Article 18: from Rhetoric to Reality Is a Timely Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Maldives 2013 International Religious Freedom Report
MALDIVES 2013 INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM REPORT Executive Summary The constitution and other laws and policies restrict religious freedom and, in practice, the government enforced these restrictions. Restrictions were not enforced for foreign tourists on “uninhabited” resort islands. The government’s respect for religious freedom declined during the year. The law prohibits citizens’ practice of any religion other than Sunni Islam and requires the government to exert control over all religious matters, including the practice of Islam. The authorities did not recognize or respect freedom of religion and it remained severely restricted. There were reports of governmental detention, religious intolerance, and restriction of religious freedom. Governmental pressure to conform to a stricter interpretation of Islamic practice increased, particularly in the lead-up to presidential elections. The government used religious grounds to further constrain the space of free expression in the media. Some Muslims expressed concern about increasing “Islamic radicalism,” though advocates of religious freedom generally believed the public was becoming more aware of the issue. There were reports of societal abuses and discrimination based on religious affiliation, belief, or practice, including incidents against Maldivians who did not want to conform to a strict, conservative interpretation of Islam. There was an increasing trend among political leaders to call for greater limits on religious groups and activities, and impose criminal punishments in accordance with Islamic law. The use of religion in political rhetoric increased substantially, which led to derogatory statements about Christianity and Judaism and harassment of citizens calling for a more tolerant interpretation of Islam. Anti-Semitic rhetoric among conservative parties continued. -
Antisemitism in the United States Report of an Expert Consultation
Antisemitism in the United States Report of an Expert Consultation Organized by AJC’s Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights in Cooperation with UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, Dr. Ahmed Shaheed 10-11 April 2019, New York City Introduction On March 5, 2019, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Dr. Ahmed Shaheed, announced that he was preparing a thematic report on global antisemitism to be presented to the UN General Assembly in New York in the fall of 2019. The Special Rapporteur requested that the Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights (JBI) organize a consultation that would provide him with information about antisemitism in the United States as he carried out his broader research. In response, JBI organized a two-day expert consultation on Wednesday, April 10 and Thursday, April 11, 2019 at AJC’s Headquarters in New York. Participants discussed how antisemitism is manifested in the U.S., statistics and trends concerning antisemitic hate crimes, and government and civil society responses to the problem. This event followed an earlier consultation in Geneva, Switzerland convened by JBI for Dr. Shaheed in June 2018 on global efforts to monitor and combat antisemitism and engaging the United Nations human rights system to address this problem.1 I. Event on April 10, 2019: Antisemitism in the United States: An Overview On April 10, several distinguished historians and experts offered their perspectives on antisemitism in the United States. In addition to the Special Rapporteur, Professor Deborah Lipstadt (Emory University), Professor Jonathan Sarna (Brandeis University), Professor Rebecca Kobrin (Columbia University), Rabbi David Saperstein (former U.S. -
Western Europe
Western Europe Great Britain National Affairs OIGNS OF SLOW BUT DISCERNIBLE economic recovery in 1993 —such as a drop in interest rate, reduced inflation, and even a small decline in unemploy- ment — did nothing to halt the unremitting decline in the political fortunes of Prime Minister John Major's Conservative government. The Tories lost to the Liberal Democrats in by-elections for two hitherto safe parliamentary seats — Newbury in May and Christchurch in July — and in local elections in May, when the Conserva- tives lost control of all but one county council. The most likely cause of the government's unpopularity was its own disunity. Internal dissension, for example, dogged the progress of the bill to ratify the Maas- tricht Treaty on European Union. In March the government lost a key vote on the bill by 22 votes, and Major had to call for a vote of confidence in July, which did insure final ratification of the treaty. The Labor party limited itself to profiting from the government's unpopularity and to updating its image and organization. Under leader John Smith's impetus, the party's annual conference in September voted to abolish the bloc vote enjoyed by the trade unions, in a bid to enhance the party's appeal to middle-class electors. Despite appeals by the Board of Deputies of British Jews and other groups, the government's Asylum Bill, which would limit the number of political refugees admitted to Britain, was passed by the House of Commons in January. Israel and the Middle East The draft peace accord signed by Israel and the Palestinians in September was welcomed by all political parties and opened the door to a more positive stance by Britain in Middle East politics. -
Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ahmed Shaheed*,**
A/HRC/28/70 Advance Unedited Version Distr.: General 12 March 2015 Original: English Human Rights Council Twenty-eighth session Agenda item 4 Human rights situations that require the Council’s attention Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ahmed Shaheed*,** Summary In the present report, the fourth to be submitted to the Human Rights Council pursuant to Council resolution 25/24, the Special Rapporteur highlights developments in the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran since his fourth interim report submitted to the General Assembly (A/68/503) in October 2013. The report examines ongoing concerns and emerging developments in the State’s human rights situation. Although the report is not exhaustive, it provides a picture of the prevailing situation as observed in the reports submitted to and examined by the Special Rapporteur. In particular, and in view of the forthcoming adoption of the second Universal Periodic Review of the Islamic Republic of Iran, it analysis these in light of the recommendations made during the UPR process. * Late submission. ** The annexes to the present report are circulated as received, in the language of submission only. GE.15- A/HRC/28/70 Contents Paragraphs Page I. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1-5 3 II. Methodology ........................................................................................................... 6-7 4 III. Cooperation -
May 27, 2020 Submission from B'nai B'rith International to Dr
May 27, 2020 Submission from B’nai B’rith International to Dr. Ahmed Shaheed, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, for inclusion in the report to the General Assembly on religious discrimination: B’nai B’rith International is the world’s oldest Jewish humanitarian, advocacy and social action organization, with a grassroots presence around the world. B’nai B’rith has been active at the UN since the founding of the world body in San Francisco in 1945. The organization has had ECOSOC accreditation since 1947 as lead agency of the Coordinating Board of Jewish Organizations (CBJO), and has an engaged presence in New York at UN Headquarters, Geneva at the Human Rights Council and Paris at UNESCO, amongst other UN duty stations. We are pleased to offer the following submission on issues facing the global Jewish community for the upcoming report of the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief. Iran’s policies are of profoundly grave concern. The country, which is led by a radical clerical regime bent on the destruction of Israel, has within its borders a remnant Jewish population. Iranian Jewish history goes back to the time of King Cyrus in the 6th century BCE, but sadly the great majority of this Jewish community has been forced to leave Iran in modern times. Most Persian Jews fled to Israel or the United States. Those that remain live under a regime that openly uses genocidal rhetoric towards Israel, the nation-state of the Jewish people, often employing anti-Semitic tropes. The regime engages repeatedly, and appallingly, in Holocaust denial or trivialization. -
Mega Sporting Events and Human Rights
Striving for Excellence: Mega-Sporting Events and Human Rights Occasional Paper Series Paper Number 2 OCTOBER 2013 Occasional Paper Series Paper Number 2 OCTOBER 2013 Striving for Excellence: Mega-Sporting Events and Human Rights About this Paper This is the second in a series of occasional papers by the Institute for Human Rights and Business (IHRB). Papers in this series provide independent analysis and policy recommendations concerning timely subjects on the business and human rights agenda from the perspective of IHRB staff members and research fellows. IHRB Research Fellow, Lucy Amis, prepared this paper with input from IHRB team members. IHRB wishes to thank all those who offered comments on earlier drafts of the paper. Since 2011 when it launched the Staff Wanted Initiative with Anti-Slavery International in response to concerns around the exploitation of vulnerable work- ers, trafficking and forced labour in the hospitality sector in the run-up to the London 2012 Olympics, IHRB has taken an active interest in the business and human rights impacts of mega sporting events (MSEs). MSEs such as the Olympic Games, FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association) World Cup and Commonwealth Games – with their massive physical and commercial footprints – afford a rare opportunity to address a broad spectrum of business and human rights concerns within a microcosm, and to explore possible new approaches to integrating respect for human rights across a wide range of relationships and practices. All rights reserved. The IHRB permits free reproduction of extracts from any of its publications provided due acknowledgement is given and a copy of the publication carrying the extract is sent to its headquarters at the address below. -
Inquiry Into the Status of the Human Right to Freedom of Religion Or Belief
Submission by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade i CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION...................................................................................6 DFAT’s Submission .........................................................................................................................................7 Australia’s Approach to Human Rights ..........................................................................................................7 DFAT’s Approach to the Freedom of Religion or Belief .................................................................................8 International Human Rights Law on Freedom of Religion or Belief...............................................................9 The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) .................................................................9 Other Binding Obligations ..........................................................................................................................10 Non-binding Sources of the Freedom of Religion or Belief ........................................................................10 Implementation of Human Rights Law on Freedom of Religion and Belief................................................10 CHAPTER 2: MULTILATERAL ADVOCACY AND ENGAGEMENT – THE UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS SYSTEM.......................................................................13 The Universal Periodic Review (UPR)...........................................................................................................13 -
Iran: UN Experts Urge Iran to Halt Immediately Execution of a Juvenile Offender, Scheduled for Tomorrow
Iran: UN experts urge Iran to halt immediately execution of a juvenile offender, scheduled for tomorrow GENEVA (18 February 2015) – The United Nations Special Rapporteurs on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ahmed Shaheed, and on extraJudicial executions, Christof Heyns, today urged the Islamic Republic of Iran to halt immediately the execution of Saman Naseem, a Juvenile offender, reported to be scheduled for tomorrow. Mr. Naseem was convicted of Moharebeh (‘enmity against God’) and Ifsad fil Arz (‘corruption on earth’) for his alleged involvement in armed activities on behalf of the Party of Free Life of Kurdistan (PJAK). Mr. Naseem, 17 at the time of his arrest in 2011, was allegedly subJected to torture and made to confess to a crime before he was sentenced to death in April 2013. The Supreme Court reportedly upheld the sentence in December 2013. “Regardless of the circumstances and nature of the crime, the execution of Juvenile offenders is clearly prohibited by international human rights law,” the independent experts stressed. The experts also recalled repeated assertions by the Iranian authorities that confessions obtain under torture were inadmissible under Iranian law. The experts requested the Iranian authorities to halt the execution of Mr Naseem in strict compliance with its international human rights obligations, under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which the country is a party. The experts expressed serious concerns over the increasing number of executions, including of women and political prisoners and renewed their call on the Government to immediately stop them. -
From Religious Dialogue to Human Rights, Particularly Women and Children’S Rights
22. From Religious Dialogue to Human Rights, Particularly Women and Children’s Rights Report of URG Policy Platform Written by: Octavian Ichim and Subhas Gujadhur I. Introduction Debates on the relationship between religion and human rights at international, regional and local levels often display a remarkable degree of misunderstanding and obfuscation. This lack of clarity has on many occasions led to the claim that certain tenets of major global religions are inherently incompatible with universal human rights. Those who make this claim often retain significant influence over policy-making. They argue that the specificities of different religions, together with different societal norms, mean that human rights should be viewed through a lens of ‘religious values’ or ‘local beliefs’. Such approaches may, however, endanger the human rights of vulnerable groups such as women and children amongst others. However, one should admit the emergence of a new multipolar world of ‘multiple religious norms’ whereby ‘modern’ political values and practices with traditional local references and ways of living, often rooted in religious traditions, will be the rule rather than the exception. Religion is unaffected by these transformations. While in some parts of the world, religion is primarily conceived as a matter of conscience and individual choice, in other regions religion is understood as something to which individuals belong to, something akin to family, ethnicity or nationality. Due to the process of globalization and migration, these different concepts coexist today within the same geographical area and have an impact on the way freedom of religion is conceived, creating tensions that need to be managed. -
DONNELLY, Sir (Joseph) Brian (Born 24 April 1945) KBE 2003; CMG 1998
BDOHP Biographical Details and Interview Index DONNELLY, Sir (Joseph) Brian (born 24 April 1945) KBE 2003; CMG 1998 Career (with, on right, relevant pages in interview) Journalist, c 1965-68 pp 2-6 Administrative trainee, GCHQ, 1970 pp 7-10 Joined Diplomatic Service, 1973 pp 11-12 2nd Secretary, FCO, Republic of Ireland Department, 1973-75 pp 12-26 1st Secretary, UK Mission to UN, New York, 1975-79 pp 26-40 Head of Chancery, Singapore, 1979–82 pp 40-55 Assistant Head, Personnel Policy Dept, FCO, 1982–84 pp 55-65 Deputy to Chief Scientific Adviser, Cabinet Office, 1984–87 pp 65-76 Counsellor and Consul General, Athens, 1988–91 pp 76-91 Royal College of Defence Studies, 1991 pp 91-93 Head of Non-Proliferation Dept, FCO, 1992–95 pp 94-108 Minister and Deputy Permanent Representative, UK pp 108-122 Delegation to NATO and WEU, Brussels, 1995–97 Ambassador to Yugoslavia, 1997–99 pp 123-149 Director and Special Rep. for SE Europe, FCO, 1999–2000 pp 149-159 On secondment to BP Amoco, 2000–01 p 160 Ambassador (formerly High Commissioner) to Zimbabwe, 2001–04 pp 161-177 Special Adviser to Foreign Secretary, 2005–06 pp 177-180 1 BRITISH DIPLOMATIC ORAL HISTORY PROGRAMME RECOLLECTIONS OF SIR BRIAN DONNELLY KBE CMG RECORDED AND TRANSCRIBED BY CLARE MORTON COPYRIGHT: SIR BRIAN DONNELLY CM: It is the 17th of February 2017 and this is Clare Morton in conversation with Sir Brian Donnelly, recording his recollections of his diplomatic career. CM: Sir Brian, thank you very much for your wonderful and very detailed career summary. -
Rhodes Magazine, Rhodes College, 2000 N
SUMMER 1999 William E. Troutt The 19th President of Rhodes College FROM THE EDITOR RHODES (ISSN #1075.3036) is published four times a year in winter, spring, summer and fall by Rhodes College, 2000 North Parkway, Memphis, TN 38112-1690. It is published as a service to all alumni, students, parents, faculty, staff and friends of the college. Summer 1999—Volume 6, Number 3. Periodical postage paid at Memphis, Tennessee, and additional mailing offices. EDITOR Martha Hunter Shepard '66 ART DIRECTOR Kevin Barre GRAPHIC DESIGNER Larry Ahokas EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS John Kerr CONTRIBUTORS Trey Clark '89, Virginia McAfee Davis, Susan Hughes '01, Andrew Michta, Michael Nelson, Commencement Andrew Shulman '00, Kasey Sweeney '01, Valerie Witte '00 Commencement is a beginning. It's the moment when Rhodes seniors enter POSTMASTER: Fisher Garden as undergraduates, then with degree in hand, go out into the Send address changes to: RHODES, 2000 North Parkway, world. Rhodes marked its 150th commencement this year, the end of a century Memphis, TN 38112-1690. and a half, and the bright beginning of another. CHANGE OF ADDRESS: This issue of RHODES features several kinds of beginnings: Please mail the completed form below and label from this issue of RHODES to: Alumni Office, Rhodes College, 2000 North • A profile of the college's new president, William E. Troutt, who Parkway, Memphis, TN 38112-1690. took office July 1 Name • The hopes and plans of seven members of the class of '99 Street • Prof. Michael Nelson's report on Rhodes' Teaching the City State Zip Humanities conference and other national institutions' efforts Home Phone Business Phone to establish similar interdisciplinary courses E-mail Employer • Prof. -
General Assembly Distr.: General 10 March 2020
United Nations A/HRC/43/64/Add.1 General Assembly Distr.: General 10 March 2020 English only Human Rights Council Forty-third session Agenda items 2 and 5 Annual report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and reports of the Office of the High Commissioner and the Secretary-General Human rights bodies and mechanisms Facts and figures with regard to the special procedures in 2019* * Reproduced as received, in the language of submission only. GE.20-03747(E) A/HRC/43/64/Add.1 Contents Page I. Fact sheet on special procedures 2019 ............................................................................................. 3 II. Statistics on current mandate holders (as at 31 December 2019) ..................................................... 4 III. Overview of standing invitations ..................................................................................................... 5 IV. Statistics on standing invitations ...................................................................................................... 9 V. Overview of country and other official visits conducted in 2019 .................................................... 10 VI. Statistics on country visits conducted in 2019 ................................................................................. 16 VII. Overview of States not yet visited by any mandate holder .............................................................. 17 VIII. Status of country visits from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2019 ...............................................