wfn.org | NCCCUSA June 2, 1998, on Religious

[CAROL_FOUKE.parti@ecunet.org (CAROL FOUKE)]

Persecution
National Council of the Churches of Christ in the 
U.S.A.
Contact: NCC News, 212-870-2227
Email: news@ncccusa.org
57NCC6/8/98            FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
NCC JUNE 2, 1998, COMMENT, 
PROPOSED PERSECUTION LEGISLATION
Religious persecution is a scourge that has 
afflicted humankind for most of its history.  With 
varying degrees of intensity, persons of faith have 
been subjected to discrimination, imprisonment and, 
in some cases, torture and death.  In religious 
terms, where the powers of the world claim for 
themselves what is finally God's sovereignty, 
believers are unavoidably in jeopardy.
At the close of the bloodiest century in history, it 
is fitting that Congress would turn its attention 
toward the goal of reducing, if not eliminating, 
this most fundamental violation of human rights.
Legislation has now been introduced in both chambers 
of Congress (and passed by the House) that is 
intended to alleviate the suffering of persons 
around the globe who wish to exercise their God-
given right to worship as they see fit.  
Representatives Frank Wolf, Ben Gilman, Christopher 
Smith and Lee Hamilton as well as Senators Arlin 
Specter, Don Nickles, Joseph Lieberman and Connie 
Mack are to be commended for their roles in guiding 
this legislative effort.  Religious groups, such as 
the National Association of Evangelicals, also 
deserve credit for placing the issue of religious 
persecution at the top of the nation's moral agenda.
The National Council of the Churches of Christ in 
the U.S.A. (NCCC) has worked to ensure that any 
proposed legislation has the intended result of 
actually reducing the incidence of religious 
persecution as well as improving the lot of those 
who are the victims.  Many of the concerns raised by 
the NCCC have been addressed, but questions remain.  
We hope these questions will continue to be explored 
honestly and openly as our government seeks to craft 
an appropriate response to this pressing 
international concern.  In particular, we hope to 
ensure that the faith communities most affected by 
the proposed legislation have an opportunity to be 
heard.  To that end, we are in communication with 
our overseas partners and missionary leaders and are 
making them accessible to members of Congress and to 
the press.
After much thought, prayer and deliberation, we 
offer the following suggestions to those desiring to 
pass legislation that addresses religious 
persecution:
1.  Violations of human rights abroad are best 
addressed through multilateral efforts.  A 
unilateral response is often ineffective and 
counter-productive.  Further, unilateral action 
may destroy America's ability to participate in 
development efforts that improve life for the poor 
and alleviate the conditions that give rise to 
various human rights abuses including religious 
persecution.
Comment:  One of the biggest weaknesses of both the 
House and Senate bills is the failure to provide 
real support and encouragement for multilateral 
efforts.  Unfortunately, the opportunity to amend 
the House bill has been lost, but modest changes in 
the Senate bill could help to ensure that it will 
have the intended effect of actually reducing 
religious persecution.  First, Section 401 or 403 of 
the "International Religious Freedom Act" (IRFA) 
could be amended to require the Secretary of State 
to seek multilateral support before unilateral 
sanctions are imposed.  Another possibility is to 
provide additional funds to the United Nations 
earmarked for international tribunals that could 
hear charges of religious persecution.  Finally, the 
30 day delay before the imposition of sanctions 
under Section 409 could be extended in order to 
allow for diplomacy as well as for multilateral 
efforts.
2.  Appropriate training for government personnel as 
well as more thorough investigation and reporting 
is likely to reduce the incidence of religious 
persecution.  

Comment:  These sections of both the House and 
Senate bills are adequate.

3.  Sanctions should be a matter of thoughtful last 
resort, not automatic first resort.  As indicated 
above, multilateral participation in invoking of 
sanctions is the desirable strategy.

Comment: Obviously, the House bill is flawed in this 
regard.  The Senate bill, on the other hand, has 
more flexibility.  However, to ensure that IRFA 
meets its intended goal, Section 401 should be 
amended in two ways.  First, the Secretary of State 
should be required to review the Commission on 
International Religious Persecution's 
recommendations before they are passed on to the 
President.  This may be intended by the sponsors, 
but it is unclear from the text of the bill.  
Second, and more importantly, the President should 
be required to make a finding that any sanctions 
recommended by the Commission are likely to help 
rather than hinder the plight of the victims before 
any sanctions are imposed.  This decision could be 
subject to congressional review under Section 409 as 
with other decisions of the President under Title IV 
of the bill.

4.  Care should be exercised so that traditions and 
cultures of other nations are respected.  Although 
we cherish and affirm the principles of the First 
Amendment as the best mechanism for protecting 
religious liberty, we recognize that they are 
rooted in western philosophical, political and 
religious thought.  We should not seek to impose 
the American arrangement on others.  This includes 
respecting the traditions of established religions 
and churches common to European as well as Islamic 
nations.  America's response to religious 
persecution must not be perceived as "anti-
Islamic."

Comment: Section 3 of IRFA should be modified in 
accordance with suggestions by the State Department 
to ensure that the bill will not sweep into its 
reach every nation that has an established religion 
or that practices some form of discrimination.  
Casting the net too widely is likely to strain 
relations with numerous nations at different places 
on the religious freedom spectrum and could actually 
reduce religious freedom as well as diminish 
opportunities for missions organizations 
headquartered in the United States.

5.  Steps should be taken to ensure that the issue of 
religious freedom is not further politicized.   
Making the State Department rather than the White 
House the locus of our overseas efforts is one 
means of encouraging this.  Annual showdowns 
between the President and the Congress over 
appropriate responses to the actions of a 
particular nation should be avoided.  
Disagreements over responsive action should not 
become the basis for partisan wrangling.  
Meaningful review by the Secretary of State should 
be part of any effective strategy for combating 
religious persecution.

Comment:  Decisions to move the locus of persecution 
monitoring from the White House to the State 
Department helped to "de-politicize" proposed 
federal legislation.  The issuance of a separate, 
annual report on religious persecution (Section 6 of 
the "Freedom From Religious Persecution Act" and 
Section 102(b) of the "International Religious -
Freedom Act") may, however, serve to politicize the 
issue in a manner that actually harms overseas faith 
communities as Democrats and Republicans seek to use 
the annual event for domestic political gain.  The 
suggestion simply to fold the religious persecution 
report into existing human rights reports should be 
considered.

By subjecting any proposed legislation to these five 
principles, members of Congress can help to ensure 
it will have the intended result and that it will 
enjoy the support of the broad spectrum of America's 
faith communities.

-end-
 -0-