Reliefweb has published a report on the 63rd General Assembly that was 
held in Geneva subsequent to the Durban Review Conference Second 
Preparatory Session. LINK 5

The report describes representatives from Egypt, Sudan, Libya and 
Pakistan all expressing great concern over the threat posed by this “new 
form of racism” — Islamophobia — which is incited by “defamation of 
religion”. According to the Libyan representative, freedom of speech is 
not the issue — at issue is the “misuse” of that right.

The representative from Iran told the assembly that modern-day racism is 
no longer based on supposed inequality between races, but is based on 
culture, nationality or religion. He claimed that xenophobic acts 
against migrants, refugees and asylum seekers; defamation of religions; 
religious intolerance and racial profiling are all expressions of this 
new form of racism which seeks legitimacy and protection under various 
pretexts such as combating terrorism.

According to the representative from Saudi Arabia, Islam rejects all 
forms of discrimination and so in Saudi Arabia there are legal 
provisions to protect all the rights of all persons regardless of race, 
religion, status or gender.

Various free, multi-racial Western democracies (a minority in the UN) 
denounced racism while making strong and clear defences of human rights 
including religious liberty and freedom of expression.

The representative from France (speaking on behalf of the European Union 
[EU]) reminded the assembly that the EU had supported the organisation 
of a Review Conference as long as certain conditions were met and 
certain lines not crossed. He said that the primary goal should be the 
full implementation of existing normative framework and that new norms 
should only be drawn up if they were deemed necessary, were subject to a 
broad consensus and did not go back on universal achievements by 
restricting the current scope of human rights.

He expressed the European Union’s concern that the “thought process” on 
the possible creation of complementary norms was moving in a direction 
that could reduce the level of human rights promotion and protection. 
According to Reliefweb, the representative from France said the EU would 
“not allow the United Nations principles to be undermined” and would 
work in accordance with the principles that had been set out in the 
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. He said the Review Conference 
should concentrate on the implementation of the existing framework 
without restricting any human rights, establishing any hierarchy among 
victims, or excluding any one group. As well, the review conference 
should show how promoting human rights, especially the freedom of 
speech, could play an important role in fighting racism.

The representative from the USA expressed concern at the trend of 
conflating issues of racism and religion which he said were two distinct 
issues. He likewise asserted that the cure for intolerance is more 
dialogue, not less.

The representative from Israel regretted that alliances had trumped 
ideals and warned that nations with a genuine desire to promote peace 
should guard against the co-opting of legitimate language and ideas by 
racist demagogues. He expressed concern that Durban II risked becoming 
itself a platform of racial incitement, and he feared that words might 
quickly turn to actions.

————————–

The OIC formulated its Ten Year Program of Action (TYPOA) in Makkah in 
December 2005. Item VI on the TYPOA is “Combating Islamophobia”. The OIC 
determined to do this by means of: 1) establishing an Observatory on 
Islamophobia tasked with monitoring Islamophobia and “defamation” of 
Islam and issuing annual reports; 2) getting the UN to adopt an 
international resolution on Islamophobia, and call on all States to 
enact laws to counter it; and 3) establishing international legal 
instruments to enforce anti-defamation laws and deliver deterrent 
punishments to those charged with inciting Islamophobia through 
defamation of Islam.

The Observatory of Islamophobia was launched in Dakar in March 2008 and 
the UN has been passing resolutions against Islamophobia and 
“defamation” of religion ever since the OIC and Arab League-incited 
Cartoon Intifada of February 2006. All that is left on the OIC’s agenda 
for combating Islamophobia is the legitimisation and implementation of 
national and international laws and legal instruments to punish 
offenders. It looks like Durban II might be a step in this direction.

By E N Kendal

Links

1) Draft Outcome Document for the Durban Review Conference 2009
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/racism/DurbanReview/session2-documentation.htm

2) Durban 2: New site, same debacle.
Kevin Libin, National Post (Canada) 25 October 2008
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=907004

3) Danish foreign minister threatens Western boycott of Durban II
Jyllands-Posten 28 Oct 2008
By Jette Elbaek Maressa
http://europenews.dk/en/node/15473

4) Shattering the Red Lines: The Durban II Draft Declaration
Selected provisions of United Nations draft published at Second 
Preparatory Session
By UN WATCH www.unwatch.org (Oct. 2008).

5) Strengthening respect for human rights key for preventing conflict, 
stabilizing post-conflict situations, Third Committee told.
GA/SHC/3933
Sixty-third General Assembly
Third Committee
33rd & 34th Meeting (AM & PM)
Hears from Special Rapporteur on Racism, Chair of Mercenaries Working 
Group; Religious Defamation, Progress towards Durban Review Conference 
among Issues
http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db900sid/SHIG-7L3D9X?OpenDocument

—————————————–
  **WEA Religious Liberty News & Analysis**
  < Religious-Liberty@hub.xc.org >
—————————————–

Please feel free to pass this along to others giving attribution to:
“World Evangelical Alliance – Religious Liberty News & Analysis.”

WEA RLC operates two mailing lists: the WEA RLC News & Analysis list and 
the weekly Religious Liberty Prayer list.

The WEA RLC News & Analysis mailing list provides reports on religious 
liberty and persecution around the world for those with a special 
interest in the field. Most subscribers are involved in church-based 
religious liberty advocacy, academic research, missions leadership, 
creative-access missions, religious media, or have prayer networks 
supporting these groups, although anyone is welcome to join. Postings 
average one per week. Information shared does not necessarily reflect 
the opinion of World Evangelical Alliance, or of the WEA Religious 
Liberty Commission.

For those who would like regular detailed information specifically
for prayer and intercession, we recommend that you subscribe to the
WEA Religious Liberty Prayer List (RLP). Each week a different
nation or situation is highlighted. A short summary is included for
use in church and other bulletins.

**SUBSCRIPTIONS ARE FREE**

To subscribe for WEA RLC News & Analysis, please send your request to
< join-religious-liberty@hub.xc.org > Please include your name and country 
or state of residence.

To subscribe for the weekly Religious Liberty Prayer(RLP) bulletin, 
please send an empty e-mail to < join-rl-prayer@hub.xc.org > with any or 
no subject.

For more information on the World Evangelical Alliance, please see:
< http://www.WorldEvangelicalAlliance.com >,
For the Religious Liberty Commission of the WEA, see:
< http://www.WorldEvangelicalAlliance.com/commissions/rlc/ >.
All WEA RLC material is archived at < http://www.ea.org.au/ >.

Advocates International < http://www.advocatesinternational.org > serves 
as the legal and judicial advisor to the RLC. Advocates International 
links many Christian lawyers and judges around the world and has been 
involved in religious liberty issues for many years.