a court ruled that the "religion" section on national identity cards can be left blank

TO BE NOTED: From the Guardian:

"Egypt's step towards freedom of belief

A court ruling that Egyptians will no longer be forced to pick from three approved religions is a crucial victory for equal rights

Comments (14)

• 
• • Brian Whitaker
  • guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 17 March 2009 15.30 GMT
  • Article history

Egypt took a small but important step towards freedom of belief and equal rights yesterday when a court ruled that the "religion" section on national identity cards can be left blank.

In 1995 the Egyptian government began introducing computerised ID cards which forced everyone to identify themselves as belonging to one of the three "heavenly" religions: Islam, Christianity or Judaism. Cards could not be issued to anyone who refused to accept this, with the result that they effectively became non-citizens, unable to work legally, study beyond secondary school, vote, operate a bank account, obtain a driver's licence, buy and sell property, collect a pension, or travel.

The practice of restricting religion on ID cards to three officially approved choices had no basis in Egyptian law but was derived from the interior ministry's own (possibly erroneous) interpretation of Islamic teaching. It was challenged in the courts by several members of the Baha'i faith, which is thought to have around 2,000 followers in Egypt.

The Baha'i originated in Iran during the 19th century and by the early 20th century also had a flourishing community in Egypt.

Although the Baha'i faith is often regarded as a heretical offshoot of Islam, the Egyptian community was initially tolerated, but its position worsened in the 1950s – partly because of its accidental connections with Israel. In 1868, after being banished from his native Persia, the founder of the faith, Baha'u'llah, was exiled with his family and a small band of followers to the Turkish penal colony of Acre. As a result of this, the faith's international headquarters was established in the Acre/Haifa area, which later became part of Israel.

In the 1960s, President Nasser issued a decree which, in effect, withdrew state recognition from the Baha'i community and confiscated their property. Nasser's decree was reaffirmed by the supreme court in 1975 in a ruling which said that only the three "revealed" religions were protected by the constitution: the Baha'is were entitled to their beliefs but practice of the Baha'i faith was a "threat to public order" and therefore fell outside the constitutional protection for freedom of religion.

Yesterday's victory by the Baha'is in the supreme administrative court appears to mark the end of a five-year battle over the ID cards, since there is no route for further appeals by the Islamist lawyers who have been fighting them since the government dropped out.

"The significance of [yesterday's] decision goes far beyond the direct remedy it provides for hundreds of Baha'i Egyptians who have been the immediate victims of this arbitrary and discriminatory government policy," said Hossam Bahgat, executive director of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights. "This final ruling is a major victory for all Egyptians fighting for a state where all citizens must enjoy equal rights regardless of their religion or belief."

Even so, there are likely to be continuing problems for Egyptian Christians, some of whom are recorded as Muslims on their ID cards against their will, while others try unsuccessfully to change their card after converting from Islam to Christianity. Officials often refuse on the grounds that the state cannot condone "apostasy".

Egypt is not alone in recording religion on ID cards – many countries do it, though it is an unnecessary invasion of privacy. It can also lead to discrimination when the holder is required to show it and in civil conflicts – Lebanon and Iraq, for example – it can put lives at risk.

As a United Nations special rapporteur noted in 2004:

The mention of religion on an identity card is a controversial issue and appears to be somewhat at variance with the freedom of religion or belief that is internationally recognised and protected. Moreover, even supposing that it was acceptable to mention religion on an identity card, it could only be claimed that the practice had any legitimacy whatsoever if it was non-discriminatory: to exclude any mention of religions other than Islam, Christianity or Judaism would appear to be a violation of international law.

Nine years ago, Greece had to remove religion from its ID cards to comply with EU rules on separation between church and state.

In Lebanon last month the interior minister issued a directive allowing citizens to have any reference to their religion removed from ID cards or civil registry records. Before that, everyone had been compelled to declare their allegiance to one of the 18 recognised faiths in Lebanon – contrary to the official policy of trying to eliminate sectarianism after the civil war.

Nadim Houry, a senior researcher for Human Rights Watch, who is based in Lebanon, said:

This is a step in the right direction, but the government needs to take the next step and ensure that all Lebanese can have access to personal status laws that are not religiously based and provide for equal treatment. Otherwise all Lebanese will continue to be forced to be officially members of specific religions and subject to their laws on key issues like marriage and inheritance."

Parents need to be with their children, not separated from them on the basis of prejudice and hatred.

From the Guardian:

• Comment is free Seven friends face revolutionary court

Baha'is' rights have often been violated in Iran; now, as pressure mounts on the government, activists' lives are being threatened

Comments (29)

• 
• • Nazila Ghanea
  • guardian.co.uk, Monday 16 February 2009 18.00 GMT
  • Article history

Fariba is a 46-year-old psychologist and a mother of three. She graduated from high school with honours but was barred from attending university because of her religious beliefs. Her youngest daughter is 14. I know her through her son, who studied for postgraduate qualification in the UK. Mahvash, 55, was a school principal before she was dismissed from public education. Vahid, 37, is an optician. He has a nine-year-old son. I am a parent too. Parents need to be with their children, not separated from them on the basis of prejudice and hatred.

Fariba, Mahvash and Vahid, in the face of tremendous challenges, have devoted their lives to serving the people of their country. Along with four other ordinary, decent citizens of Iran, they made up the membership of an informal committee attending to the needs of the 300,000-strong Baha'i community, the country's largest non-Muslim religious minority, after its formal administrative institutions were disbanded in 1983. The authorities were fully aware of their activities and had informal dealings with them. One could even say that their demands on the community necessitated the existence of this informal Baha'i representation.

The "seven friends in Iran", as they were known, were arrested in dawn raids last spring. Since that time, they have been detained without charge in Tehran's notorious Evin prison. No evidence against them has been brought to light, and they have been denied access to their legal counsel, the Nobel peace prize laureate Shirin Ebadi, who has been threatened, intimidated, and vilified in the news media since taking on their case.

Along with four of their colleagues, their lives may now be in danger. This week, it has been reported, will see a case against them sent to the revolutionary court in Tehran. They are accused of "espionage for Israel, insulting religious sanctities and propaganda against the Islamic Republic".

Such spurious allegations against the Baha'is are not new – but they are extremely serious. Even during the years prior to 1979 under the Shah, history has sadly shown that when Iran feels threatened, it inflames deep-rooted prejudice against Baha'is and other religious minorities to mobilise mass support. The Iranian government is well aware that, as articles of faith, Baha'is honour Islam as a divine religion, are obedient to the laws of the land and do not engage in political activity. The presence of their world headquarters in modern-day Israel is an historical consequence of the Persian and Ottoman authorities themselves banishing the faith's founder to the penal colony of Acre, 80 years before the state of Israel was formed.

Sixty years after the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, this case alone belies a contemptuous, continuing abuse by a sovereign government against one of its minorities. While such targeted violations are taking place within the context of pressures over all civil society organisations in Iran – including students, journalists, women's rights activists, lawyers groups, health practitioners, trade unions, and even the British Council last week – those against the Baha'is give rise to particular concern because of the systematic pattern of violations that are so regularly been resuscitated against them.

Non-discrimination on the basis of religion is fundamental to human rights. Freedom of religion or belief was recognised in international law long before the declaration, in 1948. It was subsequently captured in article 18 of that document, and expounded in article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the Islamic Republic of Iran has ratified. Non-discrimination is also upheld in tens of other international and regional standards, and indeed in Islamic law and custom as well. Freedom of religion or belief upholds the right of all, including the Baha'is in Iran, to have and to manifest the religion of their choice in worship, observance, practice and teaching. According to the 1981 UN declaration on the elimination of all forms of intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief, this implies the possibility of observing Baha'i holy days, the full operation of community life, teaching and education of the Baha'i faith in Iran and the free choice of all to join or leave its membership, the communication of Baha'is with their co-religionists inside and outside Iran and their establishment of community and charitable institutions. More pertinent to this present case, the freedom to train, appoint, elect or designate leaders is recognised, with the objective of facilitating for religious groups the conduct of their affairs. Yet further rights accrue due to the fact that Baha'is constitute a minority community, and in order to facilitate their continuity, development and full participation in society.

All of this could, sadly, not be more distant from the daily reality of the lives of Iranian Baha'is. As a UN expert committee once noted, even the dead in Iran cannot rest in peace. Baha'i cemetery desecrations don't just go unheeded, they take place under government supervision. Over 200 articles in the Kayhan over the past two years have attacked every aspect of the faith's history, personalities, beliefs and community life. Such messages are reinforced on television, in mass marches and in Friday sermons. Under government tutelage, the media serves to endanger their already highly curtailed existence.

The Baha'is have found a degree of solace and relief from the growing number of expressions of solidarity they receive from Iranians in the diaspora and even within Iran, the vast majority of whom are Muslim. Recently, a group of Iranian intellectuals, promoters of justice and champions of freedom, published an open letter (pdf) in which they stated that, as Iranians, they were ashamed of the oppression perpetrated against Baha'is in their homeland.

Within Iran itself, where defiance of the ideology of the government risks dire consequences, there are increasing incidents of Iranian Muslims challenging the mistreatment of their Baha'i compatriots. Students and schoolchildren have protested at the expulsion of Baha'is from several educational institutions, part of a government-sanctioned policy to deny Baha'is access to education purely on grounds of their beliefs. Even senior figures in the Shia religious establishment, notably Grand Ayatollah Montazeri, have stated publicly that Baha'is should have the rights of citizens and to live in Iran.

Meanwhile, seven innocent people are among the many awaiting judgment in Iran on their fate. Far from being a threat to state security, the Baha'is of Iran are deeply committed to the peaceful and prosperous development of their country. The facts demonstrate that they are persecuted purely for their religious beliefs. Time and again, they have been offered their freedom – and in some cases, their lives – if they recant their faith and convert to Islam. For more than a century, Baha'is have preferred to face the most extreme punishment rather than deny the very principles that guide their lives. They should not, however, be required to make that choice."

Me:

DonthelibertDem

16 Feb 09, 10:32pm (1 minute ago)

You know it's a strange world when, in a section entitled "Comment Is Free", people seem to be defending persecution as against freedom of belief.

The other thread is Jew Hatred. What does Israel have to do with problems in Iran? Why not quote Nigeria, Sudan, Rwanda, the Congo, Sri Lanka, Colombia,Pakistan, India, Turkey, etc. There should be one standard of human rights and war crimes, and each country or ethnic group or whatever should be compared against that. Period. Leave the other countries for another discussion. The question before us is the mistreatment of the Bahai in Iran, which is a clear violation of human rights. To argue otherwise is a logical fallacy called Poisoning The Well.