Believers against hate

Context: Faith for Rights (F4R) movement of the United Nations (UN) provides a way to create a balance between religious traditions and rights, and thus India should embrace it.

Attempts to create a balance between various traditions and human rights

• In relation to religion:
  • Archbishop Rowan Williams: Emphasised on the importance of pluralism for a functioning democracy and promoted religious tolerance.
  • Mohandas Gandhi: Adopted Narsimh Mehta’s poem as a daily national prayer: Vaishnava jana to tene kahiye, jo peed parai jaane re: which means - a gentle person is one who knows the pain of the other.
• By Judiciary in India: Supreme Court inarguably, via forms of social action litigation, taking the sufferings of people seriously. (Started with PIL in the 1980s)
• Rabat Plan of Action- 2012: by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OCHR). - in relation to legal punitive measures.
  • Aim: Contain the negative effects of the manipulation of race, ethnic origin and religion” and “the adverse use of concepts of national unity or national identity.
  • Approach used: A bottom-up, multi-stakeholder and consultative process
  • Findings –
    • Existence of hatred in many forms: post-electoral violence along ethnic lines; involving extremists, abusive and malicious portrayal, online or in traditional media, of certain religions.
    • Abuse of vague or counter-productive legislation, jurisprudence and policies: E.g. Anti-blasphemy laws, the “curbing” of freedom of information etc...
• Beirut Declaration, 2017: It recognises how religions “flourish in environments where human rights, based on the equal worth of all individuals, are protected”.
  • Its 18 commitments underline the benefits of “human rights... from deeply rooted ethical and spiritual foundations provided by religions and beliefs”.
• UN movement of F4R: It campaigns against incitement to national, racial or religious hatred and exposes legislative patterns, judicial practices and government policies that undercut the peaceful coexistence of different faiths.

Recommendations of F4R: for creating a balance between religious traditions and rights. (Based on Article 20 of the International Covenant on Political and Civil Rights)

• Restrictions on rights should be clearly and narrowly defined; Do not restrict free speech in a wide or untargeted way.
• Prosecution should be a responsible response to a “pressing social need”.
• Conduct a Proportionality Test: Right can be curbed only if the “benefit to the protected interest outweighs the harm to freedom of expression”.
• Conduct a Threshold Test: to identify whether an expression is a criminal offence - the test should take in to account the context, speaker, intent, content and form, extent, and imminence.

Inspirations from the F4R movement for India

• For the judiciary: to deal with the interplay between the freedom of religion under Articles 25 and 26 and other provisions in Part III of the Constitution;
  • “Public order, morality and health” occurring in Article 25(1);
  • “Morality” or “constitutional morality” as affecting faith;
  • Nature of judicial power to explore the “integral part of the religion”;
  • Meaning of the expression “Hindus” in Article 25(2)(b);
  • Relationship between Articles 25 and Article 26; and
  • Standing of non–denominational persons to question religious practices of a denomination.
• Further nourish F4R movement: by religious leaders and human rights experts, citizens and cadres, and the four estates of democracy — legislatures, executive, judiciary, and media.