Blasphemy, religious insults and hate speech against persons on grounds of their religion
Reply to Recommendation
| Doc. 11717
| 25 September 2008
1 The Committee of
Ministers has taken note with great interest of Parliamentary Assembly Recommendations
1804 (2007) “State, religion, secularity and human rights” and
1805 (2007) “Blasphemy, religious insults and hate speech against
persons on the ground of their religion”. It has brought these recommendations,
and
Resolution 1510 (2006), to the attention of the governments of member states.
The Committee of Ministers has, in addition, requested and received
comments on
Recommendations
1804 and
1805
(2007) from a number of committees. These comments are appended
to this document.
NoteNoteNote
2 The Committee of Ministers is aware of the importance of religious
and convictional facts within European society and refers in this
connection to the commitment undertaken at the Third Summit of Heads
of State and Government in Warsaw, to “encourage intercultural and
inter-faith dialogue, based on universal human rights, as a means
of promoting awareness, understanding, reconciliation and tolerance,
as well as preventing conflicts and ensuring integration and the
cohesion of society”.
3 The action taken by the Committee of Ministers to follow up
these commitments has focused on intercultural dialogue, including
its religious dimension. Like the Assembly, the Committee of Ministers
believes that inter-faith or interdenominational dialogue is not
a direct matter for states or the Council of Europe and would, moreover,
be regarded by religions as interference in their affairs. It reaffirms
its belief in the shared European principle of the separation between
governance and religion in the Council of Europe member states with
due regard for the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights
and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR). This principle, along with that
of freedom of conscience and thought and the principle of non-discrimination,
is an integral part of the concept of European secularity on which
the Committee of Ministers bases its work on the religious dimension
of intercultural dialogue.
4 Accordingly, and aware of the major potential of religious
communities for contributing to the expansion of the values defended
by the Council of Europe, and of the importance of appropriate co‑operation
with civil society players – including the media – in particular
to identify and share relevant experiences and good practice, on
8 April 2008 the Committee of Ministers held, on an experimental
basis, the first annual Council of Europe Exchange on the religious
dimension of intercultural dialogue. In view of the key role played
by education in combating ignorance, stereotypes and incomprehension
and in building a democratic society, the Committee of Ministers
decided to devote this Exchange to “Teaching religious and convictional
facts. A tool for acquiring knowledge about religions and beliefs
in education; a contribution to education for democratic citizenship,
human rights and intercultural dialogue”.
5 In the light of the conclusions of the General Rapporteur
and the positive assessment of the 2008 Exchange,
Note the Committee of Ministers
has agreed to foresee a continuation of work on the religious dimension of
intercultural dialogue, focused on the core objective of the Council
of Europe, through annual exchanges. These will be evaluated on
a case-by-case basis and an assessment made of their impact. Other
practical follow-up action will be considered in due course, especially
with regard to the learning and teaching of intercultural skills,
in the framework of the follow-up to be given to the White Paper
on Intercultural Dialogue, launched at the 118th Session of the
Committee of Ministers on 7 May 2008.
6 In addition to this initiative, the Committee of Ministers
recalls that numerous activities, in particular by the Steering
Committee for Education (CDED) and the Steering Committee for Higher
Education and Research (CDESR), are related to the elaboration of
new teaching methods and learning strategies that take account of religious
diversity and the religious heritage of Europe, and seek to cultivate
the religious dimension of intercultural education. The latter,
for example, was the focus of the project entitled “The New Challenge
of Intercultural Education: Religious Diversity and Dialogue in
Europe” (2002-2006), which resulted, inter
alia, in the preparation of a reference handbook on intercultural
education for use by teachers. It has also led to a draft recommendation
within the CDED, which is currently being revised to take account
of recent achievements, namely the results of the 2008 Exchange,
the White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue and the possibilities offered
by the opening of the European Resource Centre on Education for
Intercultural Understanding, Human Rights and Democratic Citizenship
in Oslo (“European Wergeland Centre”).
7 The establishment of this centre and the research, training
and information dissemination activities that it will undertake,
in co-operation with the Council of Europe, in the field of education
for intercultural understanding, human rights and democratic citizenship,
could satisfy a number of the expectations expressed by the Assembly
in paragraphs 23.7 and 24.1 of its Recommendation 1804 (2007).
Note
8 The Committee of Ministers also reasserts its commitment to
the freedom of expression and the freedom of thought, conscience
and religion, which are fundamental freedoms enshrined in the ECHR
and which lie at the very heart of democracy. Clearly, it acknowledges
that it is sometimes necessary to reconcile these different freedoms
and place restrictions upon them with due regard for the ECHR. Nonetheless
the Committee of Ministers points out that, according to the case
law of the European Court of Human Rights, in application of paragraph
2 of Article 10 of the ECHR, the right to freedom of expression
enshrined therein is applicable not only to information or ideas
that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a
matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or
disturb.
9 The Committee of Ministers encourages member states to closely
monitor the constantly developing degree of protection of these
freedoms, as seen in the enriching interpretation of the case law
of the Court to reflect this in their national law and practice.
10 Some of the questions raised by the two Parliamentary Assembly
recommendations regarding these restrictions and reconciliations
have already been the subject of two thematic reports by the Steering Committee
for Human Rights (CDDH) on the wearing of religious symbols in public
areas and on “hate speech”. These two reports identify principles
based on the relevant case law of the European Court of Human Rights, with
a view to providing guidance to the competent public authorities.
With regard more specifically to the question of hate speech, the
Committee of Ministers refers to the principles set out and the
measures advocated in its Recommendation No. R (97) 20 on hate speech,
which remain fully valid.
11 The Committee of Ministers would also draw attention to the
Conference on Human Rights in culturally diverse societies – challenges
and perspectives, to be held in The Hague on 12 and 13 November 2008,
in which the Assembly is invited to participate, and which could
afford an opportunity to reflect on other relevant issues, such
as freedom of religion or belief, hate speech and the role of the
state.
12 Lastly, the Committee of Ministers would like to thank the
Assembly for the interest it has shown in the establishment of a
comprehensive approach to non-discrimination at United Nations level.
In this context, it welcomes the forthcoming signature of the Memorandum
of Understanding between the Council of Europe and the Alliance
of Civilisations by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe
and the United Nations High Representative for the Alliance of Civilisations.
The co-operation based on this agreement will further the respective
objectives of both parties, including “the promotion and protection
of democracy, human rights and the rule of law; the fight against
all forms of discrimination on any ground; the equal dignity of
every human being and gender equality; inclusive and cohesive societies;
the democratic governance of cultural diversity; intercultural dialogue,
including its religious dimension, as well as intercultural exchange;
and the strengthening of democratic citizenship and participation
and the promotion of civil society”.
Note
Appendix 1 – Comments of the Steering Committee
for Human Rights (CDDH) on Parliamentary Assembly Recommendations
1804 (2007) and 1805 (2007)
1 The Steering
Committee for Human Rights (CDDH) takes note with interest of the
Parliamentary Assembly’s Recommendations 1804 (2007) “State, religion,
secularity and human rights” and 1805 (2007) “Blasphemy, religious
insults and hate speech against persons on grounds of their religion”,
which both raise very topical and interconnected issues faced by
European societies.
2 The CDDH wishes to draw the Assembly’s attention to its ongoing
work on human rights in a multicultural society. Within the framework
of this activity, consideration has already been given to some of
the issues tackled by the two aforementioned recommendations. An
activity report as well as two separate reports on “hate speech”
and the wearing of religious symbols in public areas have already
been adopted and brought to the attention of the Assembly, which
has taken them into account in the preparation of Recommendation
1805 (2007). Both thematic reports identify principles based on
the relevant case law of the European Court of Human Rights with
a view to providing guidance to the competent public authorities.
A conference, bringing together government experts, civil society
representatives and other relevant stakeholders, and at which the Assembly
will be invited, is planned for 2008. Further issues, which could
include freedom of religion and the role of the state, will be examined
on that occasion. As part of this activity, the CDDH has also started considering
the possibility of a political declaration by the Committee of Ministers,
which could take up some of the issues raised on Recommendations
1804 (2007) and 1805 (2007). The Assembly will be kept informed of
future developments of this activity.
Appendix 2 – Comments of the Steering Committee
for Culture (CDCULT) on Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1804
(2007)
The CDCULT:
- endorses the Parliamentary Assembly’s acknowledgement
of religion as an important feature of European society and especially,
civil society;
- congratulates the Parliamentary Assembly on reaffirming
in Recommendation 1804 (2007) the generally accepted principle and
European shared value of separation of church and state and on reiterating
its previous view that “each individual’s religion or option of
having no religion is a strictly personal matter”;
- acknowledges, as the Assembly does, the religious aspect
to many of the problems contemporary society is faced with as well
as the sometimes highly beneficial social role played by religions,
while agreeing with the Assembly on the fact that interreligious
and interdenominational dialogue is not a matter for states or for
the Council of Europe and that governance and religion should not
mix;Note
- underlines the CDCULT’s previously made contributions
and its future readiness to help the Council of Europe devise a
comprehensive strategy on intercultural and interreligious dialogue
and welcomes the prospect of annual exchanges on the religious dimension
of intercultural dialogue as proposed by the Committee of Ministers
and which began on an experimental basis in 2008;
- underlines the importance of collecting empirical evidence
in the form of case studies and good practices to allow for knowledge
transfer and informed policy making on issues of intercultural and
interreligious dialogue, as well as the importance of the role of
civil society actors in this work, and of co‑operation with them;
- underlines the key role of culture and cultural heritage
as an essential space for cultivating intercultural dialogue by
promoting tolerance and understanding of the “other” and informs
the Parliamentary Assembly that several activities are being carried
out by the Directorate of Culture and Cultural and Natural Heritage
on specific aspects related to the protection of the religious heritage
of member states (Armenia, Azerbaijan, KosovoNote).
Comments of the Steering Committee for
Culture (CDCULT) on Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1805 (2007)
The CDCULT:
- congratulates
the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe for reaffirming
its commitment to the freedom of expression and the freedom of thought,
conscience and religion, fundamental cornerstones of democracy;
- underlines, when facing cultural and religious diversity
in Europe, the key role of ongoing structured and ad hoc societal
dialogue based on respect and understanding;
- acknowledges the challenges implied in steady and best
possible reconciliation between the freedom of expression and freedom
of thought in multicultural societies and the challenges implied
in striking a fair balance between the interests of individuals
as members of a religious community in ensuring respect for their
right to manifest their religion or their right to education, and
the general public interest or the rights and interests of others;
- underlines the pertinence of existing Council of Europe
and international instruments in support of such reconciliation
and compromise;
- welcomes various recent international initiatives in support
of contacts between Muslim and so‑called Western societies and endorses
the Assembly’s proposal to extend these also to other religious
and non-religious groups;
- underlines the unique potential for contact offered by
cultural co-operation mechanisms and initiatives and would like
to see overall acknowledgment of the potential of cultural spaces
as spaces for dialogue;
- commits to making the most of intergovernmental cultural
co-operation for open and respectful dialogue and as a means of
addressing the challenges of diversity, whilst at the same time
underlining the political importance of perceiving and communicating
diversity as a resource rather than a threat.
Appendix 3 – Comments of the Bureau of the
Steering Committee for Education (CDED) on Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1804 (2007)
The Bureau of Steering Committee for Education
(CDED):
Welcomes this new recommendation of the Parliamentary Assembly,
which shows the importance of dialogue between religions and the
state in a secular framework;
Reaffirms the importance of measures designed to promote better
understanding between cultural and/or religious communities through
school education, on the basis of the shared principles of ethics
and democratic citizenship;
Also believes that schools play a major role in establishing
a tolerant dialogue;
Informs the Committee of Ministers that the problems addressed
in the recommendation were also dealt with in its project “The New
Challenge of Intercultural Education: Religious Diversity and Dialogue
in Europe” (2002-2006), which provided the opportunity, inter alia,
to:
- make substantial progress
in framing the concept, content and relevant learning methods of
the religious dimension of intercultural education;
- highlight the fact that taking account of the religious
dimension of intercultural dialogue is of fundamental importance
in fostering mutual understanding, tolerance and a culture of “living
together”;
- propose new teaching methods and learning strategies that
take account of religious diversity in intercultural dialogue;
- present, in a book entitled “Religious diversity and intercultural
education: a reference book for schools”, a set of concepts and
teaching approaches to make teachers aware of the religious dimension
of intercultural education;
Underlines the importance to promote initial and further training
of teachers mentioned in paragraph 24.1 and points out that the
dissemination of the results of the project to member states with
a view to promoting the use of the reference book by teachers and
teacher trainers has already started with the organisation of regional debates
on this theme, the first of which took place in Athens from 8 to
9 October 2007. The handbook has also been the basic reference text
in two teacher training events co-organised with the Anna Lindh
Foundation and has led to the elaboration of teaching material for
religious diversity for use in countries on both sides of the Mediterranean.
The handbook will be used in further training activities in the
framework of the Council of Europe Pestalozzi programme for the
training of education professionals;
Points out that a draft recommendation on “the religious dimension
of intercultural education: principles, objectives and teaching
approaches” which aims to raise awareness among those responsible
for education policy in the member states has been approved by the
Steering Committee for Education and submitted to the Committee
of Ministers for adoption.
Appendix 4 – Comments of the Bureau of the
Steering Committee for Higher Education and Research (CDESR) on
Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1804 (2007)
The CDESR Bureau takes note of the Parliamentary
Assembly Recommendation 1804 (2007) concerning “State, religion,
secularity and human rights”. The Bureau is of the opinion that
the recommendation takes a disappointingly one-dimensional view
of religion in not recognising that while many Europeans take a
primarily sociological and historical view of religion, for many
others religion represents an important reality of life that deeply
influences their value system. A proper understanding of the role
of religion in European societies must take account of both views
and the complexity they represent. The Bureau also finds other points
of the recommendation disappointing, and much of the wording lends
itself to different interpretations.
While the CDESR Bureau thus wishes to put on records its reservations
about the recommendation, it will, however, confine its comments
to aspects of the recommendation that are directly relevant to higher
education.
The CDESR fully acknowledges the role of education in overcoming
ignorance, stereotypes and misunderstanding of religion and their
leaders and is working towards more prominent role of higher education in
this respect.
In order to develop a more prominent role of higher education
in intercultural dialogue and democratic culture, the CDESR is involved
in the following important activities:
- the CDESR has launched a project targeted towards promoting
intercultural dialogue in higher education, recognising the primary
role of universities as platforms for mobility of international
students, on the one hand, and underlining their responsibility
for developing intercultural competencies on the other hand. Intercultural
competencies should include tolerance, respect for different cultures
and religious beliefs. One of the expected results of this project
will be a compendium of good practices of intercultural dialogue
published and disseminated to all Council of Europe member states;
- the CDESR works towards introducing the fundamental values
of the Council of Europe, in particular, democratic culture, into
higher education policies. While the issue of democratic culture
is different from intercultural dialogue, there is a clear link
between the two: the conditions of a democratic society actively
contribute to promoting intercultural dialogue, tolerance and respect
for diversity, including religious diversity.
The CDESR is in favour of developing syllabuses, teaching
methods and educational material for the study of the religious
heritage of the Council of Europe member states, as stated in paragraph
23.7 of the recommendation. In addition to the involvement of religious
leaders, this work should also draw on academic expertise. Much
work is being done in this area in member states, and the CDESR
Bureau is not of the opinion that a new institute is necessarily
needed to strengthen these activities.
The CDESR wishes to underline that in line with the principle
of university autonomy the responsibility for curricula development
lies with higher education institutions. The academic mission can
best be performed “when universities are morally and intellectually
independent of all political or religious authority and economic power”
(paragraph 7 of Recommendation 1762 (2006)).
This principle has a bearing on paragraph 24.1 of the recommendation,
which in fact covers two different proposals without distinguishing
clearly between them. The first proposal – that balanced teaching
of religions and their present and past roles as a part of teacher
training – meets with the approval of the CDESR, as does the proposal
that human rights teaching be offered to religious leaders. However,
the CDESR Bureau wishes to underline that, in keeping with the principles
of university autonomy defended so well by the Parliamentary Assembly
in Recommendation 1762 (2006), public authorities may promote such
offers but cannot require that they be included in higher education
curricula. While it fully identifies with the importance of human
rights training, the CDESR Bureau also wishes to point out that
the proposal that human rights training be required – rather than
promoted or encouraged – for all religious leaders is problematic
from a point of view of principles as well as from a practical point
of view, since the appointment of religious leaders is entirely
within the competence of religious communities and since their education
ranges – depending on the religious community or denomination concerned
– from academic training in institutions enjoying institutional
autonomy in line with Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1762 (2006)
to training that is entirely non-formal.
Appendix 5 – Comments of the European Committee
on Crime Problems (CDPC) on Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation
1805 (2007)
1 Following the
adoption by the Parliamentary Assembly of Recommendation 1805 (2007)
on “Blasphemy, religious insults and hate speech against persons
on grounds of their religion”, the Committee of Ministers decided
to communicate it to the European Committee on Crime Problems (CDPC),
for information and possible comments. The CDPC examined the above
recommendation and decided to contribute to the response of the
Committee of Ministers by providing the following comments:
2 The CDPC agreed upon the paramount importance for any democratic
society of the freedom of expression and the freedom of thought,
conscience and religion, enshrined in the European Convention for
the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as underlined
by the Parliamentary Assembly.
3 Taking into account that the degree of protection of these
freedoms is constantly developing notably through the enriching
interpretation by the European Court of Human Rights in its case
law, member states should follow closely this development and progressively
reflect it in their national law and practice.
4 Regarding paragraphs 17.2 and 17.4 of the recommendation,
the CDPC was of the view that the responsibility for implementing
the recommendations contained in paragraph 17.2 would not be limited
to national Ministries of Justice only, but would also involve other
competent national bodies.
5 Similarly, elaboration of practical guidelines for ensuring
that national law and practice allow for open debates on matters
relating to religion, penalise hate speech and prohibit acts disturbing
public order would require the collaboration of relevant competent
steering committees of the Council of Europe, in particular the Steering
Committee on Human Rights (CDDH).
6 With the above in mind, the CDPC expressed its readiness to
contribute, within its fields of competence, to the elaboration
of such practical guidelines, if decided by the Committee of Ministers.
Appendix 6 – Comments of the Steering Committee
on the Media and New Communication Services (CDMC) on Parliamentary
Assembly Recommendation 1805 (2007)
The Steering Committee on the Media and New
Communication Services (CDMC) shares the view that, in multicultural
societies, it is often necessary to reconcile freedom of expression
and freedom of thought, conscience and religion as indicated in
Recommendation 1805 (2007) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council
of Europe on “Blasphemy, religious insults and hate speech against
persons on the ground of their religion”.
The CDMC also agrees that in some instances, it may be necessary
to place restrictions on these freedoms but that, under the European
Convention of Human Rights, any such restrictions must be prescribed
by law, necessary in a democratic society and proportionate to the
legitimate aims pursued. In this context, states enjoy a margin
of appreciation given that national authorities may need to adopt
different solutions taking account of the specific features of each
society; this margin is subject to the supervision of the European
Court of Human Rights.NoteNote
The CDMC welcomes the work of different Council of Europe
bodies on intercultural dialogue and human rights in a multicultural
society, dealing inter alia with
questions of blasphemy, religious insults and hate speech against
persons on the ground of their religion. The CDMC is following this
work with great interest and looks forward to the adoption of the
White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue, which will, no doubt, make
a significant contribution to discussions on the subject.
The CDMC would nonetheless recall that, according to the case
law of the European Court of Human Rights, subject to paragraph
2 of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the
right to freedom of expression consecrated therein is applicable
not only to information or ideas that are favourably received or regarded
as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those
that offend, shock or disturb.Note
As regards the question of hate speech, the CDMC considers
that Recommendation No. R (97) 20 of the Committee of Ministers
on “hate speech” sufficiently covers questions regarding hate speech
disseminated through the media, and does not see a need to rewrite
it at this stage. It does acknowledge, however, the desirability
of enhancing the visibility and impact of the standards set out
therein.
;
