UN passes resolution against defamation of religions

Happy New Year, folks. Sorry for the silence over the past few weeks but there are times when other things have to take priority over writing a blog.

Anyway, Epiphany is a good time to return to the fray. Christmas is over and life is slowly returning to normal.

While most of us were occupied with our preparations for Christmas, the United Nations passed a resolution calling on member states:

[T]o provide, within their respective legal and constitutional systems, adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions, to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and their value systems and to complement legal systems with intellectual and moral strategies to combat religious hatred and intolerance.

The resolution was proposed by Pakistan on behalf of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference which has been pushing for legislation against insults to Islam since the Danish cartoon row.

As you might expect, the only religion specifically mentioned in the resolution is Islam.

The resolution was passed by 108 to 51.

The countries voting for it were:

Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, China, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nicaragua, Niger, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Those voting against:

Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States.

Democracies on one side and, with a few exceptions, dictatorships on the other.

Should we be worried about this resolution? Doesn't everyone just ignore what the UN says when it doesn't suit them?

Perhaps so, but there have also been calls for a resolution on "respect for religious feelings" to be passed by the Council of Europe. This decision by the UN will only embolden those who want a Europe-wide ban on insulting Islam.

As Keith Porteous Wood said when the Council of Europe debated this issue:

I do not think it wise to impose any law that is as subjective as one outlawing the causing of offence would be. There would be endless disputes as to which religions should be so privileged, and the danger would be that it would be the demands of the most sensitive that would prevail. That would be a disaster for freedom of expression.

It is not religious sensitivities that need protecting, however, it is freedom of expression. And if there is to be any internationally imposed legislation on this topic it should be to reduce restrictions on freedom of expression, rather than create another tier of censorship that will frighten commentators and artists from raising controversial matters.

Toothless though it may be, this UN resolution shows that there are people determined to prevent the criticism of Islam not only in their own countries but in ours as well.

Hat Tip: MediaWatchWatch

Comments

[marvin]

When I first heard about it, I got briefly annoyed, then realised it's the UN we are talking about.

I can't see it being ratified in actual European law. We're not that stupid.

Though... A British 'anti-islamic' blogger is to be arrested on return to the UK

http://lionheartuk.blogspot.com/2008/01/british-police-have-been-charged-with.html

[Steve]

Marvin,

As you were commenting, I was posting about this.

[marvin]

Ah-ha! I was thinking where's my 'hat-tip' :))

Nice one Steve, really good to see you back. New Years drinks beckons!!!

[Ross]

It's always entertaining to see the roll call of a UN vote and spot the most hypocritical. In this case the atheist state North Korea which outlaws any rival belief system is the winner followed by the various Islamic countries that viciously defame all other religions.

[James G]

Steve,
European countries don't need to pass new laws...As Bat Ye'or documented in her book Eurabia, throughout the 70s and 80s various European entities under the aegis of one of the tranzi precursors to the EU signed treaties with various Arab and Muslim states.

The reason they will not do anything about wholesale immigration from Muslim countries is because, technically, under these treaties it is not illegal.