“Freedom from Persecution: Christian Religious Minorities, Religious Pluralism in Danger" 
29 September 2018

Intervention by H.E. Paul Richard Gallagher

Your Excellency, the Foreign Minister of Hungary,
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like to thank Hungary for inviting me to speak at this high-level discussion on the “Freedom from Persecution: Christian Religious Minorities, Religious Pluralism in Danger.”

It is an indisputable historical fact that Christianity’s beginning was in the Middle East. Yet the hard truth is that the ancient Christian communities are struggling in the region of Christianity’s birth. The Christian population in the Middle East has decreased dramatically in recent years and, in some places, it may not survive no matter how deep its roots are.

Christians have always co-existed with Muslims and have been part of the fabric of the Middle East. Such a self-evident fact serves to remind the world once more that the Christians have every right to live in peace and freedom. Indeed, across two millennia, the Christian communities in the Middle East have actively contributed to their respective societies. They were instrumental in the protection and promotion of ancient cultures in the region. The Syriac community still speaks and prays Aramaic, the language of Jesus. The Christian diaspora from the Middle East has spread its culture worldwide. During long periods in history, Christians and Muslims have lived peacefully side by side, in spite of sporadic cases of violence based on a political manipulation of religion or ethnicity.

In recent decades, however, something shattered this relatively harmonious co-existence. Christians and other religious and ethnic minorities in the Middle East have endured difficulties, pressures, discrimination and even deadly persecution. As the Chaldean Patriarch testified before the Security Council in May 2015, “The Islamic extremist groups refuse to live with non-Muslims. They are persecuting and uprooting them from their homes and destroying all traces of their history,” an immense and irreplaceable patrimony of humanity.

This is not only a religious question; this is an issue of fundamental human rights. While for Christians those who were killed for the faith are martyrs, for all people of faith or no faith they were victims of the most outrageous human rights violations. These heinous crimes demand therefore a response not only from Christians and other people of faith; before the law, they demand a response from public authorities, whose duty is to protect their people and provide them space in which to flourish, create harmonious societies and be law-abiding citizens.

“Protection” is a primary responsibility of States toward all and every one of its citizens regardless of race, religion or ethnicity. During the first part of the sixteenth century, when the concept of national sovereign States was emerging, the Spanish Friar Francisco de Vitoria described the responsibility of governors to protect their citizens as an aspect of natural reason shared by all nations, and a rule for an “international” order whose task is to regulate relations between peoples. The United Nations rests on this bedrock principle.

“Protection” becomes a more specific and urgent responsibility for a State when parts of the population, simply by the fact of their being minorities, targeted for persecution, are subjected to all forms of physical violence, subjugation, false detention, expropriation of property, enslavement, forced exile, murder, ethnic cleansing and other crimes against humanity.

The duty to defend does not only refer to the “responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity,” as defined in the 2005 World Summit Outcome,^[1] but from all violations of their fundamental human rights and of their rights as citizens.

Violations of the religious rights of minorities extend, in fact, beyond the most egregious violations like genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity; they also include various forms of discrimination built into legal and administrative structures, resulting in bureaucratic harassment and heavy administrative burdens with regard to building houses of worship and schools.

Such protection therefore must extend beyond merely preventing the intended or actual annihilation of minorities, but must include examining and addressing the root causes of discrimination and persecution against them. In this regard, I would like to mention briefly three elements, which I consider as essential in our long-term efforts to address the root causes of persecution of and discrimination against religious minorities, indeed, all minorities.

First, I believe that the key to protecting religious or ethnic minorities from persecution is full respect of the rule of law and full equality of all before the law based on the principle of citizenship, regardless of religious, racial or ethnic differences. Laws must unequivocally guarantee the fundamental rights of all citizens without exception, including the right to religious freedom. Even in places where the law gives a special status to a particular religion, a law that deprives an individual or a community of fundamental freedoms is not a just law.

This December, we mark the seventieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Declaration establishes that “all are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law” (Art. 7). It guarantees “freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance” (Art. 18). These fundamental freedoms must apply to all peoples in every corner of the globe: in Iraq, Syria or Libya, just as much as in the United States, Italy or Japan. Equality for all before the law must be an essential element in our advocacy in favour of the persecuted Christians and other religious and ethnic minorities —indeed, of every person — in the Middle East.

Second, the recent savagery against religious or ethnic minorities has been perpetrated by violent non-state actors operating in States with weak institutions. The international community has a grave responsibility in the face of such atrocities that continue even as we speak. By universally adopting the 2005 World Summit Outcome, the international community committed itself to assisting States to exercise this responsibility to protect, to helping them build capacity to safeguard their populations from atrocity crimes, and to taking collective action in a timely and decisive manner.^[2] The international community has been failing to act on this commitment. We must shake it from its inertia and divisions.

Third, if we have failed to guard the religious and ethnic minorities from having been subjected to the most egregious violations of their fundamental human rights, then we must work to restore their rights. Justice for survivors demands not only justice against the perpetrators of the crimes; it also demands that we seek to return to them, as much as possible, what had been taken from them. This means ensuring the conditions for religious and ethnic minorities to return to their places of origin and live in dignity and safety, with the basic social, economic and political frameworks necessary to ensure community cohesion. It is not enough to rebuild homes, schools and houses of worship, which is a crucial step, as is happening in various towns in the Nineveh Plain thanks to the generosity of governments like Hungary or charitable organizations like Aid to the Church in Need or the Knights of Columbus. It is also imperative to rebuild society by laying the foundations for peaceful coexistence on the basis of citizenship.

This list is far from exhaustive, but achieving them would already go a long way in protecting the persecuted religious and ethnic minorities in the Middle East and beyond.

I wish to conclude by recalling the grave and specific responsibility of religious leaders to confront and condemn the abuse of religious belief and sentiment to justify terrorism and violence against believers of other religions. They must teach a firm and clear ‘No!’ to every form of violence, vengeance and hatred carried out in the name of religion or in the name of God, and an equally firm and clear “Yes!” to the right of every person in conscience to follow God as he or she believes that God is summoning him or her to worship and follow him. If the fundamental freedom of conscience and belief were respected, we would not need any “special” or “specific protection” for anyone.

Thank you for your kind attention.

_______________________

^[1] 2005 World Summit Outcome, 138-139.

^[2] 2005 World Summit Outcome, 138-139.

Intervention of the Secretary for Relations with States
 at the Council of Europe for the celebration of the 
70th anniversary of the 
Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man
11 September 2018 

Intervention by H. E. Paul Gallagher, Secretary for Relations with States

Excerpts

...Turning to the second challenge, that of a growing cultural pluralism, I believe that an answer must be sought in the robust affirmation of the right to freedom of religion, which is a condition for mutual respect and for real equality in the context of a pluralist society.

Religious freedom takes on a particular importance in the building of human rights, since it protects that relationship with the ultimate goal of existence, which constitutes the core of the transcendent dignity of the person, in which the different visions of man are also reflected.^[8] We know that freedom of religion is not limited merely to freedom of worship or professing one’s faith; it includes, as stated in Article 18 of the Declaration, the freedom “either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest one’s religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”

Freedom of religion demonstrates the open character of a democratic society: it means recognizing the limits of the State’s competence when it comes to questions at once both intimate and ultimate in their individual and communitarian dimensions. The growing distance between religious and non-religious cultures, as well as the great differences existing between different religious visions and sometimes within the same traditions, require that the State avoid taking positions for one or another of the world’s visions. When the State is compelled indirectly to do so, it should respect citizens, allowing people and communities to live in accordance with their deep convictions, in so far as possible. To use the words of Pope Francis: “The condition for building inclusive societies is the integral comprehension of the human person, who can feel himself or herself truly accepted when recognized and accepted in all the dimensions that constitute his or her identity, including the religious dimension”.^[9] Only starting from this perspective of benevolent neutrality will it be possible to foster a sense of belonging and the necessary dialogue between people and groups coming from different cultural traditions. It seems to me that the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights offers important ideas in this regard.

Although the task is certainly difficult, it is indispensable to promoting the affirmation of the universality of human rights. Indeed, it was by means of such cultural and religious traditions that through the course of history were forged our understanding of the human person and of his inalienable dignity. We must recognize that a correct affirmation of the universality of human rights is not possible without considering these historically and culturally determined approaches and, indeed, that it depends on them. Together with the rich tradition it offers, each vision also carries certain limitations, which can be understood through an open dialogue with other worldviews.^[10] Anyone wishing to succeed in the challenge of mediation by way of an abstract and a-historical universal affirmation of human dignity and its values, would commit a tragic error, because such an approach would end up extinguishing the very lifeblood that nourishes in the hearts of the men and women of our time a sense of respect for the dignity of the human person.^[11]

Certainly, an increase in pluralism can make it challenging to find a common understanding of the way in which these fundamental values are to find their expression in the context of a complex society. It is precisely on this point, in fact, that respect for freedom of religion can be of great help, through the search for reasonable compromises and the recognition of necessary spaces for conscientious objection. These are elements that, far from breaking social cohesion, can promote it, expressing the acceptance of the difficulties of living together, respect for the other and the plurality of points of view, as well as a recognition of the need to walk together in the common search for that which protects the universal dignity of the human person.

Protection of Religious Minorities in Conflicts
Speech to the UN 72nd General Assembly
23 September 2017

Intervention of H. E. Paul Gallagher, Secreatry for Relations with States

Your Excellencies, Distinguished Fellow Panellists, Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is an honour to participate in this morning’s side event on the Protection of Religious Minorities in Conflict, sponsored by the Permanent Mission of Hungary in collaboration with the Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See and the Institute for Cultural Diplomacy.

The need to focus on safeguarding religious minorities in situations of war and conflict arises from the revolting reality that, as all of us have seen in the last several years in various blood-drenched parts of the world, war and conflict often provide the backdrop for religious minorities to be targeted for persecution, sexual and all forms of physical violence, subjugation, false detention, expropriation of property, enslavement, forced exile, murder, ethnic cleansing and other crimes against humanity.

Recent experience makes the protection of religious minorities one of the most urgent responsibilities of the international community. Such protection must extend beyond merely preventing the intended or actual annihilation of minorities, but must include examining and addressing the root causes of discrimination and persecution against them and spur the vigorous defence and protection of their human dignity, the rights to life and to freedom of conscience and religion.

When we survey the world situation, we see that persecution of religious minorities is not a phenomenon isolated to one region, like, for example, the barbarities committed by ISIS in the Middle East. The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom in its 2016 Annual Report said that there are severe systematic ongoing and egregious violations of religious freedom happening in 27 different countries. The 2016 Religious Freedom in the World Report by Aid to the Church in Need said that 38 of the world’s 196 countries showed unmistakable evidence of significant religious freedom violations, with 23 amounting to outright persecution. The 2016 Interim Report of Mr. Heiner Bielefeldt, then Special Rapporteur of the United Nations on Freedom of Religion or Belief, described that violations of religious rights of minorities exceed the methodical, continuous and appalling violations committed by state and non-state actors such as terrorism, vigilantism, mass and individual killings, forcible deportations, ethnic cleansing, the rape and kidnapping of women and selling them into slavery, destruction and confiscation of property, attacks against converts and those who are alleged to have induced them, and encouraged or condoned violence against non-believers and persons belonging to religious minorities. They also include, he said, anti-apostasy and anti-blasphemy legislation, bureaucratic harassment and administrative burdens with regard to building houses of worship and schools, discriminatory structures in family law and education, and stigmatization of people as unbelievers or heretics.

In short, these three extensively researched reports of last year show that attacks against religious minorities are rather widespread. While almost every identifiable faith group experiences some degree of persecution somewhere in the world, Christians remain the most persecuted. Furthermore, there has been an upsurge of anti-Semitic attacks, notably in parts of Europe, and Muslims face serious persecution, often from fundamentalist groups who do not share the same interpretation of the tenets of their faith.

In this context, what is needed to protect religious minorities? I would like to mention briefly seven essential elements.

First, there is the need for action. The recent examples of savagery against religious minorities must shake the international community from any and all inertia. Those who are entrusted with safeguarding respect for fundamental human rights must fulfil their responsibility to protect those in danger of suffering atrocious crimes. We must raise awareness of humanitarian emergencies and respond generously. Similarly, with regard to the situation in the Middle East, the conditions for religious and ethnic minorities to return to their places of origin and live in dignity and safety, and with the basic social, economic and political frameworks necessary to ensure community cohesion, must be provided and ensured. It is not enough to rebuild homes, which is a crucial step, as is happening in various towns in the Nineveh Plain thanks to the generosity of governments like Hungary or charitable organizations like Aid to the Church in Need or the Knights of Columbus. What is also needed is to rebuild society by laying the foundations for peaceful coexistence.

Second, the rule of law and equality before the law based on the principle of citizenship, regardless of one’s religion, race or ethnicity are essential to establishing and maintaining harmonious and fruitful coexistence among individuals, communities and nations. The law must equally and unequivocally guarantee every citizen’s human rights, among which is the right to freedom of religion and conscience, which involves the right to change freely one’s religion without suffering discrimination or being marked out for death. Even in places where one religion is accorded special constitutional status, the right of all citizens and religious communities to freedom of religion, equality before the law, and appropriate means for recourse when their rights are violated, must be recognized and defended. A properly functioning State that works for the common good is a prerequisite for protecting religious minorities and ensuring their future.

Third, there should be both mutual autonomy and positive collaboration between religious communities and State. They, in their own fields, are autonomous and independent from each other. Yet both, under different titles, are devoted to the wellbeing of the same person who is both faithful and citizen. The more both foster sounder cooperation between themselves while respecting each other’s autonomy, the more effective will their service be for the good of all. When religious communities and State becomes confused or conflated, as Pope Francis said this April at Al-Azhar University in Cairo, “religion risks being absorbed into the administration of temporal affairs and tempted by the allure of worldly powers that in fact exploit it.”

Fourth, religious leaders have a grave and specific responsibility to confront and condemn the abuse of religious belief and sentiment to justify terrorism and violence against believers of other religions. They must constantly affirm that no one can justly kill the innocent in God’s name. As Pope Francis said in Egypt, and before that in Albania and in many other settings, there must be a “firm and clear ‘No!’ to every form of violence, vengeance and hatred carried out in the name of religion or in the name of God.” Social, political and economic issues that demagogues can exploit to incite violence must also be tackled.

Fifth, there is an urgent need for effective interreligious dialogue as an antidote to fundamentalism with the aim to overcome the cynical assumption that conflicts among religious believers are inevitable, and to challenge the narrow-minded interpretation of religious texts that demonize or dehumanize those of different beliefs. Effective interreligious dialogue can, ought and often does show the paradigm for political and interpersonal conversations necessary for social harmony.

Sixth, education a good education in general and a solid religious education in particular are key in preventing the radicalization that leads to extremism, persecution of religious minorities and terrorism. Society reaps what it sows. It is key that teaching in schools, in pulpits and through the internet do not foment intransigence and extremist radicalization but dialogue, respect for others and reconciliation. At Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Pope Francis underlined that an education in “respectful openness and sincere dialogue with others, recognizing their rights and basic freedoms, particularly religious freedom, represents the best way to build the futuretogether, to bebuilders of civility. … The only alternative to thecivility of encounteris theincivility of conflict. …To counter effectively the barbarity of those who foment hatred and violence, we need to accompany young people, helping them on the path to maturity and teaching them to respond to the incendiary logic of evil by patiently working for the growth of goodness. In this way, young people, like well-planted trees, can be firmly rooted in the soil of history, and, growing heavenward in one another’s company, can daily turn the polluted air of hatred into the oxygen of fraternity”.

Seventh and lastly, we must block the flow of money and weapons destined to those intending to use them to target religious minorities. As Pope Francis pointedly remarked at the end of his Al-Azhar address, “An end must be put to the proliferation of arms; if they are produced and sold, sooner or later they will be used.” Stopping atrocities not only involves addressing the hatred and cancers of the heart that spawn violence but also removing the instruments by which that hatred actually carries out that violence.

The protection of religious minorities in conflict is, indeed, one of the most urgent responsibilities of the international community today. I thank the Permanent Mission of Hungary, the Institute for Cultural Diplomacy, and all of you for coming today to make sure it gets the attention it deserves.

Thank you for your attention.