*EPF207 09/05/00
Text: Koh, Seiple Remarks on Religious Freedom
(2000 International Religious Freedom Report Released) (2330)
Introducing the 2000 Annual Report on International Religious Freedom September 5, senior U.S. State Department officials stressed that the report is an outgrowth of the United States historical insistence that governments everywhere respect and tolerate those who hold different beliefs.
Assistance Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor Harold Koh said that the report is not intended to impose American values on the world or to defend any particular religion, "but rather to promote and defend the right of every individual on this planet to honor his or her own chosen beliefs."
"When we promote religious freedom, we promote all human rights, for the right to think and believe freely undergirds the rights of free expression, free association, free assembly and democratic participation," Koh said.
The report, the second annual report as required by the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, reviews the status of religious freedom in 194 countries. It identifies the barriers that exist, cites the countries where those barriers exist and also highlights some of the improvements in religious freedom over the past year.
Robert Seiple, ambassador at large for international religious freedom and author of the report, said that as the report was being prepared, he was "struck by the incredible richness of the (religious) traditions around the globe. Almost every country in the world has an abundance of religions."
"One purpose of this report is to encourage nations to see this abundance not as a source of divisions, but as a source of strength," Seiple said.
A section entitled "improvements in respect for religious freedom" is new to the 2000 report, the ambassador said. "It is also important to acknowledge when something goes right -- even when the improvements are incremental or modest in scope."
Following are the texts of Koh's and Seiple's statements:
(begin Koh's remarks)
Statement of Harold Hongju Koh
Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights & Labor
Upon the Release of the Second Annual International Religious Freedom Report
September 5, 2000
Thank you, Madam Secretary, for that introduction. As the official responsible for overseeing our global human rights policy, let me thank you for your tremendous efforts to keep democracy and human rights in the mainstream of U.S. foreign policy. History will show that no Secretary of State has ever been more dedicated to the cause of human rights, or more committed to integrating the fight for human rights into the day-to-day work of the Department of State.
There is no better illustration of this than the second annual Report on International Religious Freedom, whose public release we announce today (September 5). This report, and its predecessor last year, constitute the first-ever comprehensive worldwide assessments of the state of religious freedom throughout the world. These reports grow out of our own country's historical insistence that governments everywhere respect and tolerate those who hold different beliefs. Our country was founded by people who fled religious persecution and intolerance and who, as a consequence, insisted on the prominent placement of religious freedom in the First Amendment of our Bill of Rights. After World War II, that commitment was universalized in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which expressly protects everyone's "right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion;" a right that includes freedom to manifest one's religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance, as well as the right not to hold any religious belief at all.
With the end of the Cold War, restraints on religious expression around the globe became increasingly visible. In response, Congress enacted the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, which created three core mechanisms to promote the universal right of freedom of conscience and religion: an Office of International Religious Freedom under an Ambassador at Large, located in the State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor; an Annual Report covering every foreign country; and a separate, independent bipartisan U.S. commission to make independent recommendations. The Act's purpose was emphatically not to impose American values on the world or to defend any particular religion, but rather, to promote and defend the right of every individual on this planet to honor his or her own chosen beliefs. As President Clinton noted when he signed the International Religious Freedom Act, the law "proclaim(s) the fundamental right of all peoples to believe and worship according to their own conscience, to affirm their beliefs openly and freely, and to practice their faith without fear of intimidation."
Shortly thereafter the President nominated, and the Senate confirmed, my close friend and colleague Robert Seiple to serve as America's first Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom. Over the past two years, I have worked daily with Bob, with Tom Farr, the deeply committed Director of Bob's office, and their fine staff at their offices within my Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. Our close working relationship has reinforced my view of the deep interconnectedness of our work on international religious freedom and international human rights policy. For when we promote religious freedom, we promote all human rights, for the right to think and believe freely undergirds the rights of free expression, free association, free assembly, and democratic participation.
The report that you have before you pays tribute to the remarkable work that Bob and Tom and their office have done in two short years to bring the religious freedom statute to life. It seems particularly fitting that we present this report here in New York, on the eve of the Millennium Summit, when all United Nation member states are gathering both to celebrate the diversity of their religious, cultural and political traditions and to reaffirm the universality of our commitment to international human rights.
Preparing any human rights report requires tens of thousands of hours of data collection, on-the-ground observation and challenging analysis by State Department employees, nongovernmental organization activists and religious groups and communities of conscience around the world. Preparing a new report means not only gathering data but also designing a new methodology. As impressive as last year's initial report was, we believe that this year's report is an even fuller, more comprehensive document with more detail, more context, better organization, and fuller recognition of both the progress that countries have made, as well as the problems that remain. For that result, let me give the highest praise not only to Bob and his office, but also to the splendid staff of my Bureau's Office of Country Reports and Asylum Affairs, led by their tireless Director and Deputy Director, Marc Susser and Jeannette Dubrow, for the countless careful hours they gave this summer to ensure the comprehensive and accuracy of these reports.
Without farther ado, let me turn over the podium to Ambassador Bob Seiple to present this year's report.
(end Koh's remarks)
(begin Seiple's remarks)
Thank you, Harold, for your kind remarks. As I depart the position of Ambassador at Large I want publicly to thank you for your creative and effective advocacy for all human rights, and for your commitment to the promotion of international religious freedom. And I want to acknowledge as well the professionalism of the Country Reports staff under its director, Marc Susser; and the extraordinary dedication of my own staff in the Office of International Religious Freedom, under its director and my deputy, Tom Farr.
I too want to thank Secretary Albright for her commitment to human rights, and to religious freedom in particular. Her personal support for me and the work of my office has been critical to our success in integrating religious freedom into the mainstream of U.S. foreign policy.
One year ago we announced the issuance of the first Annual Report on International Religious Freedom. We noted that it was a small, measured step that we were taking on behalf of the millions suffering for their faith around the world, but an important step. Today, with the presentation of the second Annual Report, we take another significant step. Like its predecessor, this Report covers 194 countries and contains an Introduction and Executive Summary. But it also contains some changes that I would like to highlight.
First of all, the country chapters have been reorganized to make them more "user-friendly." Each now begins with all "Introduction and Overview," and then moves to a discussion of the "Legal and Policy Framework" within which the government approaches issues of religious freedom.
Next comes a section on "Religious Demography." Here we explore the landscape of religious traditions within each country. As I peruse the reports, I am struck by the incredible richness of these traditions around the globe. Almost every country in the world has all abundance of religions. One purpose of this Report is to encourage nations to see this abundance not as a source of division, but as a source of strength. I'll have more to say on this in a moment.
After the section on religious demography, some reports turn to government restrictions and abuses of religious freedom. These parts of the reports often present grim reading, as the Secretary noted. It is here that we shine the spotlight on violations of religious freedom. And we don't pull any punches. No one can read of these restrictions and abuses without being sobered.
This year's Executive Summary has something new as well. It is a section entitled "Improvements in Respect for Religious Freedom." Here we catalogue a few improvements in religious freedom that have been significant, and more that have been noteworthy. It is, of course, important to recognize that human rights abuses continue in most of these countries. But it is also important to acknowledge when something goes right -- even when the improvements are incremental or modest in scope. This is consistent with the approach that we have taken in my two years in this position: our methodology has centered on promoting, not punishing.
Finally, the Introduction to this year's report provides a brief history of how this office -- the Office of International Religious Freedom -- came to be. It concludes with an analysis of the contributions of religious freedom to democracy. I believe this kind of analysis is important to our goal of promoting religious freedom. We want to emphasize that the legitimate religions of the world are not something to be feared, but are a source of social and cultural strength. In last year's report the Introduction explored "a religious conception of human dignity." Its theme was that religion, sometimes a source of conflict when exploited by corrupt people, has also been and can continue to be a source of reconciliation and hope, of unity and respect.
This year's Introduction makes a similar point in describing the contributions of freedom of religion and conscience to the functioning of a healthy democracy. Free expression of religiously-informed conviction plays an important role in debates over public policy. Each religious tradition has a moral code, a way of understanding who we are and how we ought to order our lives together. The articulation of these understandings in the public square is not something to be feared by any government, especially those aspiring to democratic governance. Rather, such expression makes a vital contribution to the development of sound public policy.
Let me conclude with a few words on how far we have come. Next week I will depart the State Department after two years as the first Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom. I am a realist. I did not expect my office to "reverse the tide" of religious persecution and discrimination in two years. Indeed, what I said one year ago remains true today: millions around the world continue to suffer for what they believe and how they worship.
But, again speaking as a realist, I believe we have laid the groundwork for U.S. foreign policy to make a substantial and sustained contribution toward the promotion of religious freedom and the reduction of persecution and discrimination internationally. We have done so by fully integrating this issue into the mainstream of U.S. foreign policy. The very process of producing the Annual Report, involving hundreds of foreign service and civil service officers, has made it part of the foreign policy landscape. The Report shines a spotlight on abuses of religious freedom, and has been praised for its comprehensiveness and objectivity.
We have traveled to 26 countries abroad -- many of them the worst abusers of religious freedom -- to begin a dialogue on this issue. We have not told them, "Do it the American way." Had we done so, we could not expect the dialogue to continue. We have said to them, "You are obligated to maintain the international standards of religious freedom, such as those in the UN Declaration, which you yourselves have accepted." When necessary, we have invoked the Act's sanctions provisions, and named countries such as China and Sudan "countries of particular concern."
We have begun a program of outreach to American Muslims in order to deepen our understanding of Islam. This program has been well received and we will expand it to other religious traditions. We are sponsoring a series of conferences on religious freedom in the teachings of world religions. We are supporting reconciliation programs -- such as in Lebanon and Indonesia -- to get more at the root causes of persecution and discrimination, something we can and should do more of. And we will.
Finally, I am gratified that we have had an impact on the lives of people. These little victories -- a few religious prisoners released, some bad laws changed, some refugee families removed from peril -- have been too few. But they have occurred frequently enough that, as my staff loves to say, "It makes you want to come to work in the morning."
(end Seiple's remarks)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
NNNN