This letter sent by U.S. religious leaders to all Members of Congress on Oct. 2, 1997, remains relevant in Spring 1998 to the debate in Congress around issues of religious persecution. The letter clearly spells out what we see as essential elements in any legislation related to religious persecution, and measures we believe would be counterproductive.
Dear Senator/Representative:
The Wolf/Specter bill, the "Freedom From Religious Persecution Act" (now H.R. 2431/S. 772), is moving rapidly through the House. This bill calls attention to a serious international problem and we commend Senator Specter and Representative Wolf for bringing this issue to the forefront of the nation's legislative agenda. However, we are extremely concerned that the bill, as drafted, offers some actions which will do more harm than good, particularly to Christians and those of other religious communities abroad facing persecution.
Religious persecution is an important problem which our churches and faith groups have long addressed. As Christians we are hard pressed to think of any time in the last 2,000 years when some Christians did not face persecution in one country or another, and persecution just in this century has been widespread and horrible. Jews, Muslims, and other faith groups have also faced horrible persecution, including unbelievable and inhuman outrages in this century.
We very much appreciate the new energy from both evangelical Christian groups and Congress which calls attention to the pain of this issue and to the need to seek fresh solutions. The time is ripe for deeper examination of religious persecution and ways to address it.
We believe that any legislation addressing religious persecution must:
* Treat persecution against all religious groups as extremely serious, and refrain from any hint that persecution against any specific religious group is somehow more important or less important than other religious persecution.
* Provide a definition of religious persecution broad enough to recognize both the overt and the subtle ways in which religious persons and communities experience both hostility and limitation on religious freedom. (See the 1981 United Nations Declaration on the elimination of all forms of intolerance and discrimination based on religion.)
* Treat religious persecution in the broader context of all human rights abuses, avoiding any hierarchy of human suffering or abuse of rights.
* Provide for imposing sanctions only when the varying contexts have been taken into account and other avenues of amelioration have been appropriately pursued. We especially believe that the imposition of sanctions needs to be informed by the wisdom and overwhelming wishes of those facing persecution with some idea of what measures will help or hurt. Extreme care must be taken that any proposed solution addressing religious persecution does not do more harm than good, and provides for humanitarian exemptions.
* Pursue multilateral responses and penalties in addressing persecution, including religious persecution. Attention should be given to this issue at meetings of the United Nations Human Rights Commission where compliance with article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is regularly reviewed.
* Keep the coordination of U.S. government action addressing religious persecution within the State Department. Existing human rights work within the State Department should be strengthened and the position of Ambassador-at-large for Religious Freedom should be created.
* Provide for better reporting of religious persecution and better training of U.S. personnel in relating to religious communities abroad and in addressing religious persecution effectively.
* Provide more responsible asylum provisions for victims of religious persecution and other forms of human rights persecution. Because so much progress in addressing religious persecution and other forms of human rights abuses could be made in this area, separate legislation beyond any religious persecution bill is probably needed.
* Provide assistance for poverty reduction and sustainable development in an effort to reduce the social conditions which foster religious persecution.
Each of our churches and faith groups has long associations with partners overseas who are suffering from persecution. Each has worked for years in solidarity with these persecuted partners to address their suffering. Based on this interaction with persecuted faith groups that would be affected by this bill, it is our assessment that, as currently drafted, the bill would do more harm than good to the very people that it is designed to help. We are disturbed with some of the provisions in the original Wolf/Specter bill, which even now appear to be moving forward in the House, particularly those related to the use of sanctions.
The sanctions which are in this bill are unacceptable as drafted. Some of the problems include that:
* They single out Christian and a few other faith groups in a way that will only open up and make worse old wounds between various faith groups.
* They call attention to some forms of human rights abuses in a way that creates an unhelpful hierarchy of human rights abuses, actually undercutting current human rights standards that are stronger. [i.e., existing United Nations human rights conventions, etc.]
* They are much too blunt, automatic, and thus inflexible, and do not take into consideration the actual context of persecuted persons and faith groups abroad.
We are not opposed to the use of sanctions when those sanctions are supported by a preponderant number of those facing or experiencing persecution and when other methods of correction and redress fail. Sometimes our overseas partners have called for sanctions, and we have not hesitated to press for them. The decades of work by the religious community, in partnership and solidarity with our South African colleagues, is a prime example. But sometimes our overseas partners explain to us in detail why sanctions would do more harm than good. These conversations are often very persuasive to us and are critical for the formation of effective policies.
Because such widespread attention has been drawn to this issue, for which we are grateful, we will work diligently for legislation that embodies the elements stated herein. We look forward to working with many other groups who are also considering fresh approaches so that we may truly do something to address the terrible reality of persecution and to help, not harm, those being persecuted.
Sincerely,
The Rev. Dr. Joan Brown Campbell General Secretary National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A.
Curtis Ramsey-Lucas Director of Legislative Advocacy Office of Governmental Relations National Ministries, American Baptist Churches, U.S.A.
The Rev. Dr. James M. Dunn Executive Director Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs
David Radcliff Director Brethren Witness Church of the Brethren, General Board
Fr. Robert Brooks Director of Government Relations The Episcopal Church
The Rev. Russell O. Siler Director Lutheran Office for Governmental Affairs Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Florence C. Kimball Legislative Education Secretary Friends Committee on National Legislation
Dr. Ronald J.R. Mathies Executive Director Mennonite Central Committee
Lynette Y. Meck Executive Director Mennonite Central Committee, U.S.
The Rev. Elenora Giddings Ivory Director Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Washington Office
The Rev. Jay Lintner Director Washington Office United Church of Christ, Office for Church in Society
The Rev. Dr. Thom White Wolf Fassett General Secretary General Board of Church and Society The United Methodist Church
NCC Home Page
Religious Freedom and Persecution Main Page
NCC General Assembly