Warning: Parameter 2 to qtranxf_postsFilter() expected to be a reference, value given in /home/matchman/public_html/wp-includes/class-wp-hook.php on line 298
"There is hope that the Special Envoy’s first year will be a ‘test case’" - Matchman News
Warning: Parameter 2 to qtranxf_postsFilter() expected to be a reference, value given in /home/matchman/public_html/wp-includes/class-wp-hook.php on line 298

“There is hope that the Special Envoy’s first year will be a ‘test case’”

As we saw, on Friday 6 the EU Commission President Junker announced the appointment of a new Special Envoy for “promotion of freedom of religion or belief outside the European Union”. Matchman News asked to Sophia Kuby, Director of Advocacy at ADF International to help us understanding how such a political decision will shape our […]

As we saw, on Friday 6 the EU Commission President Junker announced the appointment of a new Special Envoy for “promotion of freedom of religion or belief outside the European Union”. Matchman News asked to Sophia Kuby, Director of Advocacy at ADF International to help us understanding how such a political decision will shape our […]

As we saw, on Friday 6 the EU Commission President Junker announced the appointment of a new Special Envoy for “promotion of freedom of religion or belief outside the European Union”. Matchman News asked to Sophia Kuby, Director of Advocacy at ADF International to help us understanding how such a political decision will shape our future.

On Friday 6 the EU Commission President Juncker announced the appointment of a new Special Envoy for “promotion of freedom of religion or belief outside the European Union”. Beside the ISIS genocide, which could be the first issues Mr Figel could address?

The genocide of religious minorities in the Middle East is certainly the most pressing issue. I expect that the Special Envoy will be quick to address the topic, given that the Commission cited the European Parliament’s recent resolution on the genocide committed by ISIS as the legal basis for creating the position.
Aside from the ongoing genocide in the Middle East, it would not surprise me if the Special Envoy focused specifically on one or two problematic regions to begin with. It is important to note that the Special Envoy’s mandate is currently only a one year term, so the onus will be on producing tangible results. The challenges that could be addressed are manifold: social exclusion of minorities on religious grounds, cultural impunity for physical persecution, anti-conversion laws that hinder people’s ability to freely live out their faith – all of which contribute to growing global persecution. The latter could be a good starting point for the Envoy, given that it is in the EU’s interest to promote the rule of law in accordance with international law. Anti-conversion legislation that makes it difficult or impossible to enjoy religious freedom is not reconcilable with the EU’s stance on freedom of religion and therefore must be addressed.

The EU Commission seems to have taken the opposite direction respect the Canadian Government which decided not to maintain its Office for Freedom of Religion. Furthermore, this new EU envoy explicitly focuses on promoting the religious freedom “outside the European Union”: what does this mean within the EU foreign policy perspective?

In creating the position of the Special Envoy, the EU has made an important first step towards ensuring greater protection for religious freedom globally. However, unlike the Canadian Office for Freedom of Religion, the Special Envoy is not an institutional position. The Envoy will serve in an advisory role to the Commissioner for Development and Cooperation with a one year mandate, showing that the EU is reluctant to institutionalise the promotion of religious freedom.

There is hope that the Special Envoy’s first year will be a ‘test case’ in determining whether there should be a long term, institutional position. If the Special Envoy manages to effectively highlight significant, systematic limitations to religious freedom occurring externally during his tenure, the President of the Commission will have a strong case to renew or even institutionalise this work.

The foreign policy perspective on the position is clear, as the mandate focuses solely on the situation outside the EU. The new position of Special Envoy responds to reports of rising religious persecution throughout the world. Europe is often seen as a safe haven from the growing turmoil that is caused by religious conflict, so it makes absolute sense to monitor the external situation.

Could we take it for a signal of profound change into the deepest attitudes of the EU institutions (maybe not always caring of the religious freedom perspective)?

While we welcome the establishment of the Special Envoy, we did note a reluctance to create a more institutionalised and long-term position. In time we will see what degree of political support the work of the Special Envoy will receive from the institutions and if his findings will lead to change. It is too early to speak of a deep change in attitude. Decisions like these are always political and are made in the context of wider negotiations and long-term strategies.

I think it is a positive sign, indicating a growing awareness within the EU institutions of the problems relating to persecution and social exclusion on religious grounds, but in the end what matters is political determination and results.

However it was the Parliament that “called for this initiative in its Resolution of 4 February 2016”. Can you please tell us the background of this resolution?

The passing of the so-called ‘genocide resolution’ was a significant achievement that cannot be overestimated. In passing the resolution, the European Parliament was among the first international institutions to recognise the ongoing violence against Christians and other religious minorities in the Middle East as genocide. One week earlier, the Council of Europe had recognised that the atrocities committed by ISIS constituted genocide, but did not name the victims of this genocide (Christians, Yazidis and other religious minorities).
During the debate that preceded the resolution in a plenary session of the European Parliament, I witnessed a rare display of absolute solidarity from many MEPs across all political groups, who all spoke passionately with one voice in favour of the recognition. The resolution was a break-through and a clear sign that Europeans no longer wanted to turn a blind eye to these egregious injustices and crimes going on ‘next door’.
MEPs called for the creation of a Special Representative for religious freedom in paragraph 10 of the resolution, which was a logical step in light of the emerging consensus and awareness of rising religious persecution globally.  Again, it is worth noting that a Special Representative would have been an institutional position, not merely an advisor, but suffice to say that a special advisor is an encouraging and important first step.

Which effects do you think it will have on the European civil society’s efforts in advancing the religious freedom in the EU?

Civil society organisations, including humanitarian ones, play a key role in raising awareness of ongoing religious persecution that occurs within the EU and further afield. Annual reports from such organisations, such as Open Doors or Aid to the Church in Need, are precious sources of information for the EU institutions, as well as the general public, and are regularly presented at the European Parliament at the invitation of supportive MEPs.

Other organisations that focus on legal and political reform in order to strengthen religious freedom also play an important role in advancing religious freedom. Their expertise and advice is often well received by the institutions. The presence of these civil society organisations at the international institutions – not only the EU – makes a significant difference to how these institutions respond to issues concerning religious freedom.

Social Media Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com