Equating ‘Hate Speech’ with the made up word ‘Islamophobia’ is the major concern as ‘Hate Speech’ is a crime.
15. The African Group was convinced that the dialogue maintained by the Ad Hoc Committee since its inception provided ample opportunity to reflect on substantive and procedural gaps with regard to the Convention. The various thematic issues that the African Group and the Ad Hoc Committee had identified over the years as being contemporary manifestations of racism included xenophobia, Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, propagation of racism and xenophobic attacks through cyberspace, racial profiling and incitement to racial, ethnic and religious hatred. She said that victims of profiling required better protection from these manifestations. Maximum remedies should be applied and impunity for perpetrators of acts of racism should be eliminated.
22. The institutions of the European Union were very much focused on the fight against discrimination, racism and xenophobia. The European Commission, which was primarily tasked with ensuring the correct legal transposition, implementation and enforcement of existing legislative instruments, also encouraged the exchange of good practices between European Union Member States. To that end, the Commission had established expert groups on non-discrimination and on racism and xenophobia in 2008 and 2009 respectively. In addition, the Agency for Fundamental Rights of the European Union, established in 2007, played a crucial role in collecting, analysing and disseminating objective and comparable data on racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and other forms of intolerance and in providing independent and evidence-based policy guidance on equality and non-discrimination to the institutions and Member States of the European Union. Among other activities, the Agency assisted the Member States in designing and implementing relevant measures to combat hate crime within the framework of the Working Party on Hate Crime, which had been set up in 2014.
23. The European Union was of the view that the development of comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation was relevant and it stated that it would continue to engage in the promotion of equality and non-discrimination.
24. The representative of Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), stated that the work of the Ad Hoc Committee was currently more relevant than it had been at the time of the body’s inception. The world was facing a myriad of challenges, including economic meltdown, rising xenophobia and intolerance, international conflicts and worsening human rights and humanitarian crises. The socioeconomic and political root causes of racial abuse had become significantly more complex, giving rise to new and contemporary forms of racial discrimination on the basis of race, sex, language or religion, which were not covered by existing instruments. Consequently, there was a need for effective legislation at both the national and international levels, to fill in the gaps and provide remedial measures for victims of injustice and discrimination.
25. OIC was of the view that the historical perspective of racial discrimination and its continuing adverse effects on the lives of people and nations, especially in the economic, social and cultural domains, could not be forgotten. The ramifications of past injustices still haunted the lives of many and, therefore, international cooperation was necessary if obstacles to the attainment of better and equal standards of living were to be removed.
26. OIC was seriously concerned at the dangerous tide of extreme right-wing politics in many parts of the world and the equation of nationalism with patriotism. The increasing trend of incitement to violence, hate speech and advocacy of hatred, xenophobia, racial and religious profiling, racial differentiation — especially in border management — discriminatory immigration practices, Islamophobia, negative stereotyping and stigmatization was alarming, socially unjust and highly condemnable. Indigenous peoples, migrant workers, refugees and other vulnerable groups faced a multitude of issues linked to discrimination and harassment. Those contemporary challenges further underscored the importance of supporting the Ad Hoc Committee’s work.
27. OIC reaffirmed its commitment to constructive participation in the Ad Hoc Committee’s discussions and urged all the other countries and regional groups to set aside political differences and work to find commonalities in order to fulfil the mandate of the Ad Hoc Committee. Together, they would defeat the hate mongers and xenophobic demagogues who exploited people’s insecurities and incited violence and hatred. Together, they could pave the way for a better future based on shared principles of tolerance, inclusiveness, non-discrimination and interracial harmony.
49. The representative of Egypt suggested including a reference to Islamophobia in the draft conclusions and recommendations, noting that there was a need for political will to deal with some of the root causes of migration. The representative of Libya endorsed the proposal made by the representative of Egypt.
93. The representative of Pakistan, speaking on behalf of OIC, underlined the need to have a discussion on Islamophobia. His delegation was open to engaging in discussions on discrimination on the grounds of any religion, not only Islam. However, Islamophobia currently represented the most prevalent form of discrimination on the basis of religion or belief.
98. The representative of South Africa, speaking on behalf of the African group, supported the proposal made by the representative of Pakistan, speaking on behalf of OIC, concerning the holding of a discussion of Islamophobia during the next session.
The representative of Pakistan, speaking on behalf of OIC noted current legislation being enacted around the world relating to hate speech and border management, with implications for racial and religious profiling. He questioned whether there was legislation in place in various jurisdictions against racial and religious profiling, and stated that it would be interesting to hear and share comparative legislative experiences in this area, particularly relating to Islamophobia, negative stereotyping, and border management issues.
This is an interesting article from 2004.
We must be allowed to criticise Islam
