27 October 2009
Executive Summary of 2009 State Dept. Religious Freedom Report
Overview of state-sponsored challenges to religious freedom worldwide
The full report is available on the State Department Web site at http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2009/index.htm.
(begin text)
U.S. Department of State
BUREAU OF DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND LABOR
International Religious Freedom Report 2009
October 26, 2009
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Annual Report
The Annual Report on International Religious Freedom records the status of respect for religious freedom in all countries during the period from July 1, 2008 to June 30, 2009. The Annual Report's primary focus is on the actions of governments, including those that contribute to religious repression or tolerate violence against religious minorities as well as those that protect and promote religious freedom. Each country report contains sections covering the country's religious demography; government respect for religious freedom (including the legal and policy framework, restrictions on religious freedom, abuses of religious freedom, and improvements and positive developments); societal respect for religious freedom; and U.S. Government policy and actions. We strive to report fairly and accurately, with sensitivity to the complexity of religious freedom in varied settings.
The International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (IRF Act) designates the promotion of religious freedom for all persons as a core objective of U.S. foreign policy. U.S. advocacy for religious freedom is grounded in our commitment to advance respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms worldwide. The vast majority of the world's population professes some religious belief or identification. The right to believe or not to believe, without fear of government interference or restriction, provides an essential foundation for human dignity, robust civil society, and sustainable democracy. This principle holds a central place in American culture, values, and history. It is also a global concern; both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights articulate the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion or belief.
The IRF Act also provides the mandate for this report and prescribes the principal topics for this Executive Summary: following an introductory overview of challenges to religious freedom, Part I outlines the religious freedom situations in selected countries, Part II addresses U.S. actions in designated countries of particular concern (CPCs), and Part III discusses improvements and positive developments, with a special section on efforts to promote interfaith dialogue and understanding.
State-Sponsored Challenges to Religious Freedom
Religious freedom can be restricted in a variety of ways, from the overt to the subtle. The five categories below provide an analytic framework for recognizing the range of limitations on religious freedom.
1) Authoritarian Governments. The most severe abuses take place in certain strict authoritarian regimes that seek to control all religious thought and expression as part of a more comprehensive state control of expression and civic life. These regimes regard some groups as enemies of the state because of their religious beliefs or because they undermine unquestioned loyalty to the state. Some governments cite political security concerns as a pretext to repress peaceful religious practice. This report distinguishes between expression of legitimate political grievances by groups of religious believers and misuse of religion to advocate and undertake violence against other groups or the state.
2) Hostility toward minorities. Serious abuses occur where there is state hostility toward minority or non-approved religious groups. While not exerting full control over these groups, some governments intimidate and harass religious minorities and tolerate societal abuses against them. In severe cases, governments may demand that minority adherents renounce their faith or force them to relocate or even flee the country. This report takes careful note of the relationships between religious identity and ethnicity, especially in cases in which a government dominated by a majority ethno-religious group suppressed the religious expression of minority groups. Also detailed in this report are instances in which governments were hostile to a minority religious group because of the group's real or perceived political ideology or affiliation.
3) Failure to address societal intolerance. Some states fail to address forces of intolerance against certain religious groups. In these countries, laws may discourage religious discrimination or persecution, but officials fail to prevent attacks, harassment, or other harmful acts against certain individuals or religious groups. Protecting religious freedom requires more than having good laws and policies in place. Governments also have the responsibility to work at all levels to prevent abuses, to bring abusers to justice, to provide redress to victims when appropriate, and to proactively foster an environment of respect and tolerance for all people.
4) Institutionalized bias. Governments sometimes restrict religious freedom by enacting discriminatory legislation or taking concrete action to favor majority religions. These circumstances often result from historical dominance by a majority religious group and can result in institutionalized bias against new or historic minority religious communities. This report highlights instances in which government endorsement of a particular interpretation of the majority religion resulted in restrictions on adherents of that religion who follow a different interpretation.
5) Illegitimacy. Some governments discriminate against specific groups by identifying them as dangerous or illegitimate because they are regarded as dangerous to individuals or societal order, describing the groups with terms such as "cults" or "sects," thereby perpetuating the stigmatization of the groups and encouraging or implicitly condoning acts of violence against them. This practice is relatively common even in countries where religious freedom is otherwise respected.
Multilateral, Global, and Regional Challenges to Religious Freedom
In addition to these country-by-country concerns, the wide spectrum of efforts to undermine the right to religious freedom extends to multilateral, regional, and global fora. For instance, over the past decade, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), an inter-governmental organization comprising 57 states with majority or significant Muslim populations, has worked through the United Nations (UN) to advance the concept of "defamation of religions" by introducing annual resolutions on this subject at the UN Human Rights Council and UN General Assembly. While the United States deplores actions that exhibit disrespect for particular religious traditions, including Islam, we do not agree with the "defamation of religions" concept because it is inconsistent with the freedoms of religion and expression.
The United States understands the primary concern of the resolution to be the negative stereotyping of members of religious groups, particularly minority groups, and the contribution of such stereotypes to disrespect and discrimination. The United States shares concerns about the impact of negative stereotypes and believes that such stereotyping, particularly when promoted by community, religious, or government leaders, contributes to disrespect, discrimination, and in some cases, to violence. The United States, however, believes the best way for governments to address these issues is to develop robust legal regimes to address acts of discrimination and bias-inspired crime; to condemn hateful ideology and proactively reach out to all religious communities, especially minority groups; and to defend vigorously the rights of individuals to practice their religion freely and to exercise their freedom of expression.
The forcible return of individuals from another country to face persecution or abuse in their home country in retribution for their religious activism is also of grave concern to the United States. During the reporting period, the Government of China reportedly sought the forcible return of several Muslims living in other countries, including Syria; during previous periods it had done so with Muslims living in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Some had reportedly protested restrictions on the Hajj and encouraged other Muslims to pray and fast during Ramadan. There were credible reports that the Government of China tortured and, in some cases, executed individuals who had been forcibly returned, including some who advocated for religious freedom. Similarly, the Government of Uzbekistan continued to pursue the extradition of suspected Uzbek religious extremists from third countries, particularly from Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Ukraine, including those who had sought asylum. During the reporting period, at least two individuals seeking political asylum in Kyrgyzstan were forcibly extradited to Uzbekistan and imprisoned on religious extremism charges.
(end text)
