A Global Review of the Denial of Religious Freedom
Winter 2003/2004

By Zarrín T. Caldwell

Azerbaijan: Court Order Seeks to Expel Worshippers from Mosque

At 1 March, the court of Baku's Sabail district ruled to expel the Muslim community of the 'Juma Mosque' in Baku's old city. At this posting in early March, its worshippers were waiting for a promised eviction by force. The court order follows moves by the mayor's office to shut down the mosque, which, in turn, followed an early December arrest of the mosque's imam, Ilgar Ibrahimoglu. Officials have noted that the 1,000 year-old mosque is an illegally held premise and is not registered - a charge that its worshippers strongly deny, especially as the mosque has been conducting activities unbothered for some 12 years. Nonetheless, the community was given two weeks from mid January to vacate the property, which they did not do.

Officials have reportedly intended to turn the mosque into a carpet museum. Although officials claim that the followers of the mosque are occupying a property which is a historic and cultural building and, therefore, belongs to the Culture Ministry, much of the push for evicting its worshippers appears to be political. Rafik Aliev, chairman of the State Committee for Work with Religious Organisations, has apparently noted that the community of Juma mosque must submit itself to the Muslim Board for approval and apply for re-registration if it wishes to continue to function. Although registered in '92/'93, the mosque is reportedly the only one operating independently from the Muslim Board that appoints clerics and monitors sermons. The Muslim Board also allegedly has a close relationship with the government of President Ilham Aliev, who won an election in October 2003 that was largely seen by international observers as rigged.

In this regard, it is noteworthy that Ibragimoglu was initially detained on charges of involvement in street protests following the election in mid-October. He denies such involvement. Ibragimoglu not only performed Friday services at the mosque, but is also Secretary General of the Azeri chapter of the International Religious Liberty Association. Numerous human rights organisations, both in Azerbaijan and abroad, have expressed outrage over Ibragimoglu's arrest and have noted that efforts to close the mosque are a direct violation of religious freedom. Court proceedings in this case have been further criticised for not following due process standards. The Council of Europe and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) have been following developments. The Juma mosque has largely promoted an agenda of tolerance and human rights and has been involved in a variety of charitable programmes. (Sources: Helsinki Commission, Forum 18, Oslo Coalition on Freedom of Religion or Belief, Centre for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience and Religion.)

Belarus: Jews Seek to Preserve Heritage Sites

In a report from Forum 18, interviews with Jewish activists in Belarus have clarified that authorities are planning to construct a multi-storey car park in central Minsk that will make it impossible to reconstruct a 16th century synagogue that was demolished in the late 1960s. Allegedly, only 9 of 92 historical synagogues in Belarus have been returned to believers since 1991. Jewish leaders argue that these synagogues are an important historical and cultural heritage of Belarus and, thus, should be preserved under a 1992 law for protection of such properties. Despite this view, a new restrictive religion law adopted in 2002 notes that religious organisations do not have priority in cases where a former worship building is currently being used for culture or sport. It is unclear whether this law would also apply to cemeteries as it was recently discovered that an ancient Jewish cemetery in Rahachow had been desecrated and turned into a soccer field.

In a May 2003 report from the US Commission on International Religious Freedom asserts that attacks on Jewish property in Belarus continue to be prevalent in the country with memorials, cemeteries and other property regularly subject to violence and vandalism. Although President Lukashenko reportedly condemns these attacks, little efforts are made to pursue perpetrators. On a more positive note, 75 out of 109 members of parliament appealed to the President in November 2002 to stop the destruction of Jewish cultural landmarks in Minsk. Ironically, this followed the passage of what has come to be known as Europe's most restrictive religion law. This law, adopted by the government in October 2002, outlawed all unregistered religious activity, required government censorship of religious literature, and restricted education to only a handful of religious communities. For further information, see Global Issues, Summer 2002.

Approximately 60% of the population in Belarus identifies with the Russian Orthodox Church, which receives more favours from the government than other religious denominations. In the meantime, minority groups struggle for their rights. In its report, the US Commission states, "After coming to power in 1994, Lukashenko set about limiting religious freedom by establishing a number of regulatory and other bureaucratic obstacles that effectively restricted religious activities for many groups. These regulations were sometimes unpublished and targeted primarily small, minority religious communities." Hindu and Protestant communities have been consistently denied registration. (Other Source: Israel National News)

Canada: Use of Islamic Law Raises Concerns

Canadian Muslims have established an Islamic tribunal (the Islamic Institute of Civil Justice) to arbitrate family and business pursuits in Ontario. The forum, which began hearing cases early in 2004, will base its judgements on Shari'ah, or Islamic, law. The secular courts in Canada must uphold the agreements, but only as long as they are voluntary and negotiated through an arbitrator. Courts can also decide not to honour such negotiations if they are 'unreasonable' or in any violation of Canada's Charter of Rights. Under Ontario's Arbitration Act, individuals can use any arbitrators they want (whether or not they are religious) and it is a common practice to do so. Hence, supporters of the new tribunal note that it will ease backlog in civil courts. The body will hear disputes on family and contract matters, but would not be involved in criminal cases.

Critics are concerned that the use of this institution will mean that Islamic law will be endorsed by Canada's secular courts and that, in either case, church and state issues should remain separated. Some have also expressed concern that Shari'ah laws may negatively impact women in Canada, since Islamic family law gives some privileges (like certain inheritance and custody rights) to men. They also claim that having two legal codes in a country is unworkable. Supporters, like Syed Mumtaz Ali who helped found the tribunal, are quick to point out that Muslims are required to obey the laws of the country where they live, and Islamic law where possible. Such a court of arbitration is common in multicultural societies, say supporters. Muslims in the US and Britain, for example, have similar councils that render decisions routinely upheld by the courts and similar types of dispute resolution already exist for Canada's Jewish community.

Canada's Islamic Institute of Civil Justice was formed in October 2003 and begins reviewing disputes in Ontario with operations to potentially extend across Canada at a later time. The new institution has 30 members and will appoint and train arbitrators, primarily imams and religious scholars. (Sources: Globe and Mail, Reuters, and Islam Online)

Spain: Law Passed on Religious Education

In a story published by the New York Times in late December, it was reported that the administration of the current Spanish prime minister (José María Aznar) has passed a law to strengthen the presence of the Roman Catholic Church in Spain's schools. Under the law, students must take either a class each year in Roman Catholic dogma, or a secular class on world religions that, apparently, offers a more historical approach. In the past, an optional course on Roman Catholicism was offered during school hours, but was not graded. While the law is, no doubt, welcomed by many Catholics in Spain, some groups such as teachers' unions, parents' associations, and even regional governments have reportedly filed suit in Spain's Constitutional Court against this new law. These critics feel that religion should be taken out of public schools altogether.

It remains that approximately 94% of Spain's population is Catholic, although only about 20% of these attend church regularly, according to polls. While the Constitution provides for freedom of religion and indicates that there is no state religion, Catholicism is still the dominant religion in Spain and has a much closer relationship with the government than other faiths. This relationship was defined by four 1979 accords between Spain and the Holy See and cover economic, religious education, military and judicial matters. Minority religious faiths in Spain do complain that the Catholic church enjoys privileges not available to them, such as expanded tax exemptions, better media access, and fewer restrictions on opening places of worship. In the latter regard, there have been several recent incidents in the Catalonia region (near Barcelona) where residents have protested the construction of new mosques.

In late 2001, Spain was host to a UN conference entitled the 'International Consultative Conference on School Education in Relation to Freedom of Religion and Belief, Tolerance and Non-discrimination'. Because of the very different approaches of different countries to this topic, consensus by the international community at this forum was elusive. Nonetheless, the final document of the conference still urged education for religious tolerance. IARF sent a delegation to this conference in Madrid and produced a booklet of essays on 'Religious Education in Schools: Ideas and Experiences from around the World.' Click here to see these essays on-line. (Other Source: U.S. State Department)

Sri Lanka: Violence against Christians Escalates

Various media organisations report a rise in anti-Christian sentiment in Sri Lanka, with an estimated 91 attacks on Christians and churches in 2003 and over 40 incidents in the first two months of 2004. Several churches in some neighbourhoods have had to be provided with armed protection as there have been increasing attacks on places of worship. Among the incidents, a Roman Catholic church was set on fire near the capital of Colombo in mid-January. Many of the attacks are being carried out by mobs of militant Buddhist monks, who claim that Christian groups are trying to convert Buddhists by exploiting their poverty. Anger has mostly been directed toward evangelical churches, which make up a minority of the Christian community. Sri Lanka's population is approximately 70% Buddhist, 15% Hindu, 7.5% Muslim and 7.5% Christian.

Some of the recent violence arose over the natural death in December of a popular Buddhist monk (Ven. Gangodawila Soma Thero) who preached against conversions to Christianity. His funeral drew thousands of mourners. As part of the response to his death, Buddhist priests are pushing for new anti-conversion legislation and staged a large demonstration in the capital in late January. Since then, a group of Buddhist & Hindu organisations have prepared a draft bill which would severely curtail 'unethical conversions.' At a press conference in mid-February, the Buddhist-Hindu committee said that their proposed bill would prohibit all actions impairing freedom of religion of any person by coercion or allurement and 'proselytising' would become a punishable offence. Christians in Sri Lanka fear that such legislation would simply legitimise attacks on them. The appeal for anti-conversion legislation in Sri Lanka has reportedly been developing over the past year and is modelled on legislation that has been introduced in five states in neighbouring India.

Some believe that Sinhala nationalist parties are using the issue to generate political support from the Buddhist community. The government, however, is reportedly quite concerned about these developments and is setting up all-religions peace committees at provincial and district levels. These committees are to be comprised of representatives of all religions and are meant to help defuse current religious tensions. (Sources: One World, Reuters, AFP, Sri Lanka Daily Mirror, Worldwide Religion News, and Christian Solidarity Worldwide)

United States: Supreme Court Allows Denial of Theology Scholarships

In late February, the US Supreme Court ruled 7-2 to let states withhold taxpayer funded scholarships from students studying theology. While it doesn't prohibit such funding altogether, the ruling means that any decision a state may take to deny such scholarships to students would not run afoul of the US Constitution. Currently, 37 states already have bans that prohibit state funding of religious education in colleges and universities. The plaintiffs bringing the case, however, argued that refusing to give scholarships to students for studying religious topics infringed on the First Amendment right to practice religion.

The case was originally brought by a student (Joshua Davey) in Washington state who was denied a state merit scholarship that was available to students studying other subjects. The Bush Administration supported Davey's position and argued that states could not discriminate against religious education. Supporters of Davey's view noted that allowing states to subsidise a wide variety of other course, but not religion, was discriminatory and that students had a right to be treated equally. The lawyer for the Bush Administration, Theodore Olson, noted that "this is the plainest form of religious discrimination, where only a student studying religion is excluded from a state program available to anyone else."

Despite this argument, Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote for the majority of the Supreme Court: "The State of Washington established the Promise Scholarship Program to assist academically gifted students with postsecondary education expenses. In accordance with the State Constitution, students may not use the scholarship at an institution where they are pursuing a degree in devotional theology. We hold that such an exclusion from an otherwise inclusive aid program does not violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment." Not surprisingly, church-state separationists hailed the decision of the Court. Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said, "This (ruling) maintains an important barrier to efforts to fund school vouchers and other faith-based programs. Americans clearly have a right to practice their religion, but they can't demand that the government pay for it."

The Supreme Court decision followed an earlier decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled in 2002 that Washington State engaged in religious discrimination when it offered state aid for secular education but denied it for religious education. The state of Washington asked the Supreme Court to hear the case and it agreed to do so last May. (Other Sources: Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, Washington Post, and Associated Press.)