Speech of the OIC Secretary General at the High-level Segment of the 28th Session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva

Date: 03/03/2015

Mr. President, Mr. High Commissioner, Excellencies, Head of Delegations, Ladies and Gentlemen, At the outset, I would like to congratulate you Mr. President, on your presidency for the year 2015. OIC will extend its full support in the discharge of your onerous responsibilities. I would also like to welcome Prince Zeid Al Ra’ad as the new High Commissioner of Human Rights and wish him well in his prestigious yet extremely demanding assignment. Knowing his track record of being an objective and astute diplomat, we are confident that he will perform his mandate with the desired objectivity and neutrality. Mr. President: The United Nations, the UN, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UDHR, rose from the ashes of World War-II and gave hope to millions of people that the world would be based on universal norms and values that are common to all cultures and civilizations. Indeed the unique legitimacy of the UN flows from the perception that all Member States, with their cultural, racial and religious diversity, are equal stakeholders and that the organization pursues the collective interests of the world community. Though in some aspects, these institutions reflect the power relationship and reality of the post WWII era, they are the stages where the world meets to agree and disagree. And though for long years had been captive of the Cold War freezer, they are now ours in a fuller sense. Along the same line, many international and regional organizations have sprung up: the Arab League, the European Union, the African Union, The Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the OIC. None of us can imagine the world today without this web of interrelated, interconnected and interdependent groupings of countries, which in their totality reflect the diversity and richness of our world community. These organizations are the melting pots of visions and ideas that can confront the ills of our world, inherited from a different era or inflicted anew on our selves. One such illness is the daunting challenge faced by the international community at the present is the rise of extreme violence. A phenomenon that aims to undermine the multicultural fabric of our global order. It advocates a narrative of extremes that seeks to spread hatred and violence by stoking interracial and inter-religion tensions and hatred. To confront it, we need an understanding of the contexts, the root causes of its manifestations. Simply and readily juxtaposing this phenomenon to one religion or a region would be a great mistake. Perhaps some of those roots lie in what we have inherited from the previous century. A century that witnessed: - Two world wars that took the lives of more than seventy six million people. - A Cold War that paralyzed the world and made us all live under the shadow of atomic annihilation. - Colonization that subjugated millions of people and broke their social equilibrium, dismantled their culture, rooted out their languages and monopolized their economic resources. - Globalization that sought to create social, political and cultural molds, images, reference points and value systems that reflect the stamps of a dominant discourse. - The birth, maturity and impact of the ideologies of nihilism, Stalinism, Nazism, McCarthyism and apartheidism. - The defeat of liberation movements and the birth of the apparatus of an overwhelming state that wholeheartedly embraced the neocolonialists. - The growth of arms trade, where arms producing countries sold around five hundreds billions dollars worth of arms to the underdeveloped countries annually. - The birth of extreme movements at the hand of the medians of the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan and its post era; and the weakening of the Iraqi State and later on total dismantling of its components. - A sense of triumphalism and end of history prevailed among some of us; and a sense of defeat, helplessness, frustration and depression prevailed among others. - And an intellectual malaise that took over a Muslim world intent on regurgitating, instead of reinvigorating its traditions, cultural expressions and intellectual discourse. This is not mere history, but an inheritance, a context that we must search to identify the root causes of Daishism, bokoharamism, parkinglotism; and to explain the desire to find one more, real or invented, enemy to defeat; or to vent layers of frustrations on a symbol of domination, real or imagined. In that emerging post nine eleven world where violence bred violence, and where religion, particularly Islam, was dragged into the question of what causes extreme violence, the OIC was on the forefront squarely condemning all acts of terrorism; and consistently denouncing the ideological narratives of all terrorist and extremist groups that use religion, ideology or cultural superiority to legitimize their violent and manipulative acts. Always emphasizing that terror is a political tool that has been in use as long as human societies have existed. It should, therefore, be judged as a political tool, and not submitted to infantilizing moral judgment; and that religion should not be the culprit. Accusing religion as the source of extreme violence and terror is an abyss that will drown us all. This OIC position had to deal with an increasingly Islamophobic world. For over a decade, the OIC sought to introduce specific UN resolutions on “Combating defamation of religions”. While this resolution, first introduced in 1999, was initially adopted by consensus, it gradually lost support on the grounds that it: 1) Unduly limits freedom of expression; 2) seeks to protect religions or set of beliefs instead of individuals and communities, which is beyond the scope of human rights law; and 3) focuses mainly on Muslim and Islam. At the 15th Session of the HRC in September 2010, the OIC provided a breakthrough by outlining an eight-point approach for action at the national and international levels aimed at addressing the issue of religious intolerance. The US Secretary of State, in acknowledging the importance of the eight points towards building a consensus asserted that “it is time to overcome the false divide that pits religious sensitivities against freedom of expression and pursue a new approach based on concrete steps to fight intolerance wherever it occurs”. The positive momentum to address the issue was duly reflected in a new OIC sponsored resolution on the subject of “Combating Intolerance, Negative Stereotyping and Stigmatization of, and Discrimination, Incitement to Violence, and Violence against Persons Based on Religion and Belief”. The resolution we know today as Resolution 16/18 which was adopted by consensus at the 16th Session of the HRC, in Geneva, in March 2011. Thus a new beginning was made to address this important issue from yet another consensual foundation. The resolution also provides for various substantive administrative, political and legislative actions to be taken at the national and international levels to address the concerns relating to freedom of religion or incitement to religious hatred and discrimination. Since then, the resolution has been constantly adopted by consensus both in the HRC and the GA Sessions every year. In July 2011, taking full advantage of the renewed international commitment to the subject of freedom of religion, the OIC Secretary General along with the former US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, held a meeting in Istanbul on the subject of combatting intolerance, discrimination, incitement to violence and violence on the basis of religion or belief. The joint statement issued at the end of the Istanbul meeting, called upon all relevant stakeholders throughout the world to take seriously the call for action set forth in resolution 16/18, which contributes to strengthening the foundations of tolerance and respect for religious diversity as well as enhancing the promotion and protection of Human Rights and fundamental freedom around the world. The Istanbul meeting was a timely initiative that turned into “Istanbul Process”. It aims at ensuring a sustained and structured process of engagement with a view to following up on the implementation of HRC Resolution 16/18. The importance of events held under the framework of the Istanbul Process lies in developing a better understanding of stakeholders’ different perspectives, interests and concerns and accordingly devising a suitable plan of action based on positive and effective good practices shared in these meetings. To date, four Expert Meetings have been held under this process, respectively hosted by the United States, in Washington DC in December 2011, the United Kingdom, in association with Canada in London (Wilton Park), in December 2012 and the OIC, in Geneva, in June 2013, in Doha, Qatar in March 2014 and the OIC has issued invitations to hold the fifth meeting in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia in June this year to carry further the work of the previous four meetings and to build on the Rabat declaration. Consensus on this text would thus remain fragile unless it stands the test of implementation, which in turn can only be achieved through open and candid discussions on how to address concerns of all parties while ensuring results on ground. Combating incitement to hatred, violence and discrimination based on religion must become a priority not just for this Council but also for the international community as a whole. We must show courage to openly discuss and address sensitive issues such as limits to freedom of expression when it comes to inciting hatred and discrimination based on one’s religion or belief in accordance with international human rights law. There already exist various standards to combat hate speech including in many Western societies. We must endeavour to find a common approach whereby these laws can be applied universally to provide protection to all communities in different situations. Mr. President, Right to self-determination is a fundamental right and peremptory norm of international law. Its denial leads to violation of all other rights. Longstanding cases of denial of this right of the Palestinian and Kashmiri peoples continue to stain the collective conscience of the international community. It’s not enough to talk about peace. One must believe in it and work at it. United Nations has a moral responsibility to resolve these historical injustices. OIC remains seriously concerned with the continued plight of Palestinian people. Last summer, once again people of Gaza were subjected to mass atrocities by Israel, which were declared as war crimes and even genocide by many independent sources. While strongly condemning the ongoing brutalities of Israel, the occupation power, I urge this Council to continue to play its due role in highlighting and condemning the continued suffering of Palestinians under the yoke of one of the worst and most inhuman occupation. Key issues such as prolonged unjust blockade of Gaza Strip; systematic pattern of expansion in illegal settlements; judaization of East Jerusalem through confiscation of Identity documents of Palestinians; apartheid wall; treatment of Palestinian prisoners; Palestinian refugees and violations of the whole range of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of Palestinian people must be addressed with utmost urgency by this Council. The OIC has repeatedly called for a peaceful settlement of the Kashmir dispute and believes that a just and durable solution, in accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiri people, must be sought through a sustained dialogue process. The OIC condemns the actions perpetrated against civilian Azerbaijani population by Armenia in the occupied Azerbaijani territory of Nagorno-Karabakh and call for the resolution of the conflict in accordance with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions within the sovereignty, territorial integrity and inviolability of the internationally recognized borders of the Republic of Azerbaijan. The OIC calls upon Myanmar authorities to ensure protection of the right to life and wellbeing of its Rohingya population; bring to justice those responsible for inciting hatred and violence as well as take steps to ensure non-discrimination on any grounds in laws and practice including denial of citizenship to Rohingya Muslims. Mr. President, Human rights can be best summarized as freedom from fear and freedom from want. Together with civil and political rights, equal emphasis must be given to economic social and cultural rights including the right to development. It must be one of the key priorities of the High Commissioner. The United Nations is presently going through a defining moment by crafting the roadmap for sustainable development for the next 15 years, which hopefully will transform the lives of billions of people. Eradicating poverty by 2030 is a lofty objective. But to achieve that we must use an approach that focuses on eliminating conflicts and violence as well as to reduce inequality within and among nations. Without peace, stability and inclusive economic growth, ensuring human rights would remain an elusive aim. In conclusion, Mr. President, I wish you and the Council purposeful discussions and meaningful outcomes on all issues under consideration. I thank you all.

Other Press

No press releases assigned to this case yet.