General Debate Item 3 of the 13th Session of the Human Rights Council Geneva, 12th March 2010

Statement by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Permanent Representative of the
Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva
at the General Debate Item 3 of the 13th Session of the Human Rights Council
Geneva, 12th March 2010


Mr. President,

Three weeks ago the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and the permanent Committee of al-Azhar University for Dialogue among the Monotheistic Religions held the annual meeting of their Joint Committee for Dialogue in Cairo (23-24 February). In their joint declaration the participants recommended paying “greater attention to the fact that the manipulation of religion for political or other ends can be a source of violence”, and avoiding “discrimination on the basis of religious identity”.

Mr. President, in a number of countries freedom of religion is not yet fully guaranteed. Recent surveys indicate that nearly 70 percent of the world’s 6.8 billion people live in countries with high restrictions on religion, the brunt of which often falls on religious minorities. The latter’s rights are seriously violated, their freedom of worship hampered. In some regions followers of minority religions, that are not recognized by law, have to confess their faith in hiding and illegally, in fear of prison terms and persecution. In other places, while the right to freedom of religion is legally recognized, religious minorities are harassed and persecuted by members of the majority religion. Their properties are damaged, their houses of worship are destroyed, their lives severely threatened. These criminal acts are often committed in total impunity. Authorities stand idly by or are partisans in the conflict. Victims are forced to desist from reporting the injustice done to them for fear of further negative repercussions. Perpetrators harassing religious minorities feel encouraged by the silent collusion of State authorities and by a judicial system that is ineffective or partial. The limitation clauses in international instruments should not be used in a disproportionate manner to strike at the rights of religious and ethnic minorities and political opponents but only to protect and promote the human rights of all.

The Holy See calls therefore upon States to respect and promote the right to freedom of religion in all its aspects, through national legislation, including appropriate sanctions against violators to eradicate impunity effectively.

Mr. President, victims of discrimination and violent attacks have a right to obtain redress and compensation for the harm done to them by public or private agents. The State has the responsibility of protecting the fundamental human rights of all people in its territory. In order to obtain just redress, standard and objective methods should be laid down in national legislation for working out retribution and relief measures. As long as the State is not able or willing to provide effective legal protection for all its citizens, the continuous persecution of ethnic and religious minority communities will continue to afflict the world and to weaken the human rights of everyone.

Mr. President, in his address to the members of the Diplomatic Corps last January, His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI underlined that “sadly, in certain countries, (…) one increasingly encounters in political and cultural circles, as well as in the media, scarce respect and at times hostility, if not scorn, directed towards religion (…). It is clear that if relativism is considered an essential element of democracy, one risks viewing secularity solely in the sense of excluding or, more precisely, denying the social importance of religion. But such an approach creates confrontation and division, disturbs peace, harms human ecology and, by rejecting in principle approaches other than its own, finishes in a dead end. There is thus an urgent need to delineate a positive and open secularity which, grounded in the just autonomy of the temporal order and the spiritual order, can foster healthy cooperation and a spirit of shared responsibility.”

Mr. President, the way forward rests on an effective implementation of all human rights by recognizing and respecting the dignity of each human being, without distinction of ethnicity or religion; on rejection of all forms of discrimination on the ground of race, colour, sex or religion; on fair treatment in the courts; on an educational system that teaches peaceful coexistence built on mutual respect, solidarity and cooperation as means that promote a healthy social pluralism and a prosperous life for all members of our one human family.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Permanent Mission of the Holy See

Statement by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Permanent Representative of the
Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva
at the Annual full-day meeting on the Rights of the Child of the
13th Session of the Human Rights Council:

The fight against sexual violence against children
Geneva, 10th March 2010


Mr. President,

“Sexual abuse of minors is always a heinous crime”. To this unambiguous condemnation of sexual violence against children and young people, the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI has added the religious dimension, pointing out that it is also a "grave sin" that offends God and human dignity. The child's physical and psychological integrity is violated with destructive consequences. Studies have shown that abused children react in different ways to sexual violence and have a higher likelihood of teen pregnancy, homelessness, risk of drug and alcohol dependence. In a word, the evil committed against these little ones often stigmatizes them for their entire life.

As you are aware, in the last years, Catholic clergy, religious and lay workers in a number of countries have been accused , and several have been convicted, of child abuse. There is no excuse for this behavior, which is a grave betrayal of trust. In some cases heavy fines had to be paid while in other cases the culprits were given custodial sentences. Protection from sexual aggression remains high on the agenda of all church institutions as they struggle to come to terms with this serious problem. Likewise, concrete measures to ensure transparency and assistance to the victims and their families are the way to alleviate the pain, grief, and bewilderment caused by the abuse that has occurred.

The Catholic community continues its efforts to deal decisively with this problem. Thus, those who are found guilty of these crimes are immediately suspended from exercising their office and are dealt with according to the norms of civil and canon laws. Other legal measures have been taken in order to ensure that children and young people cared for in schools and institutions are safe. Many of the measures taken, legal or administrative, deal with recognition and punishment of abuse. Prevention is the best medicine, and this begins with education and promoting a culture of respect of the human rights and human dignity of every child, and especially through the implementation of efficient methods for the recruitment of school personnel.

Could the panel share some best practices that can help children to recognize and report the improper behavior of educators and caregivers?

The Support of the Human Rights Council to the Recovery Process in Haiti after the Earthquake of January 12, 2010: a Human Rights Approach

Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See
Statement by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Permanent Representative of the Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva at the 13th Special Session of the Human Rights Council
The Support of the Human Rights Council to the Recovery Process in Haiti after the Earthquake of January 12, 2010: a Human Rights Approach
28 January 2010

Mr. President,
The world has been shaken by the tens of thousands of deaths, the millions that are left homeless, and by the destruction of Port-au-Prince and other villages on the island of Haiti, caused by the terrible earthquake of January 12th. The Delegation of the Holy See expresses its condolences for all the victims of the recent earthquake to the Government and people of Haiti through their representatives present with us today. We welcome the initiative taken by Brazil for this Special Session.
The images of the collapsed cathedral in the capital, which have gone around the world, symbolize the situation of the Church in this majority Catholic country. The Church also has been hard and painfully hit by the death of many of its members, the Archbishop of Port-au-Prince and many religious, priests and seminarians. Schools, hospitals and clinics run by the Church have been destroyed. A great number of social and pastoral workers, several of them foreigners, have died under the rubble of a collapsed city while serving together the Haitian people.
Such emergency shows more clearly the need and value of respecting human rights. In the case of Haiti, the right to life, to food, water, health, development, an adequate life expectancy, the right to decent work, among others, were already largely absent. The recent tragedy is a call to the solidarity of the international community to respond immediately to these requirements of the Haitian people and to place these human rights at the base of a healthy plan of reconstruction.
A few hours after the earthquake struck, the Holy Father Benedict XVI called for concrete action: "I appeal to everyone's generosity not to let these brothers and sisters who are experiencing a time of need and sorrow go without our practical solidarity and the effective support of the International Community. The Catholic Church will not fail to take immediate action through her charitable institutions in order to meet the people's most urgent needs." Countries from all over the world are rushing to aid the quake victims. Many Catholic NGO's have launched rebuilding programs. For example, Caritas Internationalis has received 33 million dollars so far for this purpose and Catholic Relief Services (CRS) has already delivered 25 million dollars of aid to Haiti. However, the well-meaning and generous international assistance provided to Haiti, in a practical application of the principle of subsidiarity, first of all should offer the Haitian people the capacity to rebuild their needed infrastructures and to assume their political and social responsibility.
Mr. President, the Church, as an integral part of Haitian society, will continue to actively collaborate in rebuilding the country, by promoting the most basic human rights and by contributing to the health and educational advancement of the Haitian people in their just aspiration to a life of freedom and dignity.
Thank you Mr. President.

“The WTO, the Multilateral Trading System and the Current Global Economic Environment”

Statement by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Apostolic Nuncio, Permanent Observer of the Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva
at the 7th Session of the Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization

“The WTO, the Multilateral Trading System and the
Current Global Economic Environment”

Geneva, 30 November – 2 December 2009


Mr. Chairman,

1. The current economic crisis has heavily impacted the poor of the world. On several occasions it has prompted the Holy See to call the attention of States and international organizations to its dramatic consequences, high unemployment in particular. This Seventh Session of the Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization is an important opportunity to renew the commitment of the international community for concerted action to lead developed and developing countries on the road to recovery and growth. The recent social encyclical of Pope Benedict XVI, Caritas in veritate, presents an extensive analysis of the present global economic environment and offers some practical indications for fair solutions. My Delegation would like to invite to a thoughtful reflection on this major statement and its articulate vision of development. This document reaffirms that every country has a right to define its own economic model, but within an inclusive and fair globalization where solidarity, investments, trade, technology transfer, capacity building and knowledge sharing are put at the service of a development with a new face. Such new model of development is based on the centrality of the person, recognising that each human being has a dignity, desire for freedom and fulfilment of his/her deepest aspirations in all economic mechanisms.

2. In today’s complex international scene, there are many and overlapping actors and causes affecting both underdevelopment and development. As a result, difficulties in the functioning of multilateral institutions are increasing and particularistic solutions to a common problem are adopted. The current state of trade talks are a clear example of this phenomenon. The slow progress of the Doha Round of negotiations has spurred the growth of several Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs) as an alternative route for achieving trade liberalization. It is certainly true that in principle PTAs that meet the full spirit of article 24 of GATT, constitute a step towards global free trade; however, it is also well known that when PTAs are asymmetric, involving advanced economies and developing countries, they could backfire for the latter countries. Therefore, given the development goal of current trade negotiations, we must recognize that the interests of the poorest countries are better safeguarded within the rules of the multilateral trading system. In this respect the present Ministerial Conference represents a unique opportunity to re-launch trade negotiations. Moreover the confirmation of the centrality of the multilateral system is a crucial opportunity to reaffirm that a truly pluralistic approach based on the cooperation of each single member could allow the achievement of the common good by respecting the dignity of every single person as a member of the one community of the human family.

3. The multilateral trading system and trade liberalization have stimulated economic growth worldwide, including in Least Developed Countries (LDCs). But disparities in the level of development continue within and among nations. Besides, the financial crisis is likely to have a considerable adverse effect on international trade as well. The Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations has not been concluded, jeopardizing a continued dynamic expansion in the exports of developing and transition economies. However, important positive agreements have been reached in the process. It is therefore crucial that every effort is made in order to allow the realization of these benefits so that new resources could be made available to the development particularly of the poorest countries.

4. “If the market is governed solely by the principle of the equivalence in value of exchanged goods,” observes Pope Benedict XVI, “it cannot produce the social cohesion that it requires in order to function well. Without internal forms of solidarity and mutual trust, the market cannot completely fulfil its proper economic function” . Thus, what kind of “equivalence of value” can propose the billion men, women and children who suffer from hunger and deprivation? Their income is too low to be even noticed by the market; but if the market does not see them, it cannot respond to their needs. In this case “economic activity cannot solve all social problems through the simple application of commercial logic.” The ‘bottom billion’ cannot be left out of the picture. It seems evident that the market cannot rely only on itself. It “needs to be directed towards the pursuit of the common good, for which the political community in particular must also take responsibility.” In this setting, the Aid for Trade initiative, launched in the last Ministerial Conference, has proved to be able to combine market mechanisms with the need of solidarity, making good progress since its launch. Moreover if the promises made during the G20 meeting held last April will be fulfilled, additional important resources will be made available. However several poor countries have not been able to fully exploit the potential benefits of this initiative. We should make every effort to extend these potential gains to the countries that most need them.

5. Given the recent FAO Conference on Food Security and the critical issue represented by agriculture in current trade talks, allow me to raise the point that the market, such as it is sometimes promoted, cannot answer, for example, the problem of malnutrition and hunger in the world without recourse to non-market values like solidarity and trust.

6. It is well known that in several countries the State takes the initiative to acquire foodstuff on the market for the most underprivileged. These products are subsidized and resold at low price, a procedure that in a way inserts the poorest people in the market since their need is translated into solvent request and becomes perceptible by the market. This approach, however, represents a high cost for the State not sustainable in particular for many of the least advanced countries. Here solidarity between rich and poor countries finds a logical role to play. The ensuing benefit affects also the economy because the decrease of social inequality prevents “the progressive erosion of “social capital”: the network of relationships of trust, dependability, and respect for rules, all of which are indispensable for any form of civil coexistence.”

7. Indeed, as recently stressed by a WTO report, world agricultural exports have almost tripled over the last twenty years and the amount of food that is actually globally produced is technically able to satisfy the current demand. “Hunger is not so much dependent on lack of material things as on shortage of social resources, the most important of which are institutional. What is missing, in other words, is a network of economic institutions capable of guaranteeing regular access to sufficient food and water for nutritional needs, and also capable of addressing the primary needs and necessities ensuing from genuine food crises, whether due to natural causes or political irresponsibility, nationally and internationally. The problem of food insecurity needs to be addressed … by investing in rural infrastructures, irrigation systems, transport, organization of markets, and in the development and dissemination of agricultural technology that can make the best use of the human, natural and socio-economic resources that are more readily available at the local level, while guaranteeing their sustainability over the long term as well. All this needs to be accomplished with the involvement of local communities in choices and decisions that affect the use of agricultural land.” In this way a more generous and appropriately diversified Aid for Trade can make a real difference.

8. The increase in agricultural productivity at the local level of the poorest countries would allow not only the increase of the overall supply of food but could also contribute to the stabilisation of commodity prices that would be less dependent on climate change. This latter aspect could significantly reduce the level of uncertainty that severely harms farmers whose incomes are excessively exposed to the high variability in food prices. The success of this effort would bring about an improvement in the income of rural populations where many of the world’s poor are concentrated, thus contributing to resolve the problem of hunger.

9. Moreover investing in agriculture will have a multiplier effect as agriculture plays a multi-functional role not only in the production of food, but also as a place of life and of socialization, an instrument for protection of the environment and shaper of the landscape. In all, the attention to agriculture and its relationship to trade success comes when primacy is given to the human person.

Mr. Chairman,

10. In conclusion, if this Conference signals the political will to make progress in monitoring and surveillance to disputes, accessions, Aid for Trade, technical assistance and international governance, it will be a decisive step towards the creation of an international trading system based on the principle of social justice. Indeed social ethics like transparency, honesty, solidarity and responsibility cannot be ignored: they preserve a person-centred goal in any economic activity, prevent crises caused by greedy speculation and provide a comprehensive approach that does not separate the social consequences from economic and environmental decisions. But there is an additional step that ensures success in the long run, the inclusion of the dimension of gratuitousness and the logic of gift as an expression of fraternity and involvement of the entire human family both as a protagonist of development and as the primary objective of trade and economic activity.

98th Session of the Council of the International Organization for Migration

Statement by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi
Apostolic Nuncio, Permanent Observer of the Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva
at the 98th Session of the Council of the International Organization for Migration

23-26 November 2009


Mr. Chairman,
The Delegation of the Holy See expresses its appreciation for the effective leadership of the Director General, welcomes the new Deputy Director General, and congratulates you on your election.

Mr. Chairman,

1. The increasing number of people on the move across the globe, especially the vast majority of those forcibly displaced by lack of survival opportunities, by violence and climate change, has raised new and complex demands for solidarity, humanitarian assistance and protection. The challenge to international organizations, governments and the civil society comes from the fact that while necessity is the common factor that pushes these people out of their country, the legal norms that define their status apply differently and in some cases are blurred or even disregarded. Migrant workers, convention refugees, asylum-seekers, temporary migrants, mixed flows, boat people, climate refugees, victims of smuggling and of trafficking, are all categories of persons included in current policy discussions. The International Organization for Migration, sensitive to the evolving situation, commendably has begun to deepen its own approach, in collaboration with other partners, to a major concern in the management of migration- and a sign of its present inadequacy: irregular migrants.

2. Data from the United Nations and governments about people who enter another country without authorization or who overstay their visa or engage in activities different from the authorization they had received are only estimates, given that the nature of such movement escapes registration. But numbers are impressive. Migrants in irregular administrative status are approximately 30 to 40 million, a number that amounts to 15 to 20 percent of all international migrants. This phenomenon is global. Europe is home to an estimated 5 to 8 million irregular migrants; the United States, to over 10 million; South Africa, to some 500,000. In Asia, around 30-40 percent of all migration flows are estimated to take place through irregular channels. A reflection of both the challenges and the most sensible response, various regularizations in quite a number of countries of Europe and Latin America have settled hundreds of thousand of irregular migrants: my delegation welcomes signals that the United States is also advancing a similar strategy.

3. Many countries on all continents, as these examples indicate, experience the presence of irregular migrants, a reality that will remain with us as long as insecurity due to environment degradation, violations of human rights, wars and lack of opportunity persist. In fact irregular migration needs to be looked at and analyzed as linked to regular migration: often the same root causes and mechanisms are at work in both cases; many times migrants are diverted to irregular channels because no legal channels are effectively available to them.

4. It is also rather well documented that irregular migration often matches the labour market demand in countries of destination. The International Labour Organization (ILO) and other international and regional bodies as well as our own Church organisations and partners working with migrants and refugees of all kinds around the world report that nearly all of the irregular migrants who are adults, and a growing number of the children, are working, predominantly either in the informal economy or in informal employment arrangements. For the most part, they fill huge gaps in providing essential labour and services, often of the most demanding kind, in both highly and lesser skilled occupations. The impressive proportion of migrant workers busy growing food and constructing houses, buildings and cities speaks to how important they are to their new societies as a whole. Their growing role in the home, health and child care sectors of so many countries of the north and the south, illustrates their role in one-to-one, day-to-day solidarity, a building block of families and communities worldwide.

5. And yet, a consequence of their status is that irregular migrants become vulnerable to widespread exploitation and abuse, can be used for unfair competition, and experience serious, but avoidable personal and public health concerns. Moreover, irregular migrants are commonly pictured for political and media purposes—and at times perceived by public opinion—as simply losers, job stealers or worse, and a burden to social services when in fact they are active contributors to the economy. Indeed, most are young and responsible providers for their families. They are often marginalised, and scared by public policies that are expressed or implied, enforcement that is ad hoc as well as targeted, and discrimination. The majority finds invisibility in shadows that carry risk for any democracy and social cohesion.

6. Experience has shown that irregular migrations have been growing notwithstanding increased control of borders and of work places. Bound up in all these considerations, the dignity and inalienable human rights of irregular migrants call for a new management strategy. States, while exercising their sovereign right to regulate immigration, should work for concerted policy answers directed to positive outcomes. In this complex effort, some significant elements should be taken into account.

7. First, as so many states and others are increasingly emphasising at international and regional fora like this meeting, migrants are human beings, with human aspirations and human vulnerabilities that at times evoke a specific form of human solidarity. This is particularly evident during the often long and life threatening experience of many migrants in irregular flows on desperate migratory routes. The very human responses of rescue, of assistance especially in emergencies, and of protection, especially for refugees, children, women, and victims of torture, trafficking, trauma or violence in transit, these are all responses that deserve greater attention and organisation in addressing the dangers and suffering in irregular migration today. My delegation welcomes the thinking that IOM has been doing in this area, and particularly in the approach of collaboration, not competition with the expertise and presence of UNHCR, the Red Cross system and local non-government organisations on the ground, including the many church entities directly engaged in this work.
a. My delegation calls for new attention to the horrific phenomenon of “gauntlet migration,” that is, what it means to be and properly respond to, a man, woman or child who has been serially brutalised, multiple times and repetitively, along the many roads and crossings of a migration journey across land, desert and water borders in Africa, in South and Southeast Asia, and in the Americas and Caribbean for example. What may be needed is not so much new rights or policies but, as the background paper for this session suggests in its reference to IOM’s work with UNHCR under the 10 Point Plan of Action, the elaboration of common standards and practical mechanisms for better operationalising assistance and protection in such situations.
b. My delegation also wishes to encourage IOM, in the course of and beyond this reflection on irregular migration, to return, together with its members and with partners in UNHCR, other international organisations and civil society, to the important but unfinished business of distinguishing between forced or survival migration and migration that is genuinely voluntary. This opportunity for reflection and new, more human and practical responses to those who truly have no choice other than to migrate seems especially promising in light of the clear convergence that recent processes, including the Global Forum on Migration and Development, have demonstrated on recognising and building appropriate policy frameworks to address the difference between migration that is a choice and migration that is a necessity.

8. Secondly, given the unprecedented rise in mobility as our economies, labour markets, and even families become ever more globalised, it is important to fully consider that however grave their circumstances, these millions of migrants possess valuable development potential in terms of skills, capacity and knowledge. Under the right conditions, i.e. the enjoyment of basic rights, they can use their potential to rebuild their communities and their livelihoods and contribute to the economy and society that hosts them. But those considered to be in irregular status—including most regrettably, large numbers of refugees stuck in protracted situations—lack the ability to find legal work, sufficient freedom of movement and access to training and education. While they are kept in the shadows, development opportunities are lost. Hence the need to provide the necessary legal framework to prevent such a loss.

9. Thirdly, to arrive at such a framework, popular stereotypes, that often block fair legislation, should be overcome through education and a more realistic portraying of irregular migrants in the media. It is a misconception that irregular migrants take away jobs or reside only in developed countries. A concerted negotiation between governments, employers and labour unions appears necessary. If one takes into account that small and medium size enterprises are often drawn to employ irregular migrants to avoid costs, an effective solution would provide a way to accommodate the mutual need of the employers for workers and those workers for jobs by offering legal employment together with some tax benefits and scaled payment for social benefits without prejudice to fundamental work rights and without creating unfair competition with national workers. Devising such forms of regularization is not without economic benefits since it is better for the state to have businesses and regular migrants that may contribute slightly less to the social security and tax regimes than irregular ones that do not contribute at all.

10. A fourth observation regards the need of balance for an eventual comprehensive framework where control, interests of the economy and human rights are considered together. The social consequences of migration cannot be left out of the equation. Migrants add a human face to the on-going process of globalization and can be instrument and promoters of peaceful relations among countries making visible the reality that we are one human family. In this connection, policies of detention should be revisited not only because of the human rights questions they raise, but also because they hold hostage and inactive a productive population at very high financial costs. Much less practical and respectful, as the U.N. Human Rights Council has underlined, is the recourse to criminalization of irregular migrants simply because of their status.

11. Finally, confronted with such a complex and almost intractable issue, the IOM could intensify the promotion of serious research into contemporary irregular migration to advance an understanding of the mechanisms involved, especially of the organized underground industry that plays an intermediary role with its international ramifications in fostering irregular migration. For a successful task, cooperation among countries of departure, transit and destination becomes even more necessary in this type of migration. The various attempts undertaken to stimulate a global coordination of migrations remain still at an embryonic stage, but they show the felt-need of some global entity that can effectively support the management of today’s population movements. It is a challenge that demands creative and courageous imagination.

Mr. Chairman,
12. The inclusion of migrations in the fight against poverty and in the process of development would fall short of its goals if the large percentage of irregular migrants is left out. If a new framework of wider channels for legal immigration and other provisions to regularize their presence and to uphold their fundamental human rights is achieved, everyone will gain: migrants, national economies and peaceful coexistence. The way forward rests on the acceptance of every person as a protagonist in development and on the responsibility of States and the international community to create the conditions that allow everyone’s talent to be fruitful in a transparent and legal situation. As Pope Benedict XVI reminds us in his recent social encyclical, authentic development is inclusive and solicitous of the most vulnerable members of society. He says: “The more we strive to secure a common good corresponding to the real needs of our neighbors, the more effectively we love them... In an increasingly globalized society, the common good and the effort to obtain it cannot fail to assume the dimensions of the whole human family.” Irregular migrants are part of this family.

PERMANENT MISSION OF THE HOLY SEE

HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
12th Session – Item 9: Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia
and related forms of intolerance

Statement by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Apostolic Nuncio,
Permanent Observer of the Holy See to the United Nations Office
and other International Organizations in Geneva
30 September 2009


Mr. President,

1. For some time now, the international community has been searching for a balanced normative approach to the fundamental human rights of freedom of religion and belief, freedom of expression, and respect for all persons holding religious or different convictions. Resolutions and declarations are moving toward effective provisions for international protection and reaffirmation of the importance of dialogue. Such efforts are being undertaken with the aims of preventing social conflicts and the disparagement of individuals and groups of believers and avoiding marginalization of, or violence against, these groups. However, such a negative perspective risks losing sight of the critical importance of the positive aspects of religious freedom. Such freedom implies the protection of every person’s right to choose, to profess and to disseminate individually, and in community, a belief according to his/her conscience, as stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the other Human Rights instruments, with the corresponding obligation of States to protect this fundamental human right by means of an appropriate legal framework. The Delegation of the Holy See is of the opinion that the last report of the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance has taken a more positive approach to the issue. The questions of religious discrimination and incitement to religious hatred, and the sociological concept of “Defamation of Religions”, issues addressed in the latest Report, are better contextualized. The Rapporteur recommends anchoring the debate in the existing international legal framework, adding that in matters of belief rights, the human person should not be separated from her social relationship. “The rights associated with religion are all the more in need of protection if they are considered to clash with a prevailing secular ideology or with majority religious positions of an exclusive nature. The full guarantee of religious liberty cannot be limited to the free exercise of worship, but has to give due consideration to the public dimension of religion, and hence to the possibility of believers playing their part in building the social order.”

2. The Delegation of the Holy See agrees, therefore, with the Special Rapporteur that only an integrated approach based on the full respect of the right to freedom of religion can be the answer in combating the old and new phenomenon of discrimination on the basis of religious conviction and practice. Aware that the increasing manifestations of religious intolerance are undermining the rights of all persons of any religion and belief and that practically all religious minorities are discriminated around the world, my Delegation is convinced that a concerted solution is necessary. The consensus reached in the Durban Review Conference, for example, represents a fine balance between reaffirming the importance of freedom of expression and the need to curb hate speech. Particularly in this area that touches on deep emotions and on a personal and collective sense of identity, laws are not enough. A new outlook is required, one that takes into account the increased pluralism in most societies and the interconnectedness of a globalized world. Modern technology (especially through the means of social communication) can be an effective resource and can contribute to a clearer awareness of one’s dignity and human rights. Thus the convergence of freedom of expression and the means of social communication is fundamentally positive. It is only a question of choice. Media can be used either to build and sustain the human community in all its economic, political, cultural, educational and religious aspects to the enrichment of people’s wellbeing and spirituality or to injure the integral good of the person, to incite hatred, to marginalize and alienate people and to stereotype them based on race and ethnicity, sex, age and also religion.

Indeed in the relationship between the means of social communication and religion there are temptations on both sides. Media often ignore and marginalize religious doctrine, ideas, practices, experiences, and sentiments of religious persons are belittled and religion is judged by secular standards. Such a perspective can result in hostile treatment of legitimate religious groups. On the other hand, religion may negatively judge communication media and encourage religious exclusivism that foments disregard and hostility toward others.

3. Freedom of expression is not only a right but also a duty that needs to be strengthened. The presumption should always be in favour of the possibility to exchange ideas and articulate opinions. Protecting the freedom of expression, however, is not an absolute obligation; normally it should be upheld for the good of society and also for the enjoyment of the freedom of religion and belief. But any form of incitement to hatred that affects the human person and his/her rights is unacceptable. When people are performing the social duty and right to inform, they are called to take into account principles of social ethics such as truth, solidarity, tolerance, fairness, principles that form the cornerstone of justice, equity, respect for privacy, subsidiarity. Media too should remain at the service of the person. It may be useful to underline in this context that the integral development of persons and their good cannot be realized apart from the common good of communities to which they belong. The common good, of which human rights are the grammar, should be understood as inclusive of the full range of physical, intellectual, emotional, and spiritual goods. Thus, the person’s innate social nature and religious feelings deserve the opportunity to grow and to be protected from abuse. Then, if the new technologies are to serve the good of individuals and of society, all users will avoid the sharing of words and images that are degrading of human beings, that promote hatred and intolerance, that exploit the vulnerable.

4. At this juncture, therefore, it is better to avoid a negative and limiting approach and insist rather on the positive aspects of the fundamental right to freedom of religion. The wise use of media and of educational systems and textbooks can teach mutual respect and appreciation. Moreover, initiatives of dialogue and efforts like that of the High Commissioner of Human Rights to attain a better understanding of article 19 and 20 of the ICCPR in the international law framework, can go a long way toward promoting mutual understanding, sustain freedom of religion, belief and conscience, and to prevent their disrespect. Civil authorities should contribute their part by guaranteeing the right to criticize the work of the media and by facilitating the participation of all, especially of ethnic groups and religious minorities, in the decision making of communication policies.

5. In conclusion, Mr. President, the road ahead points in the direction of comprehensive implementation of existing norms to protect freedom of religion and belief, of wise use of the freedom of expression, of greater sensitivity to the right to express religious convictions and, consequently, to demonstrate religious identity, both as an individual and in a group, in private and in public, in the common search for truth and peaceful coexistence. In this way, people come first since human rights belong to them and their communities rather than to abstract ideas, institutions or physical territories. In the same way, equality of treatment is preserved by protecting religious minorities from discriminatory legislation and practices. In the new digital arena, much can be achieved by encountering and knowing the traditions and values of each other, by creating a new mentality of understanding and respect, and by searching together for truth, goodness and beauty.

PERMANENT MISSION OF THE HOLY SEE

HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
12th Session – Item 3: Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic social and cultural rights, including the right to development – Sub-item (c): Right to Development-

Statement by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi,
Permanent Representative of the Holy See to the United Nations Office
and other International Organizations in Geneva
September 22, 2009




Mr. President,

1. The current financial crisis is showing the degree of global interdependence of national economies. It risks also to jeopardize the efforts of the international community to meet the Millennium and other development goals in many countries. Moreover, it could bring about a reduction of the public and private funding of national social safety nets and undermine thereby the enjoyment of human rights not only by the poorest and weakest segments of the population, but also by other groups negatively affected by the crisis. A key factor to mitigate the adverse effects of the crisis, we believe, is placing the human person at the center of economic and social policies at the international and national levels.

2. The Holy See Delegation views the current debate on the right to development within this Council and its mechanisms as an opportune occasion to strengthen the international commitment on the operationalization of this right and to transform this political willingness into concrete action. Achieving development is not only a matter of eliminating material poverty, but also of principles and values guiding economies and societies in all countries irrespective of their per-capita income level. Furthermore, risks of a deterioration of the economic and social situation are present in most countries, including in high-income countries, due to the rising number of the population suffering new forms of poverty, social exclusion and marginalization. Needless to say, these economic and social inter-country inequalities risk to be significantly increased by the financial crisis. For these reasons, my Delegation notes with interest the work that is being accomplished by the Task Force aiming at creating a list of right-to-development criteria and operational sub-criteria around three main components: human-centred development, an enabling environment, and social justice and equity. We believe that a global agreement on these criteria could constitute a fundamental step not only towards the operationalization of the 1986 Declaration, but also in the direction of the systematic consideration of the human person and its inherent rights and dignity in the elaboration of development policies at all levels.

3. In the context of the development process, the human person is not only a receiver of aid but also the real actor of his or her integral development and of the relations among peoples and persons. As restated in the recent encyclical Caritas in Veritate: “Man is the source, the focus and the aim of all economic and social life” (25). We support the Task Force ‘s approach of a comprehensive human-centred development that implies the indivisibility and interdependence of all human rights as well as the relevance, not only of development outcomes, but also of the development realization process and of its sustainability. My delegation believes also that the cultural component of the right to development defined in the 1986 Declaration cannot be complete without including the ethical and spiritual dimensions of the person. These qualitative dimensions should be reflected among the human-centred criteria of this right that are being elaborated by the Task Force.

4. The Task Force view of the duty of States to create, individually and collectively, an enabling environment for the realization of the right to development should be endorsed. States therefore are called to remove obstacles to development due to the violation of human rights and the international community to support the development process, especially in the poorest countries. In this context the principle of subsidiarity is particularly relevant. Solidarity and subsidiarity can be viewed as complementary. While the former relates to the mobilization of financial and human resources for development, the latter helps to identify the most appropriate level of decision-making and intervention. The principle of subsidiarity can therefore be seen as a cross-cutting criterion for the creation of the enabling environment to the right to development. It allows the participation of the beneficiaries of aid in the process of development through the responsible use of their freedom and talents.

5. Finally, we support the adoption of criteria of social justice and equity that imply moral imperatives prompting action for the protection of human rights and for an equitable sharing of benefits from development, including, among others, access to food, housing education, health and employment. We follow with interest as well the overall work of the Task Force and Working Group aiming at identifying operational right-to-development criteria and dialoguing with existing poverty reduction, debt transfer, technology transfer and other global partnerships. We believe that such work is laying the ground work for States and the international community to concretely reduce economic and social disparities, too often a cause of violations of human dignity and human rights.