OTHER EVIDENCE
Written evidence submitted by Christian
Solidarity Worldwide (CSW),
received on 23 June 2006
INTRODUCTION
1. Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW)
is a human rights organisation which specialises in religious
freedom, works on behalf of those persecuted for their Christian
beliefs, and promotes religious liberty for all.
1.1 Regular fact-finding visits enable CSW
to obtain fresh, accurate information, to stand in solidarity
with those who are suffering and to tailor practical responses
to identified needs. CSW has developed strong relationships with
key contacts around the world, who provide regular updates on
situations of persecution. Supporters also express solidarity
with those who suffer through prayer, equipped with regular bulletins
from CSW.
1.2 CSW's team of advocates produce regular
expert briefings on current situations of persecution. These briefings
are used to inform and lobby UK and European Parliamentarians,
the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and other European Foreign
Ministries, the European Commission, the Council of the European
Union, the US Administration and the United Nations among others.
In this way CSW ensures that the voice of the persecuted reaches
key decision makers in the international community.
REGIONS OF
FOCUS
2. Asia Pacific
2.1 Burma
2.1.1 We welcome the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office's (FCO) involvement in UN Security Council discussions
on Burma, and hope that the United Kingdom will remain engaged
in efforts to bring Burma to the agenda of the UN Security Council
and seek a binding resolution. While the United Kingdom's support
is welcome, we hope the United Kingdom will take a more active
lead in efforts to bring a UN Security Council resolution on Burma
urgently. We note that after the publication in September 2005
of the report Threat to the Peace by international law
firm DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary, commissioned by former Czech
President Vaclav Havel and Nobel Laureate Bishop Desmond Tutu,
the United States announced its support for UN Security Council
action the next day, while the United Kingdom expressed no position
for more than two months, and only formally announced its support
in November 2005.
2.1.2 We welcome the FCO's efforts to raise
human rights concerns, and hope that the United Kingdom will increase
and intensify its efforts to raise the plight of political prisoners,
and particularly the situation of the Internally Displaced People
and the gross violations of human rights suffered by ethnic national
groups, including the Karen, Karenni, Shan, Mon, Chin, Kachin,
Arakan and Rohingya. We urge the United Kingdom to work with allies
to investigate crimes against humanity and attempted genocide.
2.1.3 We urge the United Kingdom to provide
financial support for pro-democracy and human rights organisations,
particularly exiled Burmese groups involved in monitoring, documenting
and disseminating information concerning human rights violations.
2.2 China
2.2.1 In response to the Foreign and Commonwealth's
reporting of China in its annual report, CSW would like to address
three questions to the FCO.
2.2.1.1 What has the FCO done to address
the very serious concerns regarding Chinese repatriation of North
Koreans to face harsh detention, torture and even death in some
cases, as well as forced abortion in cases where the returnee
is pregnant?
2.2.1.2 Has the FCO led or taken moves within
the international community to address China's deliberate breach
of its obligations under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status
of Refugees, to which it is a party, most specifically in its
refusal to allow access for any North Koreans to asylum procedures
and to permit the UNHCR access to North Koreans in Chinese territory?
Has the FCO in fact raised this issue within the UNHCR?
2.2.1.3 Has the FCO impressed upon the Chinese
that repercussions will result from this ongoing deliberate breach
of international law?
2.3 Laos
2.3.1 In light of the FCO's SP3 and SP6,
CSW requests that the government of Laos is engaged particularly
on the issue of developing the rule of law, with particular reference
to religious freedom. In particular, the government should be
strongly encouraged:
2.3.1.1 To clearly articulate that members
of any religious group are free to practise their faith according
to their conscience, without the constraint of belonging to a
specified religious group;
2.3.1.2 To establish means for the enforcement
of provisions for religious freedom at the level of local authorities;
2.3.1.3 To continue to train local authorities
with respect to the provisions for religious freedom, in order
to ensure its full and proper implementation, to guarantee the
constitutional protections for religious groups, to fulfil Laos'
obligations under international law and to bring Laos into conformity
with international standards on religious freedom.
2.3.2 No specific mentions of Laos were
made either in the FCO Departmental Report 2006 or in the Annual
Human Rights Report 2005. However, serious infringements on religious
freedom persist on Laos, to some extent facilitated by a poorly
developed legislative framework. The macro context of the weakness
in the rule of law in Laos renders religious freedom vulnerable
to the whims of officials in the Party. There has been evidence
of an increased awareness in Laos of the need for religious freedom,
concomitant with the increased involvement of the country in ASEAN
and other international fora, and the Lao Front for National Construction
has undertaken to educate local authorities about religious freedom.
However, there also remains among some officials a deeply-ingrained
antagonism to religious affiliation, and the public discrediting
of the Christian religion by officials has continued to be reported.
2.3.3 Ongoing international scrutiny appears
to be essential in preventing religious freedom violations. Proper,
equal and enforceable protection under the law, as well as a broad
effort to educate officials and society are particularly key to
addressing this issue.
2.4 North Korea
2.4.1 We wish to commend the FCO for its
very important role and success in the General Assembly resolution
on North Korea, which is an important step forward. We commend
the FCO for its significant role in addressing the serious concerns
in North Korea within the international community.
2.4.2 In view of the FCO annual report CSW
would like to address two questions to the FCO:
2.4.2.1 What will the FCO do in the face
of the intransigence of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea
(DPRK) in refusing to respond to the concerns articulated in the
UN resolutions of the General Assembly and the Commission on Human
Rights, and its refusal to acknowledge or co-operate with the
mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights
in the DPRK?
2.4.2.2 Does the FCO have plans to explore
further avenues within the international system to press North
Korea to take seriously the international concern regarding its
egregious human rights record and to take practical and effective
steps to improve respect for human rights for the citizens of
the DPRK?
2.5 Vietnam
2.5.1 As Vietnam looks to augment its position
in the international community, CSW urges that the Vietnamese
government be held accountable for its religious freedom obligations
under international law, and encouraged to ensure clear improvements
in the situation of religious freedom across the country, especially
in those provinces in which the worst violations occur. Under
the FCO's commitment to the promotion of democracy, human rights
and good governance under SP6, CSW recommends that the government
of Vietnam is strongly encouraged:
2.5.1.1 To clarify the ambiguities and loopholes
concerning the process of official registration, and to ensure
that competent authorities are obliged to facilitate the process;
2.5.1.2 To ensure that, from a national
to a village level, Party and security officials are educated
and held accountable to the new provisions on religious activity,
as stipulated in Article 7(2) of the Ordinance Regarding Religious
Beliefs and Religious Organisations;
2.5.1.3 To ensure the equal implementation
of the provisions on religious activity;
2.5.1.4 To fully investigate any allegations
against local authorities, especially those pertaining to beatings,
attempts at forcing renunciations of faith or any other measures
to obstruct religious leaders from registering their congregations;
2.5.1.5 To fully investigate any allegations
of religious conditions being attached by local authorities to
the receipt of funding or other benefits, as such cases arise;
2.5.1.6 To proactively uphold the right
to peaceful assembly for religious organisations, as guaranteed
in Article 21 of the ICCPR.
2.5.2 With special reference to the Protestant
Christian community in Vietnam, the situation of religious freedom
must be considered in the context of the recent measures introduced
to regulate religious activities. The Ordinance Regarding Religious
Beliefs and Religious Organisations, coupled with Decree 22 of
March 2005, have established some form of legal framework for
religious activities in the country. However, not only does the
fact of central administrative control over religious activities
give cause for concern itself, the efficacy of this framework
is severely limited by a number of factors. These include the
existence of a number of ambiguities, tensions and overlapping
provisions which occur within and between the two documents and
the considerable unevenness of its implementation across the country.
The reports by Protestant leaders in some areas of the country,
of having been informed by authorities that the new measures simply
do not apply to them, are especially damning in this regard. They
also undermine the confidence of church leaders in the seriousness
with which the Government of Vietnam takes the issue of religious
freedom.
2.5.3 In light of the arbitrary actions
and policies of provincial- to village-level authorities, the
Christian community of Vietnam has called upon the government
to ensure adherence to the rule of law and respect for the rights
of all Vietnamese citizens in the area of religious freedom, in
accordance with Vietnam's obligations under international law.
The intention to encourage the implementation of the State's policies
on religion and to submit to international standards has been
articulated in Articles 7(2) and 38 of the Ordinance, respectively.
There is need both to ensure that State policies are in accordance
with international standards, and to ensure their effective and
uniform implementation at a local level.
3. Latin America
3.0.1 CSW was concerned to note an almost
complete lack of attention in the FCO report to the entire region
of Latin America. While the report covers FCO work on issues like
the resolution of conflicts and the reinforcing or building of
democracy, it fails to mention any FCO efforts in one of the longest
running conflicts in the world, in Colombia, or one of the world's
longest standing dictatorships, in Cuba.
3.0.2 Neither the firm establishment of
democracy nor respect for human rights is guaranteed in Latin
America. Rather than ignoring an entire continent in its annual
report of activities, CSW would encourage the FCO to pay some
attention to the region of Latin America, not least the countries
where the most egregious abuses continue to occur on a daily basis,
Cuba and Colombia.
3.1 Colombia
3.1.1 Conflict and fragile (or in some cases
nonexistent) democracies continue to be an unfortunate hallmark
in Latin America. While the FCO report briefly mentions the fact
that the Colombian cocaine industry has an impact on UK citizens,
it does not detail any attempts made by the FCO to address either
the drug trade, or related issues, like the conflict, corruption,
endemic poverty, or internal displacement. As far as the promotion
of democracy, the report does not mention any efforts to reinforce
the fragile Colombian civil society, or engaging with members
of that society who are often the targets of violence, including
trade union leaders, journalists, human rights defenders, and
Church leaders, both Protestant and Roman Catholic.
3.2 Cuba
3.2.1 CSW was also disturbed to find that
no mention is made of any FCO efforts towards the establishment
of democracy and respect for human rights in Cuba. What has been
the FCO position on the regular reviews of the European Union
Common Position on Cuba? A summary of how FCO representations
in Cuba engage with Cuban civil society, including human rights
defenders and pro-democracy activists as well as with the family
members of political prisoners would be welcome.
4. South Asia
4.1 India
4.1.1 CSW welcomed the commitment issued
in the Political Declaration on the EU-India Strategic Partnership,
promulgated under the UK Presidency, to "work together to
uphold human rights in a spirit of equality and mutual respect".
While it is concerning that no specific references were made in
the documents associated with the EU-India Strategic Partnership
to the fundamental problem of caste discrimination and the subjugation
of Dalits, this issue was commendably given specific recognition
in the FCO Human Rights Annual Report 2005.
4.1.2 CSW would like to make specific recommendations
for the consideration of the Committee:
4.1.2.1 Continued recognition must be given
to the widespread problem of caste discrimination in India;
4.1.2.2 A clearer articulation is needed
of the fact that Dalits are the chief victims of human rights
abuses and religious intolerance in India;
4.1.2.3 A stronger commitment is needed
to the promotion of the rule of law at a grassroots level to promote
harmony and stability between different social groups in India,
in connection with SP3;
4.1.2.4 A clear mandate is needed to make
representations challenging legislation which promotes the subjugation
of Dalits in India and obstructs freedom of religion;
4.1.2.5 In connection with SP5 and SP6,
the promotion of means for sustainable development targeted specifically
at Dalit communities, including the Ambedkar Principles, should
be considered.
4.1.3 There continues to exist a dichotomy
between India's secularism and economic progress on the one hand,
and ongoing caste discrimination on the other. While the FCO Departmental
Report 2006 focused on the "explosive economic rise of India",
it passed no comment on the pervasiveness of caste subjugation.
This constitutes a block to the full societal participation of
Dalits and tribals, and its symptoms have constituted some of
India's worst human rights problems. Caste discrimination also
limits India's economic potential, owing to the patterns of socio-economic
exclusion affecting a large proportion of its population. In order
to promote human rights and sustainable development under the
FCO's SP6, and with a view to facilitating Indian economic development
in the interest of British investors under SP5, there is a continued
need to support initiatives for Dalit emancipation.
4.1.4 Among the issues to be addressed,
a key element of the subjugation of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled
Tribes and Other Backward Castes is the obstruction of their religious
freedom both through legislative means and extremist violence
against those who adopt a new religion. The assertion of the EU-India
Strategic Partnership Joint Action Plan that India is a paradigm
of "how various religions can flourish in a plural, democratic
and open society" failed to take account of India's major
religious freedom problems; the extent and nature of violence
against the religious minorities, particularly those of Dalit
background or involved in evangelistic or developmental work among
Dalits, ought to give cause for particular concern. Widespread
attacks against the Christian minority have continued into 2006:
although many attacks are not satisfactorily reported, CSW had
by the end of March 2006 documented at least 21 incidents of violence
against Christians in the preceding three months.
4.1.5 In some states, particularly those
ruled by a BJP government, there is a consistent problem of ineffective
investigation and prosecution of attacks on religious minorities.
This often generates impunity for attackers, which represents
a failure in the rule of law and undermines the confidence of
the minority communities in the justice system. In most cases
of violence against Christians, attackers have been released on
police bail, even after committing violent attacks. This indicates
that the offences are treated with inadequate seriousness, and
risks failing to provide an adequate deterrent to attackers. Furthermore,
the extent of police neglect, bias and violence gives cause for
major concern. For example, on 25 January in Chapri village, Madhya
Pradesh, a group of seven police led a violent attack on two tribal
leaders. No disciplinary action is known to have been taken against
the police responsible for the attack. On 16 January in Matiapada
village, Orissa, two Christians arriving at the police station
to register an arson attack on their homes, were instead questioned
under the Orissa anti-conversion law; police also refused to include
the name of the village leader in the First Information Report,
despite the persistent claim of the Christians that he led the
attack against them. The rationale behind the FCO's SP3, on promoting
the rule of law to resolve disputes, should provide a mandate
for representations to be made in the micro context on religiously
motivated violence which is unsatisfactorily dealt with by the
domestic justice system.
4.1.6 There also continues to exist a number
of legislative obstacles to full religious freedom, not least
the denial to Christians and Muslims of Dalit background of a
stake in India's public sector "reservation" policy
and the anti-conversion laws in Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh,
Arunachal Pradesh and Gujarat, and recently passed by the state
legislature in Rajasthan.
4.1.7 Among the other necessary aspects
of a policy to address social exclusion in India are the targeting
of aid at Dalit and tribal communities and long-term economic
empowerment. Recognition was given to the former in the FCO Human
Rights Annual Report 2005, which noted allegations of the deprivation
of Dalits during the relief effort following the 2004 tsunami.
Clear systems of accountability are needed to ensure that aid
reaches the most needy communities. The latter may be supported
through sympathetic representations in favour of reservation policy,
and the promotion of other means for long-term development among
Dalits.
4.2 Pakistan
4.2.1 We note that no reference is made
in the Annual Report to the abuses of the Blasphemy Laws, the
Hudood Ordinances and the persecution of religious minorities.
We hope that the Foreign & Commonwealth Office will make it
a priority in its relations with Pakistan to seek the repeal of
unjust laws and address serious human rights issues concerning
religious minorities and women.
4.3 Sri Lanka
4.3.1 We note that the escalation in attacks
on Christians in Sri Lanka, and the proposed anti-conversion legislation
is not referred to in the Annual Report, despite the fact that
the Foreign & Commonwealth Office Freedom of Religion Panel
commissioned a Special Representative, Baroness Cox, and a Special
Adviser, Benedict Rogers, to investigate anti-conversion legislation
and produce a report for the FCO. We hope the United Kingdom will
make it a priority in 2006 to urge Sri Lanka not to pass legislation
which violates international human rights agreements and to bring
an end to anti-Christian violence.
5. Sub-Saharan Africa
5.1 Eritrea/Ethiopia
5.1.1 CSW commends the FCO for its role
in promoting plans for the reduction of tension along the Ethiopia/Eritrea
border, and its efforts to ensure the resolution of this border
in line with the international ruling.
5.1.2 CSW also notes that the British Embassy
in Addis Ababa is currently working to forge a strong international
consensus on the internal political crisis in Ethiopia following
negative developments in that country. It is, however, surprising
that similar action does not appear to have been taken in relation
to Eritrea, a country that has become increasingly repressive,
where several thousand people are currently detained without trial,
some since 2001, where torture occurs routinely, and where evidence
is emerging of extra-judicial killings of detainees.
5.2 Nigeria
5.2.1 CSW applauds the fact that a new partnership
with Africa was put at the heart of the Gleneagles G8 agreement
which emphasizes the importance of good governance in sustaining
development, and that an EU-Africa Strategy has been agreed by
the European Council. CSW concurs with the assertion that one
of the hindrances to sustainable development and prosperity in
Africa is violent conflict. CSW therefore commends the FCO's efforts
to promote reconciliation and broker peace in the Niger Delta
and in Kano and Plateau States.
5.2.2 CSW would like to highlight the fact
that, since 2000, a system of religious repression that is either
tacitly or openly approved or facilitated by state governments
has been entrenched in most of northern and central Nigeria. The
process of enforcing this system is frequently characterised by
the use of recurrent violence that has now begun to elicit commensurate
retaliatory action elsewhere. This has ominous implications for
the future of a nation that is more or less equally divided between
two major faiths. Given the complicity of many state governments
in repressive actions, CSW calls on the FCO to urge effective
intervention by the federal administration in order to ensure
that such practises are brought to an end as a matter of national
interest.
5.3 Sudan
5.3.1 CSW congratulates the government on
its role at the UN World Summit in ensuring the establishment
of the "Responsibility to Protect" as an international
norm.
5.3.2 CSW also commends the fact that the
FCO has warned perpetrators of human rights abuses in Darfur that
they would face investigation by the ICC, and concurs with the
unfortunate conclusions regarding PSA targets for Sudan.
5.3.3 It is lamentable that three years
after the conflict erupted, and despite much verbal denunciation,
the international community has yet to take effective action to
end the culture of impunity in Darfur. The inability to take action
can be attributed in part to a continuing belief despite evidence
to the contrary that Janjawid militia, who along with regular
government forces have been identified by the UN as the main perpetrators
of human abuses, are largely outside of the control of the Sudanese
government. Consequently there appears to have been reluctance
at international level to take punitive action against the government
for its failure to rein in the Janjawid and end the targeting
of civilians. This lack of consequences has assisted the emergence
of the general culture of impunity that currently prevails in
Darfur.
5.3.4 Thanks to the FCO's efforts the international
community has now embraced the "Responsibility to Protect".
CSW now calls on the FCO to again assume a leading role in ensuring
that this norm is put into practice with immediate effect in Darfur,
particularly with regard to encouraging the enlargement of the
size and mandate and adequate resourcing of the AU force, and
its eventual replacement by a UN force operating under a mandate
defined by Chapter Seven of the UN Charter.
5.3.5 CSW congratulates the FCO on its key
role in the signature of a Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA).
However, we remain concerned at the obstruction by the north of
the time table for implementation of key provisions of the agreement,
at its refusal to accept the ruling on Abyei County, and at the
continuing presence of militia groups in southern Sudan, including
the LRA. In addition, the use of torture and arbitrary detention
continues in northern Sudan in defiance of the provisions of the
new Sudanese Bill of Rights and the country's undertakings as
a signatory of the UN Convention Against Torture.
5.3.6 To ensure the success of the CPA,
the FCO must continue to play an active role in encouraging sustained
international engagement in the implementation of the agreement
and the timely provision of resources to support it. If this does
not occur, the CPA will never become a model for peace building
that can be exported to other troubled areas of Sudan, as was
initially envisaged.
5.4 Uganda (Northern)
5.4.1 CSW commends the FCO's support for
efforts to end the brutal insurgency in the Acholi region of northern
Uganda and to bring key perpetrators to trial before the ICC.
5.4.2 However, there is concern at a local
level that the ICC warrants were issued at a time when peace talks
between the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) and the Ugandan government
appeared to be slowly making headway. The issuing of the warrants
ended this peace process, but the violence and suffering continue
and the LRA leadership remains at large.
5.4.3 The lack of effective measures to
execute the ICC warrants has weakened the standing of the organisation
in the eyes of the local population, which longs for normality
and feel that the aborted peace talks had offered the best way
forward. Many of Joseph Kony's top generals are indoctrinated
abductees. While most of the Acholi population agrees that Kony
should be brought to justice, there is a sense in the community
that the abductees need rehabilitation, not punishment.
5.4.4 There are other concerns. Ninety five
per cent of the Acholi tribe have been forced out of their homes
and are obliged to live in refugee camps. This has effectively
disrupted, perhaps irreparably, the way of life of an entire people
group. In addition, it is not unknown for 1,000 people to die
each week in these camps. Worse still, while the Acholi suffer
primarily as a result of the activities of the LRA, they are often
victimized by elements of the Ugandan Army who are n the area
ostensibly to protect them.
5.4.5 It is vital that more is done to ease
the plight of the Acholi people of northern Uganda, and to accommodate
their views. CSW also calls on the FCO to urge the Ugandan government
to declare northern Uganda a disaster area in order to facilitate
international assistance to the area.
CONCLUSIONS
6. While CSW commends the FCO on many of
its achievements as reported in the Annual Report 2005-06, we
would take this opportunity to draw the Committee's attention
to the recommendations made in the above response, particularly
related to human rights and religious freedom.
Alexa Papadouris
Advocacy Director
23 June 2006
| 
