World Evangelical Alliance Religious Liberty News & Analysis
By: WEA RLC Principal Researcher and Writer, Elizabeth Kendal
In December 2005 the Heads of State and Government at the Organisation of
Islamic Conference's 3rd Extraordinary Summit in Makkah adopted a "Ten Year
Program of Action" to address the most "prominent challenges facing the
Muslim world today". Through the Ten Year Program of Action (TYPOA) the Organisation
of Islamic Conference (OIC) aims to strengthen Islamic solidarity and project
the "true image and noble values of Islam" thus enabling the Muslim Ummah to
achieve its renaissance". (TYPOA: Link 1)
Item VI on the OIC's Ten Year Program of Action is "Combating Islamophobia".
Tasks to be undertaken in this regard include the establishment of an
Observatory on Islamophobia tasked with monitoring Islamophobia and
"defamation" of Islam and issuing annual reports; and getting the UN to
"adopt an international resolution on Islamophobia, and call on all States to enact
laws to counter it, including deterrent punishments".
It must be noted that December 2005 was three months after the Danish
Mohammed cartoons were published in Denmark (with no response) and one month after
they were re-printed in Cairo, Egypt (front page during Ramadan, with no
response). Most notably however, it was two months before the "Cartoon Intifada" erupted
in the Levant and spread across the Muslim world. The Cartoon Intifada, in
which Danish embassies were razed, numerous lives were lost and Danish
products were boycotted, subsequently became the backdrop for the OIC's April
2006 presentation of its resolution against the defamation of religions,
specifically Islam, to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC).
The OIC's anti-"defamation" resolutions have now passed in both the UNHRC
(see LINK 2) and the UN General Assembly where it was adopted in December 2007
by a recorded vote of 108 in favour to 51 against, with 25 abstentions.
Having achieved its goals in the UN (a feat the OIC regards as indicative of
"the international community's views and willingness to eliminate any
discrimination against Muslims or defamation of Islam" (LINK 3: p26), the OIC
is now moving on from the recognition of "defamation" to the elimination of
"defamation" using means both positive -- supplying an alternative message --
and negative -- "deterrent punishments".
In preparation for this next stage, the 34th Islamic Conference of Foreign
Ministers, meeting in Islamabad, Pakistan, in May 2007, commissioned the
Observatory on Islamophobia to submit its first report, covering the period
from May to December 2007, along with its recommendations, to the OIC's 11th
Session of the Islamic Summit Conference in Dakar, Senegal, on 13-14 March
The theme of the Dakar Islamic Summit Conference was "Islam in the 21st
Century". The agenda, speeches, resolutions and first OIC Observatory Report
on Islamophobia can be found on the OIC website: < http://www.oic-oci.org >
(or for a direct link through to the English version, see link 3).
The OIC's Observatory report is built on the foundation laid by Mr Doudou
Diene, the UN Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance through his 17 August 2007
report to the 6th Session of the UNHRC on "the manifestations of
defamation of religions and in particular on the serious implications of Islamophobia on
the enjoyment of all rights". For this report and an analysis of it, see LINK 4.
The central claims of the OIC's Observatory Report on Islamophobia are
consistent with the OIC's Ten Year Program of Action which aims to combat
Islamophobia by correcting the world's perception of Islam and creating
The Observatory Report on Islamophobia claims that:
1) that in order to have peace, the correct (OIC-approved) version of history
and of Islam must be understood, accepted and promoted (anything else is
"baseless" Islamophobia or inciteful "defamation" of Islam and responsible
for the violent, destructive and punitive -- though definitely not immature,
irrational, criminal or Islamic -- Muslims rioting in the world today);
2) that Islamophobia exists in part because there is no legal instrument to
combat it, therefore a "binding legal instrument" must be created "to fight
the menace of Islamophobia".
Further to this, the report lists in its Annex A 34 "major incidents" of
Islamophobia and/or "defamation" of Islam, occurring from May to Dec 2007.
The message of the report could be summed up by this quote from page 50:
"Westerners should bear in mind Amr Moussa's words at the inaugural session:
'Islam is different from Communism because it is not easy to beat,
although it is easy to live with and easy to dialogue with. However, if one targets it,
the whole world will be in extreme danger.'"
Before embarking on a closer examination of the Observatory report, it is
important to reiterate: Islam and Muslims and race are not the same thing. It
is wrong and misleading to freely interchange the terms as if they were.
Islam is not a person or a race, but an ideology and whole-of-life system.
Muslims, on the other hand, are diverse human beings whose human rights must
be protected. Perpetual satisfaction is not a fundamental human right and it
is certainly not the reality of life for anyone. Race is a totally separate
issue to religion.
Religious liberty (which, according to the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights includes the right to convert, just as freedom of speech includes the
right to question and debate) is a fundamental human right. Human rights
principles and laws exist to protect the rights of human beings, not the
claims of religions (human rights = rights of humans).
Of all things in this world, religion has the least grounds to claim an
exemption from scrutiny, for religion is -- or is supposed to be -- an issue
not of race but of eternal truth.
Secondly, defamation is legally defined as "a false accusation of an offence
or a malicious misrepresentation of someone's words or actions" (American
Heritage Dictionary). While the OIC freely employs the term "defamation", the
more correct word would be criticism. Criticism is not defamation unless
it is false, and while the OIC claims that critical and negative views of Islam are
wrong and misconceived, that claim ought to be open to debate.
1) CORRECTING PERCEPTIONS
As noted, the Observatory report builds on the foundation laid by Mr Doudou
Diene who has asserted that the root cause of Islamophobia and Muslim
reactionary violence is "defamation" of Islam. The message to all historians,
journalists, human rights and religious liberty advocates, public figures,
authors, cartoonists, film-makers, song-writers and others is: correct your
perceptions, eliminate "defamation" of Islam, adopt the OIC-approved message
and you will have peace. Fail and you can only have danger.
According to the Observatory report, "Prejudice and intolerance vis-a-vis
Islam is an old phobia, and has been a stubborn and distinctive trait of
Western society and the European psyche since the seventh century." (page 5)
According to the report, the historian Groeber was correct when he wrote that
"Islam spread in the whole world in a very short period of time like sunshine
spreads in moments", emerging all at once as a "perfectly integrated
phenomenon", miraculously acquiring a universal identity from its inception.
Its quick advance sent "strong shock waves of fear and awe across all
Europe". While Islam's "radiant civilisation enriched Europe in all fields of science,
knowledge and morality", the Church exploited the masses' obsessive fear of
Islam to increase its own power. (p5,6)
According to the report, Europeans were for so long devoted to monoculture
and the belief that their culture is superior, that now they cannot help but be
irritated by the presence of foreigners of different cultures. The report
charges that Europeans are "unable to adjust to the cultural diversity that
has become a fact of life in today's global village." (p6) Consequently, so
the report claims, "The new phenomenon of Islamophobia . . . has emerged as a
racist movement of intolerance and discrimination and should be dealt with as
On page 11 of the Observatory report, ten alleged "Root Causes of
Islamophobia" are listed. The first cause listed, "Historical Perspective",
explains that the reason Islam came under attack from Christianity and
Judaism was that as a "modern faith" with "liberal values in terms of upholding human
rights, equality and human dignity and the rights of women", Islam had found
"greater acceptability with the people". (In other words, Jewish and
Christian hostility towards Islam has historically been driven by apostaphobia
The second root cause of Islamophobia is said to be the ignorant mindset
amongst "the common people of the West" who have wrongly believed that "Islam
was a religion that lived by the sword and preached violence and hatred
against non-believers and that it stood to challenge the Western democratic
way of life".
Other stated root causes include insufficient dissemination of information
about Muslim victims of terror and Muslim rejection of terror;
"misrepresentation and incorrect interpretation of Islam", "abuse of freedom
of expression" which gives rise to hurt and insult of Muslims; fear that
economic opportunities are threatened by immigrants; and "the continued
occupation of Arab and Palestinian territories . . ."
On numerous occasions throughout the report the primary Islamophobic
misconception and defamation of Islam that must be corrected is that of the
wrongful linking of Islam to "terrorism, violence and human rights
The other roots causes of Islamophobia are, the OIC claims, related to the
"lack of legal mechanisms . . . as well the absence of a binding
international instrument to contain defamation of religions".
2) DETERRENT PUNISHMENTS
Quoting from the Observatory report (p30, 1.1 a): "The primary objective of
the Observatory in accordance with the Ten Year Program of Action should
be to correct projection of Islam as a religion of moderation, peace and
The Observatory will therefore monitor closely all Islamophobic incidents and
"defamatory" statements, and all lectures and workshops taking place in
different parts of the world. It will also update the list of repudiated
Muslim think-tanks and NGOs that can monitor and counter the anti-Islam
The report continually but erroneously depicts Islamophobia and "defamation"
of Islam as incidents of racism and racial discrimination. It also
continually refers to "defamation" of Islam as a human rights issue. But that is also
wrong. Human rights are rights for humans, and the human rights of Muslims
are protected in the West. (If the OIC was not so preoccupied with the Muslim
colonisation of Europe it might have more incentive to address the Islamic
world's brain-drain and the reasons why such large numbers of Muslims are
deserting the Muslim world for the West.)
According to the Observatory report, combating Islamophobia and "defamation"
of Islam requires the creation of a legal instrument, along with a committee
to implement and monitor it as victims file complaints under the 1503 Human
Rights Council Complaint Procedure. (p31)
LAWS? SANCTIONS? A COURT?
It would be very interesting to know what such a legal instrument might look
like and how it might work. The Observatory report gives clues but no
On page 50 of the Observatory report it is claimed that the OIC cannot
properly address the challenge of Islamophobia and "defamation" of Islam if
the "official authorities and politicians do not assume [an] ethically and
morally righteous and responsible attitude in front of the masses . . ."
Will the Cartoon Intifada form the pattern for OIC response to
"defamation" of Islam? Will Islamophobic incidents or "defamatory" remarks (at least those
selected by the OIC as being found worthy to warrant action) be followed by
riots, then accusations and/or charges, then a demand that the relevant
government accept responsibility and act against the perpetrator? Will a
government's refusal to submit to OIC demands elicit OIC-sponsored sanctions
from the Muslim world?
Page 21 of the Observatory reports gives us a preview of what may be in
store. After the Dutch parliamentarian Mr Geert Wilders announced in late November
2007 that he was producing a documentary critical of the Qur'an, the OIC
General Secretariat expressed "a strong note of concern to the Embassy of the
Netherlands in Riyadh . . . requesting the Dutch government's intervention to
stop the broadcasting of the documentary."
Subsequently, "The OIC Secretary General met the Foreign Minister of the
Netherlands, Mr. Maxime Verhagen, upon the latter's request . . . in
Madrid on January 15, 2008. The Dutch Minister informed the Secretary General that his
Government acknowledged the concern of the OIC with seriousness and that the
Government does not associate with and condemns such activities in the
strongest possible terms. He also informed the Secretary General that he met
the parliamentarian in question personally to ask him to refrain from such a
derogatory act. He also explained that if the announced documentary is
broadcast and the content violates the Dutch laws, then, the parliamentarian
would be prosecuted. The Dutch Foreign Minister appealed to the OIC Secretary
General for his help and cooperation so that the film does not hurt the Dutch
interests in the Muslim world."
The OIC could only reiterate its concern and "caution" the Dutch FM that "the
broadcast and distribution of the documentary could spark off strong
repercussions that might go out of hand and become difficult to contain. He
told the Dutch Foreign Minister that the best option available to avoid a bad
situation would be to do the needful in stopping Mr Wilders from exhibiting
the film and that the Dutch Government should impose all necessary
On 18 January the Dutch PM held a press conference in The Hague where he
expressed his concern that "the broadcast of the film would invite reactions
that could affect public order, public safety and security and the economy".
The Dutch Embassy then responded to the OIC General Secretariat on 19 January
with a note that the Dutch government had openly expressed its concerns about
the possible offensive nature of the film to Muslims.
The OIC Secretary General then wrote letters to various European ministers
with authority in the EU, the Council of Europe, and OSCE calling for their
intervention, reminding them that "advocacy of racial or religious hatred" is
prohibited by law. This drama is ongoing.
If a "legal instrument" is established, might it be possible that individual
uncensored, unrepentant or persistent "Islamophobes" and "defamers" of Islam
might be indicted to face court on criminal charges? One thing is certain,
the OIC would not be envisaging hauling Westerners before state courts in Libya,
Iran, Syria or Sudan. Nor would they envisage the creation of a special
court, linked to the OIC in Makkah, designed specifically to handle cases of Western
Islamophobia and "defamation" of Islam. It is more probable that the OIC
would envisage using a European Human Rights Court as its legal instrument, staffed
by Europeans who would in the name of peace and human rights codify
anti-"defamation" laws and even prosecute, sentence and detain "violators".
It is quite possible that moves are already afoot in this regard. In his
opening speech to the Dakar Summit, OIC General Secretary Prof. Ekmeleddin
Ihsanoglu was pleased to report that concerning the fight to combat dangerous
Islamophobia, "We have established strong ties with the centres of
'think-tanks' in Europe and the USA to expose our views and values and defend
The Observatory report notes on page 45 that the OIC is in the process of
opening an office in Brussels that will enable closer cooperation between it
and the EU. On page 48 we read: "The Organization of Security and Cooperation
in Europe (OSCE) General Secretariat based in Vienna and OSCE's
democratization and human rights center, ODIHR, based in Warsaw are prominent
among the Western intergovernmental institutions with which the OIC General
Secretariat established a high level of cooperation on the issue of
Islamophobia during the last two years." Throughout the report it is clear
that the OIC is hard at work getting the UN, the EU, the OSCE and other
Western bodies not just lining up behind the OIC agenda, but adopting and
even implementing it.
In this New Supranationalist World Order it is no longer inconceivable that a
politically motivated administrative body might establish a court
specifically charged to implement its will and convict those it has already deemed guilty.
Indeed, such a court would not even be unique. States wracked with Muslim
riots and OIC-sponsored sanctions might eventually be very pleased to be able
to appease Islamic reactionary forces by handing over indicted persons.
The Observatory Report on Islamophobia is peppered with numerous appeals for
dialogue. However, it is clear that this is not to be a Western-style
dialogue where people talk freely to each other, but something more akin to a
screen-test, where the participants sit before cameras and microphones and
read from an OIC-approved script! And the promise is that those who follow
the script will receive the "carrot" of peace, while those who deviate will know
the "stick" of law and punishment.
1) 10 year program of action outlined (IINA)
2) UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL: Protecting Religion. 12 April 2007
3) Observatory Report on Islamophobia (covers May-Dec 2007).
Presented at the 11th Session of The Islamic Summit Conference
Dakar, Senegal from 13-14 March 2008
For all other the speeches and resolutions from the Summit see:
4) WEA RLC News & Analysis. 17 Sept 2007
UN Human Rights Council: Watershed days
- UNHRC to choose between defending human rights and Islamising human rights.
By: WEA RLC Principal Researcher and Writer, Elizabeth Kendal
Islamic states seek world freedom curbs: humanists
By Robert Evans, 12 March 2008
Difficult tasks facing the OIC
By Hassan Hanizadeh, 13 March2008
includes: "In addition, Islamic countries must begin playing a major role in
international bodies such as the UN Security Council, the European Union, and
the International Atomic Energy Agency so that they can elevate Muslims'
status because Muslims living in the United States and European countries are
treated like second-class citizens, although, based on Islamic teachings, the
non-Muslims living in Islamic countries enjoy equal rights with Muslims."
World Evangelical Alliance Religious Liberty News & Analysis
15 February 2008
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY TRENDS 2007-2008
-- Apostasy, Apostaphobia and postmodernism
-- The New Cold War, and its implications for religious liberty
By WEA RLC Principal Researcher and Writer, Elizabeth Kendal
**WEA Religious Liberty News & Analysis**
< [email protected] >
Please feel free to pass this along to others giving attribution to:
"World Evangelical Alliance - Religious Liberty News & Analysis."
To subscribe for Religious Liberty News & Analysis, please send
your request to < [email protected] >
Please include your name and country or state of residence.
For more information on the World Evangelical Alliance, please see:
< http://www.WorldEvangelicalAlliance.com >,
For the Religious Liberty Commission of the WEA, see:
< http://www.WorldEvangelicalAlliance.com/commissions/rlc.htm >.
All WEA RLC material is archived at < http://www.ea.org.au/rlc >.
PRAYER: For those of you who would like more detailed information on
situations for prayer and intercession, we recommend that you
subscribe to the WEA Religious Liberty Prayer List. Each week a
different nation or situation is highlighted. To subscribe, send an
empty e-mail to < [email protected] > with any or no subject.
Advocates International < http://www.advocatesinternational.org >
serves as the legal and judicial advisor to the RLC. Advocates
International links many Christian lawyers and judges around the
world and has been involved in religious liberty issues for many
The Religious Liberty News & Analysis mailing list provides reports
on the state of religious liberty and persecution around the world
with those with a special interest in the field. Most members are
involved in church-based religious liberty advocacy, academic
research, missions leadership, creative-access missions, religious
media, or have prayer networks supporting these groups, although
anyone is welcome to join. Postings average one or two per
week. Information shared does not necessarily reflect the opinion
of World Evangelical Alliance, or of the WEA Religious Liberty