Category: News

Home Office cites Bible to deny asylum

Kaya Burgess, Religious Affairs Correspondent | Richard Ford, Home Correspondent
The Times March 22 2019

The Home Office refused asylum to an Iranian who converted from Islam to Christianity because, it said, Christianity was not a peaceful religion.

Immigration officials wrote to the man, who had converted to Christianity on the ground that it was a peaceful religion, citing violent passages from the Bible to support their claim. They said that the Book of Revelation was “filled with imagery of revenge, destruction, death and violence”.

The Church of England condemned the “lack of religious literacy” after the man said that he now faced persecution in Iran for his faith. Church officials called for a “serious overhaul” of Home Office policies.

The letter cited a passage from Leviticus in the Old Testament, which says: “You will pursue your enemies and they will fall by the sword before you.” It also referenced chapter ten of Matthew’s gospel, in which Jesus says: “I came not to send peace, but a sword.”

It said: “These examples are inconsistent with your claim that you converted to Christianity after discovering it is a ‘peaceful’ religion, as opposed to Islam which contains violence, rage and revenge.”

Nathan Stevens, an immigration caseworker who is also a Christian and is helping the unnamed asylum seeker with his appeal, shared the letter and said he was shocked by “this unbelievably offensive diatribe being used to justify a refusal of asylum”.

“Whatever your views on faith,” he said, “how can a government official arbitrarily pick bits out of a holy book and then use them to trash someone’s heartfelt reason for coming to a personal decision to follow another faith?”

The Bishop of Durham, the Right Rev Paul Butler, said in a statement shared on Twitter by the Archbishop of Canterbury: “I am extremely concerned that a government department could determine the future of another human being based on such a profound misunderstanding of the texts and practices of faith communities. To use extracts from the Book of Revelation to argue that Christianity is a violent religion is like arguing that a government report on the impact of climate change is advocating drought and flooding.”

A spokesman for the Home Office, which could not confirm whether the official who sent the letter had been reprimanded, said: “This letter is not in accordance with our policy approach to claims based on religious persecution, including conversions to a particular faith.

“We continue to work closely with key partners . . . to improve our policy guidance and training provided to asylum decision-makers so that we approach claims involving religious conversion in the appropriate way.”

The bishop said: “The fact that these comments were made at all suggests the problem goes deeper than a lack of religious literacy among individual civil servants and indicates that the management structures and ethos of the Home Office, when dealing with cases with a religious dimension, need serious overhaul.”

Stephen Evans of the National Secular Society said that asylum decisions should be based on facts, adding: “It’s not the role of the Home Office to play theologian.”

Campaigners have complained of a “culture of disbelief” among officials dealing with asylum claims based on religious conversion.

A 2016 report from the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief said that Christian asylum seekers and converts were being asked “Bible trivia” questions. It warned that questions from crib sheets were a “very poor way of assessing a conversion asylum claim” and could result in wrong decisions and expensive appeals.

A report published yesterday by the Commons home affairs committee accused the Home Office of showing a “shockingly cavalier” attitude towards immigration detention, including a lack of sufficient judicial safeguards and failings when dealing with individual cases.

A spokeswoman for the Home Office said: “Detention is an important part of our immigration system — but it must be fair, humane and used only when absolutely necessary.” She added that most people detained were held only for “short periods” and that such people could not by law be held indefinitely.

Church of England response to Home Office letter regarding Iranian asylum seeker

21/03/2019

Speaking in response to the publication of an excerpt from a Home Office ‘reasons for refusal’ letter sent to a Christian convert who had applied for asylum The Bishop of Durham, Paul Butler said:

“I am extremely concerned that a Government department could determine the future of another human being based on such a profound misunderstanding of the texts and practices of faith communities. To use extracts from the Book of Revelation to argue that Christianity is a violent religion is like arguing that a Government report on the impact of Climate Change is advocating drought and flooding.

“It is good that the Home Office has recognised that this decision is inconsistent with its policies and that its staff need better training. But the fact that these comments were made at all suggests that the problem goes deeper than a lack of religious literacy among individual civil servants and indicates that the management structures and ethos of the Home Office, when dealing with cases with a religious dimension, need serious overhaul.

“I look forward to hearing what changes in training and practice follow from this worrying example.

“The Church of England has regularly raised the issue of the religious literacy of staff at all levels within the Home Office. This fresh case shows just how radically the Home Office needs to change in its understanding of all religious beliefs.”

The Bishop of Durham leads for the Bishops in the House of Lords on matters relating to immigration, asylum and refugees.

Comment from His Eminence Archbishop Angaelos, Coptic Orthodox Archbishop of London

21 March 2019

It is with great concern that I read reports from various sources yesterday regarding a letter from the Home Office rejecting an Iranian asylum seeker, and convert to Christianity, based on, at best a complete and utter misunderstanding and misrepresentation of Christian Scripture, and at worst an intentional manipulation of the text to justify the rejection of this vulnerable individual.

Home Office process and procedure on asylum issues, especially pertaining to religious converts, has been a source of ongoing conversation with the Home Office for a number of years. Through our Asylum Advocacy Group, which I founded and convene, we are working with the Home Office on a training programme due to be implemented within the coming months for case workers which takes into account incidents such as these, and many more like it.

This particular incident needs thorough investigation because while it has been accepted by a spokesperson from the Home Office as ‘not in accordance with our policy’, it must be determined whether this is merely out of misunderstanding or a proactive attempt to adversely affect the application of someone whose life may very literally be at risk. It must also be ascertained as to whether religious discrimination is at work, as there is no place for partiality within a Government that seeks to promote equality, and abides by Article 18 of the Declaration of Human Rights among other agreements.

We have been told on numerous occasions that the Home Office is not even in a position to ask whether an employee, case worker or contractor has any religious affiliation at all. Taking this into consideration, it now is astounding that such brash comments about a person’s religious belief can be made by an employee or contractor of that same institution.

Since yesterday, other examples have also arisen of similar malpractices when it comes to misrepresenting Scripture and rejecting asylum claims on those grounds, and so I do hope that these are also looked at in their entirety, and not a single case in isolation.

I look forward to our ongoing work with the Home Office as I commend the faithful and professional practice of the vast majority of Home Office staff and contractors.

Finally we must realise the extent of these actions, and that they have a bearing on people of faith who are potentially vulnerable in their state of origin, and vulnerable here in Britain as asylum seekers, and for this we must take great care to ensure that such violations do not go undetected or untreated.

The issue was discussed on BBC Radio 4 Sunday Programme, 24 March – listen now

London, England, Mar 25, 2019 (Catholic News Agency).- The British Home Office has agreed to reconsider the asylum claim of an Iranian Christian, after it was shown on Twitter that the department had denied the application on the grounds that Christianity is not a peaceful religion.

“The Home Office have agreed to withdraw their refusal and to reconsider our client’s asylum application, offering us a chance to submit further representations. A good start, but more change is needed”, the Iranian’s caseworker, Nathan Stevens, tweeted March 22.

Stevens added that he hopes “there will be real change though as it isn’t all about this one case; there’s a much wider problem to be addressed here.”

The immigration caseworker had tweeted photos March 19 of the Home Office’s letter explaining its reason for refusing the convert’s asylum claim, commenting: “I’ve seen a lot over the years, but even I was genuinely shocked to read this unbelievably offensive diatribe being used to justify a refusal of asylum.”

The asylum seeker had noted in his 2016 application that among his reasons for converting was that Christianity talks of “peace, forgiveness and kindness” while “in Islam there is violence rage and revenge.”

The refusal letter cited biblical passages, from Leviticus, Matthew, Exodus, and Revelation, which it said contradicted the asylum seeker’s claims: “These examples are inconsistent with your claim that you converted to Christianity after discovering it is a ‘peaceful’ religion,” the denial letter stated.

Stevens said: “Whatever your views on faith, how can a government official arbitrarily pick bits out of a holy book and then use them to trash someone’s heartfelt reason for coming to a personal decision to follow another faith?”

The Home Office, the British government department responsible for immigration, drugs policy, crime, fire, counter-terrorism, and policing, has said that the refusal letter is “not in accordance with our policy approach to claims based on religious persecution,” the Catholic Herald reported. It added that “we continue to work closely with key partners … to improve our policy guidance and training provided to asylum decision-makers.”

Sarah Teather, director of Jesuit Refugee Service UK, said March 21 that the refusal letter “is a particularly outrageous example of the reckless and facetious approach of the Home Office to determining life and death asylum cases – they appear willing to distort any aspect of reality in order to turn down a claim.”

“This case demonstrates the shocking illiteracy of Christianity within the Home Office … Here at JRS, we routinely encounter cases where asylum has been refused on spurious grounds.”

She added that “as this instance gains public attention, we need to remember it reflects a systematic problem and a deeper mindset of disbelief within the Home Office, and is not just an anomaly that can be explained away.”

Stephen Evans, CEO of the National Secular Society, commented on Twitter that it was “totally inappropriate” for the Home Office “to play theologian.” He added that “Decisions on the merits of an asylum appeal should be based on an assessment of the facts at hand – and not on the state’s interpretation of any given religion.”

Paul Butler, the Anglican Bishop of Durham, expressed “extreme concern” that the Home Office “could determine the future of another human being based on such a profound misunderstanding of the texts and practices of faith communities … that these comments were made at all suggests that the problem goes deeper than a lack of religious literacy among individual civil servants and indicates that the management structures and ethos of the Home Office, when dealing with cases with a religious dimension, need serious overhaul.”

Stevens has also noted that the refusal letter was part of a larger problem. He quoted in a March 20 tweet from another refusal that stated: “You affirmed in your AIR that Jesus is your saviour, but then claimed that He would not be able to save you from the Iranian regime. It is therefore considered that you have no conviction in your faith and your belief in Jesus is half-hearted.”

Shia Islam is the state religion of Iran, though several religious minorities are recognized and granted freedom of worship. However, conversion from Islam is strictly prohibited.

Open Doors UK said that 114 Christians were arrested in Iran in December 2018. Many of them were reportedly converts from Islam.

The US Commission on International Religious Freedom wrote in its 2018 report that “in the past year, religious freedom in Iran continued to deteriorate … with the government targeting Baha’is and Christian converts in particular.” It said that “Christian converts and house church leaders faced increasingly harsh sentencing: many were sentenced to at least 10 years in prison for their religious activities.”

Previous posts

GOVERNMENT BACKS FORB TRAINING COURSE FOR ASYLUM DECISION-MAKERS

October 15, 2018

House of Lords 15 October Baroness Berridge To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to improve the assessment by the Home Office of asylum applications made on the grounds of religious or belief based persecution. The Minister of … Continued

ASYLUM REPORT: INADEQUATE ASSESSMENT OF RELIGION-BASED CLAIMS

June 7, 2016

Can you name the twelve apostles? When is Pentecost? How many books are there in the Bible? Who betrayed Jesus to the Romans? These are some of the questions asked of asylum-seekers during their interview with the Home Office as … Continued

Policy paper

Independent review of FCO support for persecuted Christians, commissioned by the Foreign Secretary: terms of reference
Published 8 February 2019

Aim
The Review will map levels of persecution of and other discrimination against Christians in key countries around the world. It will provide an objective assessment of the impact and levels of FCO support and make recommendations in this regard. The Review will be presented to the Foreign Secretary.

Objectives
The objectives of the Review are to:

• Establish recent and continuing levels of persecution and other discriminatory treatment affecting Christian communities around the world, focusing on a number of key countries, and based on an assessment of the existing data, and identify trends and underlying social, ideological, political and historical drivers and causes;
• Analyse the range of persecution and other discrimination Christians suffer, their direct discrimination or targeting in law, employment, business, education and academia; discrimination due to social or cultural norms, especially with regard to gender inequality; or that resulting from insufficient protection in administrative, political or legal systems;
• Examine the treatment of and outcomes for affected Christians and the range and effectiveness of local and international responses, including that of regional and multilateral bodies;
• Provide an independent and objective assessment of FCO support, specifically whether the FCO offers appropriate and proportionate support for Christians, given the various religious minorities and discriminated groups facing threats; and
• Identify countries of most concern and/or where the UK has particular opportunities to influence.

Outputs and timing
The Review will take place over five months from the date of its launch (30 January 2019).

The first phase of the review, including a comprehensive assessment and analysis of existing evidence of the contemporary persecution of, and other discrimination against Christians to be incrementally published on the Review website, will conclude with an initial report to the Foreign Secretary in April 2019.

The second phase will assess the FCO’s current and recent response to the persecution of and other discriminatory behaviour against Christians in light of the above and report to the Foreign Secretary by 28 June 2019 with recommendations for a cohesive and comprehensive policy and operational response.

Both reports will be published by the Foreign Secretary. Information may be withheld from publication in the reports where required by law or where it is considered necessary in the public interest. The final report will be laid before Parliament.

Approach and conduct of the Review
The Review will be guided by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, with particular regard to Article 18 and related articles in the human rights treaties, acknowledging that all human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated.

The Review will draw on leading experts to promote engagement in a wide public consultation, enabling representation from across the global Christian community. This will enable direct engagement with key individuals, organisations and agencies both in the UK and abroad, ensuring that as comprehensive a global picture of the persecution of and other discrimination against Christians is established and available as a resource.

The Review will focus on a number of key countries (identified at the start of the Review) which reflect various situations of concern, contexts, and where the FCO might have most impact in reducing both direct and indirect persecution and discrimination. The Review will include visits to a number of focus countries as well as to relevant multilateral institutions.

Given the short timescale, the Review will draw extensively on existing available research and will make recommendations for future evidence gathering, where necessary. The Review will have a strong focus on evidence and consultation with a range of actors, including survivors/victims, civil society institutions, the diplomatic community, governmental and multilateral entities.

The Review will focus on the work of the FCO; other public authorities may wish to take note of the points of learning.

Freedom of religion

SIR – As persons with experience of international human rights protection over the past two decades, we welcome the commitment of greater diplomatic efforts in the human rights field – in this instance religious persecution.

Political responses to such violations fall well short of the scale of the global problem; and the determination of the Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt – who has commissioned a review into the persecution of Christians – to draw attention to this is timely.

Our observation is that couching this review even more broadly, and in the context of persecution against those of all religions and beliefs (including those of no religion), will greatly enhance its effectiveness internationally.

Seeking to protect some from persecution necessarily requires seeking to protect all from persecution. Upholding full enjoyment of freedom of religion or belief (which includes the freedom of worship) would enhance its enjoyment by all, whether believer, non-believer or ambivalent.

Britain can rightly draw attention to the inclusive nature of its diplomacy in advancing this freedom over many years. This is an opportunity for redoubling and reinforcing these efforts in the light of increasingly abhorrent violations.

Ahmed Shaheed
UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief

Nazila Ghanea
Associate Professor of International Human Rights Law, University of Oxford

Sir Malcolm Evans
Professor of International Law, Bristol University

The Sunday Telegraph, Letters, 10 February 2019

Open Doors 2019 World Watch List

23 January 2019

Lord Harries of Pentregarth
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking in response to Open Doors’ 2019 World Watch List of the 50 countries where Christians face the greatest persecution.

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon) (Con)
My Lords, the Government are deeply concerned about the severity of violations of the freedom of religion or belief in many parts of the world. We regularly raise our concerns at ministerial and senior levels. To ensure that the United Kingdom is supporting Christians in the best possible way, my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary has commissioned an independent global review into additional practical steps the Government can take to support persecuted Christians. The aim is for this review to make an initial report by Easter.

Lord Harries of Pentregarth (CB)
I thank the Minister for his reply and I very much welcome what the Government are doing, particularly through the Foreign Secretary. The right of people to freedom of religion or belief is absolutely fundamental, whether they are Muslim, Hindu or atheist, but does the Minister not agree that there is a particular crisis affecting Christians at the moment, with the number of countries in which Christians are suffering persecution at a very high level, having doubled in the past year? Does he not agree that it is particularly dismaying that India should now appear at number 10 on this list, just below Iran and above Syria? India has a very good constitution and sound laws, but because of the rise of nationalism, these laws are simply not being enforced. Will he convey to the Indian Government our deep dismay that India should appear on this list at all, let alone at number 10?

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
My Lords, I agree with the noble and right reverend Lord on the issue of persecuted Christians. Around the world today 245 million Christians in 50 countries have been identified as suffering persecution of varying levels. As the noble and right reverend Lord said, that has doubled over the last four or five years. Clearly, action is needed. This does not preclude the fact that we will continue our efforts, and it is right that we stand up for all persecuted communities around the world, including ​those of no faith. He mentioned India specifically. India is the largest democracy and has an inherent, vibrant and strong rule of law. I assure noble Lords that we will continue to make representations to all countries, including India, to ensure that equality and justice for all citizens in India are upheld according to its own constitution.

Baroness Berridge (Con)
My Lords, I too welcome the inquiry and the acknowledgment of the scale of the persecution. One practical step that the Government took was to create the Syrian vulnerable persons resettlement scheme to enable people to come to this country. However, the recent figures released show that in the second quarter of last year, only 0.08% of the people who came to the UK from Syria were Christians, despite over 11% of that population pre-civil war being Christians and being targeted by IS. Will my noble friend the Minister please meet with his colleagues at the Home Office to investigate the reason for this apparent disparity in the figures? Will he then communicate the reason clearly to the UK Christian community, who are left with reports from NGOs and even the Times saying that the Government are operating a discriminatory policy against Christians?

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
First, I assure my noble friend that there is no discrimination against Christians or indeed anyone of any faith. However, she does bring to light an important issue about the situation in Syria. I am acutely aware of the challenges being faced by Christians in Syria and which continue to be faced in Iraq. We have seen appalling crimes committed against the Christian communities, as well as others. The major challenge that remains for Syrian Christians is the exodus of anyone from Syria who is of the Christian faith. My noble friend raises an important point about the Home Office scheme. I will certainly raise that with Home Office colleagues. But I assure my noble friend, and, indeed, all noble Lords, that we remain absolutely committed to ensuring that we stand up for the rights of people of all faiths and none, be it domestically or internationally.

Baroness Brinton (LD)
My Lords, in order to develop an appropriate policy to help persecuted Christians and other religious or belief groups, it is vital to have accurate data about them. Can the Minister say whether Her Majesty’s Government have made any progress in developing a database across government that tracks violations of freedom of religion and belief, and other important data about religion or belief minorities?

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
My Lords, the noble Baroness raises a very important point. It is certainly something that I have been looking at very closely since my appointment last summer as the Prime Minister’s Special Envoy on Freedom of Religion or Belief. There are many sources that we currently utilise to determine the level of persecution of different communities around the world. Equally, we have strong partnerships with representatives and leaders of different communities around the world. But her case for having a comprehensive database is a valid one, and certainly we will be looking to see how we can validate data that is provided by communities and organisations such as Open Doors, ​to ensure that it is verifiable and that we can share it with key partners to ensure that the issues of persecution can be addressed.

Baroness Nye (Lab)
The Minister will know that the Burmese army responsible for the Rohingya genocide is also targeting other ethnic communities, including the 1.6 million Christians in Kachin State, as outlined in the watch list. The International Development Select Committee report stated that,

“there may be a fundamental problem with the peace process that the UK is supporting”.

Will the Minister say how government support for UK-Burma trade takes into account these deeply held concerns about the Burmese military’s involvement in these human rights abuses, which surely amount to crimes against humanity?

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
My Lords, we are all acutely aware of the tragic plight of the Rohingya community, and the noble Baroness rightly points out other persecuted minorities in Burma. I assure her that not just bilaterally but with key partners and most clearly through international co-operation at the United Nations, we have raised this issue consistently. I believe we have seen progress, at least in the framework of MoUs which have now been signed between the Burmese Government, the Bangladeshi Government and organisations including the United Nations. On the specific actions that have been taken, the noble Baroness will be aware that the United Kingdom, working with European partners, has raised the issue of targeted sanctions against leaders of the military, and they have been extended to other members of the Burmese military. We continue to look at this. Ultimately, we hope for the safe, secure and voluntary return of the Rohingya community and other persecuted minorities, but we are a long way from that being a reality.

Prime Minister’s Questions, 16 January                                                                                                            

Rehman Chishti (Gillingham and Rainham) (Con)
I very much welcome the recent statement by the Foreign Office that Britain must do more to support persecuted Christians. In the light of that, will the Government now review their position on the Asia Bibi case and offer her asylum in the UK, so she can choose a safe destination, instead of asking a third country to take her in? That would mean shifting our moral responsibility to another country, which cannot be right.

The Prime Minister
Share
I hope I can reassure my hon. Friend by saying that, as I have said previously, our primary concern is the safety and wellbeing of Asia Bibi and her family. Obviously, the UK’s high commissioner in Islamabad is keeping me and the Government up to date with developments. We have been in contact with international partners about our shared desire to see a swift and positive resolution in this case, and a number of countries are in discussions about a possible alternative destination for Asia Bibi once the legal process is complete. I will not comment on the details of that, however, because we do not want to compromise Asia Bibi’s long-term safety.

On the timing, I think the Foreign Minister of Pakistan has confirmed that Asia Bibi will remain under the protection of the Pakistani Government until the legal process has concluded, and the Prime Minister of Pakistan has supported the Supreme Court and promised to uphold the rule of law. What matters is providing for the safety and wellbeing of Asia Bibi and her family.

Persecution of Christians,  Oral Answers to Questions, Church Commissioners 17 January 2019 

Jeremy Lefroy (Stafford) (Con); Henry Smith (Crawley) (Con); Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con); Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con); Kevin Foster (Torbay) (Con); Diana Johnson (Kingston upon Hull North) (Lab)

To ask the right hon. Member for Meriden, representing the Church Commissioners, what (a) steps the Church of England is taking and (b) recent discussions the Church of England has had with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on tackling the persecution of Christians throughout the world.

The Second Church Estates Commissioner (Dame Caroline Spelman)
I do realise that the grouping of these questions will make it sound rather like Foreign Office questions for Christianity—but then, the Anglican Communion is the third largest global organisation in the world, after the United Nations and the Catholic Church.

The Church of England has regular discussions with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on freedom of religion and belief. I am pleased to announce to the House that the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for South West Surrey (Mr Hunt), invited the Bishop of Truro, before Christmas, to lead an independent review of UK Government support for persecuted Christians.

​Jeremy Lefroy
The number of Members who attended the meeting in the House yesterday about the Open Doors report shows just what huge interest there is in this issue. It was very disturbing to hear about the significant increase in the persecution of Christians, and indeed of people of other faiths, in the past year or two. Will my right hon. Friend ensure that as the report is compiled, the bishop will talk with as many Members as possible? We hear from our constituents and from around the world about individual cases of persecution.

Dame Caroline Spelman
I am delighted to give my hon. Friend that assurance. I, too, was really shocked by the report presented in Parliament yesterday, which shows that 40 countries out of the 50 on the Open Doors watch list are places where Christians experience very high or extreme levels of persecution. I shall go from this place to a meeting at the Foreign Office with the Foreign Secretary, as well as the bishop, and I will make that request directly to him.

Henry Smith
I am grateful to my right hon. Friend. I echo the remarks of my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Jeremy Lefroy) in welcoming the Open Doors “World Watch List” report, launched here in Parliament yesterday.

With regard to Commonwealth countries on the list, we heard, for example, some very harrowing reports of abuse against Christian communities in Nigeria. What effort can the Commonwealth side of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office make in helping to mitigate such persecution?

Dame Caroline Spelman
Nigeria is high up the Open Doors watch list of countries where Christians suffer persecution. I am sorry to say that in the past year 3,731 Christians were reported killed by the activity of extremists in Nigeria. As it is a former dependency of the United Kingdom, the Government ought to have some way of having greater influence. I know that the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is knowledgeable about Nigeria, uses every endeavour to bring pressure on the Government of Nigeria to better protect the Christians in their country.

Sir Desmond Swayne
What estimate has my right hon. Friend made of the willingness of International Development and Foreign Office Ministers to actually do something about the persecution of Christians and put it at the top of their priorities?

Dame Caroline Spelman
I am delighted to be able to tell the House that since the last set of Church Commissioners questions, the hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Helen Goodman) and I have paid a joint visit to a Minister of State at the Foreign Office to impress on him the importance of officials in the Foreign Office, the Department for International Development and other Government Departments, such as the Home Office, taking up the course for a better understanding of religious literacy. We were given assurances by the Minister that this would be impressed on officials.

Bob Blackman
I thank my right hon. Friend for her answers thus far. One area of the world where persecution is at its highest is Pakistan, where there have been a number of high profile cases. What is the Church doing to combat these terrible attacks on Christians, who just want to celebrate their religion?

​Dame Caroline Spelman
Pakistan is very high up on the Open Doors watch list of countries where Christians suffer persecution. I am sure that like me, my hon. Friend will have heard the case of Asia Bibi raised with the Prime Minister yesterday in the House. It is important not only that we look for a solution for her and her family that assures her protection, but that we remember that what we do on behalf of Christians in other countries can impact others around the world in the same way. The persecution of Christians in Pakistan is high on our agenda.

Kevin Foster
As has already been mentioned, yesterday saw the launch of the Open Doors “World Watch List 2019” here in Parliament. Can my right hon. Friend advise me of what use the Church of England makes of the analysis of the trends in the persecution of Christians across the globe in its discussions with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office?

Dame Caroline Spelman
Obviously the watch list is a useful guide to where the focus needs to be. The bishops take special interest in particular countries that are high up on that watch list. Bishops regularly pay visits to countries where Christians are persecuted. In fact, the bishop responsible for the plight of Christians in the middle east and Palestine is currently paying his regular annual visit to look at the decimation of the Christians in that region.

Diana Johnson
I was interested to hear that the right hon. Lady is about to meet the Secretary of State. He wrote over Christmas in The Daily Telegraph:

“It is not in our national character to turn a blind eye to suffering”,

and that the issue is about

“our deeds as well as our words.”

Will the right hon. Lady say something about the deeds she would like to see from the Foreign Secretary?

Dame Caroline Spelman
The Foreign Secretary has acted by bringing in a bishop—an independent person—to review the work of the Foreign Office in relation to the persecution of Christians abroad. Three areas will be assessed: the level of interaction between Churches and organisations overseas with British or foreign diplomatic missions in the protection of Christians; the experience of staff at the FCO, the Department for International Development and the Home Office, who may have been on the receiving end of approaches from Churches and other organisations seeking help for persecuted Christians; and the feedback of international organisations on British activities and an assessment of the approaches of other countries’ diplomatic missions to the persecution of Christians.

The UK All Party Parliamentary Group for International Freedom of Religion or Belief calls on Cuba to strengthen the protection of freedom of religion or belief in the country’s new constitution. The APPG also expresses concern about the harassment and intimidation of Cuban religious leaders and activists who are advocating for stronger protection of the right to freedom of religion or belief.

The draft constitution was produced in 2018 by Cuba’s National Assembly. It omitted several points of protection for freedom of religion or belief, as well as the words “freedom of conscience,” which had been included in the country’s previous constitution. The draft constitution also does not include language from Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Cuba signed in 2008, and which sets the international standard for the protection of freedom of religion or belief.

During the constitutional drafting process, there have been widespread reports of the harassment and intimidation of advocates of the right to freedom of religion or belief. CSW reports that currently two churches in Santiago and Havana are under threat of demolition.

Cuba’s Constitutional Commission is reviewing proposals for changes to the first draft of the new constitution. This follows months of public consultation. It is expected that the Commission will submit a revised draft for approval by the National Assembly in January. In February 2019, Cubans will vote on the new constitution through a public referendum.

The APPG urges the Cuban government to strengthen the protection of the right to freedom of religion or belief in the new Constitution by including freedom of conscience and language protecting freedom of religion or belief that is in line with international laws and standards. The APPG further calls on the UK Government to engage its Cuban counterparts on this issue and to encourage them to do all they can to protect Cuban religious leaders and activists from threats and harassment.

During the Christmas break Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt announced a global review into persecution of Christians: “I have asked the Rev’d Philip Mounstephen, Bishop of Truro, to lead an independent review of whether we are doing all we can. I would like this exercise to consider some tough questions and offer ambitious policy recommendations: Britain has – in my view – the best diplomatic network in the world, so how can we use that to encourage countries to provide proper security for minority groups under threat? Have we been generous enough in offering practical assistance, and does the level of UK support match the scale of the suffering? Have we always got our foreign policy priorities right in terms of advocating for and expressing solidarity with this group?”

In the Daily Telegraph, under the heading We must not allow a misguided political correctness to stop us from helping persecuted Christians he wrote “Yesterday my family and I walked a short journey to our local church, and enjoyed an uplifting Christmas service. We attend as a simple matter of personal choice, but since being appointed Foreign Secretary, it has struck me how much we take that choice for granted: others around the world are facing death, torture and imprisonment for that very right.”

With Christianity on the verge of extinction in its birthplace, it is time for concerted action that begins to turn the tide.

He concluded “Britain has a strong history of standing up for the rights of all religious communities. I am proud of the way the UK has led the world in condemnation of the ethnic cleansing of the Muslim Rohingya community in Burma; as well as our response of passionate anger to the recent resurgence of anti-Semitism in our own society. It is not in our national character to turn a blind eye to suffering. All religious minorities must be protected and the evidence demonstrates that in some countries, Christians face the greatest risk. We should be willing to state that simple fact – and adjust our policies accordingly… It is time to echo that message of hope to the persecuted church around the world; with our deeds as well as our words.”

While the Telegraph op ed emphasised that “So often the persecution of Christians is a telling early warning sign of the persecution of every minority,” there were criticisms of the focus on Christians:

Under the heading The pick-and-choose problem with the U.K.’s efforts to protect persecuted Christians H.A. Hellyer, a senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute in London and the Atlantic Council in Washington, wrote that it reflected “a trend in the United Kingdom and in Europe more generally, and a profoundly problematic one, too; at best, it apologizes for autocrats overseas, and at worst, it leads to condemning non-Christian refugees to die in boats in the Mediterranean Sea, while airlifting Christian ones to our lands… where Christians face problems overseas, they invariably do so in the context of autocratic rule, repressive policies and war. All of those issues are deeply felt by all in those regions – and that while there are specific challenges faced by minorities, including Christians, it is important to address them within the framework of addressing the lack of fundamental rights writ large. The rights and freedoms of Christians in those areas cannot be segmented away from other citizens living under repressive conditions, and it should be those conditions that define how we as a country respond. If we are selective about which vulnerable groups get our support, the likely end results range from ignoring other groups, to supporting repressive regimes.”

The Guardian stated that the report “will be specifically directed at the persecution of Christians, and not religious minorities in general, reflecting the foreign secretary’s view that since Christianity is the established faith in the UK, it is legitimate for the state resources to be devoted to the review.”

Lord Alton wrote Jeremy Hunt’s promised Foreign Office Review into Persecution will have no credibility if it simply seeks to justify the indifference that led to the mass graves of Nineveh.

Others welcomed the announcement. Ewelina Ochab wrote on Forbes.com “It is noteworthy that in countries where Christians are persecuted, they normally represent a minority group. It is also noticeable, that in many of these countries, other religious minorities are subject to persecution. Addressing the persecution of Christians will also help to address the persecution of other religious groups.”

But she underlined “The challenges faced by Christians around the world, not only those which manifest in mass atrocities, need urgent consideration and action. This independent review takes place very late but represents an important step taken to address the persecution of Christians worldwide, with potential benefit for other religious minorities as a result. Other states, and also international actors should follow in the footsteps of the UK.”

Benedict Rogers wrote on ConservativeHome.com “Hunt’s review of British policy on the persecution of Christians is crucial and courageous…  [it] is extremely welcome. We will see what comes out of the review when the Bishop of Truro, appointed to lead it, reports next Easter. I hope that at a minimum it will lead to the British government being more consistently outspoken, using its diplomatic networks to better defend persecuted Christians, ensuring our aid policy genuinely does not discriminate on religious grounds, for or against any religion, but recognises that faith-based aid groups can be part of the solution, and co-ordinates better with like-minded governments – particularly the United States Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom, the EU’s Special Envoy for Freedom of Religion or Belief and the UN Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Religion or Belief – to ensure that the crisis facing Christians worldwide is no longer ignored.”

In Ireland Michael Kelly was prompted to write his own op ed in the Irish Independent: Persecution of Christians is worse than at any time in history – and Ireland’s silence on it is shameful 

But there was an acidic response from Jules Gomes in FrontPage Magazine, headed Britain’s blindfolded investigation of persecution of Christians, arguing that “government reviews are instruments of inertia, damage control, public relations, virtue signaling, obfuscation and a surrogate for action.”

Having stated that “Britain has done little to help persecuted Christians since the 17th century,” he continued by accusing the current governemt of being itself anti-Christian: “In the first quarter of 2018, Britain refused to give asylum to a single Syrian Christian, but let in 1,112 Syrian Muslims…” He argues that the report is an attempt to draw attention away from the government’s refusal to offer asylum to Asia Bibi, and at odds with the government’s unwillingness to defend Christians facing persecution in the UK.

THE REPORT ON PERSECUTIONS OF CHRISTIANS was launched on 30 January
Foreign Secretary’s speech
Hunt: postcolonial guilt hindering fight against Christian persecution
Christian persecution inquiry not anti-Muslim, says head
The Foreign Office’s toothless review into Christian persecution
Jeremy Hunt hopes for international coalition to tackle poor levels of religious freedom
Terms of Reference
Questions: House of Commons
Questions: House of Lords
Foreign Secretary’s Lent message

Baroness Berridge
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the publication produced by the All-Party Parliamentary Group for International Freedom of Religion or Belief, Commentary on the State of Freedom of Religion or Belief; and what steps they are taking to mark International Human Rights Day.

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon) (Con)
My Lords, the British Government are deeply concerned about the severity of violations of freedom of religion or belief across many parts of the world. I am grateful to the APPG for producing such a comprehensive report highlighting the scale of the issue. We are marking International Human Rights Day with activities in the UK and overseas. Indeed, earlier today I hosted an event at the Foreign Office to mark the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Baroness Berridge
My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for his Answer. Although the APPG commentary deals with violations of freedom of religion or belief, International Human Rights Day allows us to draw attention to how interconnected many human rights are. Women from religious minorities in countries outlined in the report, such as Saudi Arabia, India and Myanmar, often face double discrimination for being not only women but from a religious minority. Can the Minister outline whether Her Majesty’s Government, in their country strategies on freedom of religion or belief, or in their research, look at gender discrimination alongside violations of freedom of religion or belief, which is the only way to help these groups of vulnerable women?

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
I am grateful to my noble friend for her work on the particular report and she is right to point out the important link between freedom of religion or belief and ensuring the rights of women and girls across the world. I am pleased to inform her that we continue to prioritise the issue of girls’ and women’s rights across all parts of the human rights agenda and all areas of British foreign policy. She will also be aware of our commitment to ensure 12 years of quality education for every girl across the world.

Baroness Northover (LD)
My Lords, on the subject of women’s rights, the Minister will be very familiar with Asia Bibi’s case. Surely there could not be a clearer case for asylum. There are rumours that the FCO and the Home Office wanted to grant her asylum, but it was blocked at higher levels. Is that so? When her case is considered again in January, will the United Kingdom Government be offering asylum if they possibly can?

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
As the noble Baroness will be aware from her time as a Minister in Her Majesty’s Government, we do not refer to specific cases. However, I can assure her that rumours are exactly that—rumours. She should not base any question on those. We are continuing to work with international partners to ensure that Asia Bibi’s safety and security is paramount. I can also assure her that, along with the Pakistani Government and our international partners, we are doing our utmost to ensure that that priority is not forgotten.

Lord Singh of Wimbledon (CB)
My Lords, does the Minister agree that our ritual listing of human rights abuses around the world is a little hypocritical when we turn a blind eye to human rights abuses carried out by trading partners in the Middle East and elsewhere? What sort of country are we becoming when a government Minister can say in public without criticism, “When we talk trade with China, we should not raise issues of human rights”?

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
I assure the noble Lord that I do not share that sentiment. This is important to me. I am proud of Britain remaining a bastion of human rights historically, currently and in the future, ensuring that we, along with our partners and friends, raise issues where there are human rights abuses. Sometimes that is done discreetly and effectively; sometimes we call them out publicly. That continues to be the case.

Lord Cashman (Lab)
My Lords, does the Minister agree that the defence of religious belief is paramount but, equally, that we should not go down the route of imposing religious belief and thereby using it to deny people their human rights in various parts of the world, not least in the 36 Commonwealth countries where religion is used as an excuse to deny lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people their rights?

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
First, I agree with the noble Lord on the issue of forcing anyone to believe anything. My role is not just that of freedom of religion envoy; I am the envoy for freedom of religion or belief. “Or belief” is an important part of my role, ensuring that discrimination against anyone, including the LGBT community, is kept at the forefront of the agenda. Indeed, as part of our celebrations of 70 years since the charter, we announced that we will co-chair the ERC with Argentina from June 2019.

The Lord Bishop of St Albans
My Lords, it is good to mark the significant progress we have made in 70th year of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but it is worrying that in many parts of the world those human right are being questioned and pushed back, even by some of our allies. What action are the Government taking to stand with Michelle Bachelet, the UN human rights chief, to “push back” on the push-back?

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
The right reverend Prelate is right to raise this issue. On reflection, 70 years since the declaration, here we are in 2018, seeing abuses of human rights across the piece. We have talked about gender, faith and LGBT rights, which remain important priorities for Her Majesty’s Government. We are working closely with the human rights commissioner, Michelle Bachelet. I have met her twice already, as has the Foreign Secretary, to reiterate our strong support for her priorities and agenda.

Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his response. I agree completely with the noble Baroness, Lady Berridge, about the connection between human rights and freedom of religious belief. When giving the Minister responsibility for this matter, the Prime Minister said that we would work with all societies and countries, particularly civil society. What discussion is taking place with faith groups about the issue raised by my noble friend? How can we get people to understand that human rights are fundamental across all groups?

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
The noble Lord is again right to raise that. On working with civil society groups, he will be aware that we recently announced £12 million of funding, for which I am grateful to colleagues in the Department for International Development, in support of freedom of religion or belief initiatives to help civil society organisations on the ground in some of the most challenging part of the world, exactly as the noble Lord articulated. LGBT rights, as well as other rights and gender equality, are an important priority. To give him another practical example, next year will mark the anniversary of my noble friend Lord Hague launching this initiative as the Prime Minister’s representative on preventing sexual violence in conflict. We will mark that by inviting faith leaders to stand together with those of no belief to prioritise the humanity that prevails in standing up for victims of sexual violence in conflict, because no religion, faith or belief sanctions it.

This debate is sourced from the uncorrected (rolling) version of Hansard and is subject to correction.

To mark Human Rights Day, the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the APPG for International Freedom of Religion or Belief has published a Commentary on the current state of Freedom of Religion or Belief.

This Commentary is unique. It is the first resource to be compiled collectively by the APPG’s 25 expert Stakeholder human rights and faith-based organisations who work on the right to Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) globally. Specifically timed to provide 27 up-to-date country profiles prior to the annual preparation of the FCO Human Rights and Democracy Report 2018, this Commentary includes 21 FCO ‘Human Rights Priority Countries’.

The Commentary provides a pithy analysis of the state of FoRB in the past year. It is designed to support a better understanding of, and in turn, better responses to, the tensions and drivers of conflict or violence in the countries in question. It is for use by all those working in the FCO and more widely in the field of human rights, including the right to FoRB.

The scale and intensity of violations worldwide has meant that FoRB has emerged as a critical issue of our time. Countries including the UK, USA, Canada, Germany and Denmark have begun to prioritise this in their work. The EU has created a new post to cover FoRB in addition to the Special Rapporteur at the UN.

The UK shares obligations with the global community to defend FoRB and other linked freedoms, which are recognised by the UK as contributing to strengthening the rules-based international order. Lord Ahmad, the FCO Minister of State for the UN and Commonwealth and the Prime Minister’s Special Envoy on FoRB stated In a speech in January 2018:

“The connection between religious tolerance and stable societies is another reason why we think promoting freedom of religion or belief is so important. There is clear evidence to suggest that tolerant and inclusive societies are better equipped to resist extremism. And most importantly, by ensuring that everyone can contribute, it makes society as a whole better.”

The APPG’s Commentary is a key step in raising awareness about violations of Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This Article enshrines the right to FoRB.

As well as the information contained here, the APPG has emphasised that it is vital that FCO Country Desk Officers and embassy staff receive the training and resource necessary to monitor, interpret and respond to FoRB violations in the country where they work. Ensuring that all FCO and DFID staff working in countries with high FoRB violations receive training would enable country strategies to address FoRB violations to be developed and pursued. The APPG hopes that on this 70th anniversary of the UDHR, these steps will now be taken.

Read the full commentary

Interview with Baroness Berridge on Radio 4 Sunday Programme 16 December 2018

The aim of the Wilton Park discussion this month was to explore how the delivery of humanitarian and development aid, underpinned by the rule of law and international norms, could better address the complex and contextual needs of religious minority groups in conflict and crisis settings.

The event explored how the needs assessment processes within humanitarian and development programming works in practice to identify members of vulnerable religious minority groups/ those excluded and evaluate how effectively those needs are being met.

It also engaged with how effective data gathering – including data disaggregated on religious identity as well as other marginalisation factors – can support more effective humanitarian and development response cross sector for vulnerable religious minorities.

This statement was issued after the event:

The Wilton Park statement on assisting religious minorities in humanitarian crises

The world is experiencing an extraordinary era of humanitarian crises, generating massive numbers of refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs). In this context, many vulnerable religious minorities face discrimination and restrictions in their places of origin, which can be seriously exacerbated by civil war and other social and political unrest. This is particularly evident where religious minorities remain within the borders of their own countries.

Religious identity itself often makes minority communities targets of violence and abuse during crises, which may compel them to flee conflict and persecution rather than to seek humanitarian assistance. The intersection between the chaos of crisis and religious minority status dramatically increases vulnerabilities, yet assistance providers, to date, have often been slow to recognise the significance of religion as a factor.

• Freedom of Religion or Belief lies at the heart of universal human rights. Furthermore, securing the integrity of religious communities safeguards pluralism, encourages multicultural awareness, reduces future vulnerabilities, provides spaces for spiritual and emotional needs to be met effectively in post-crisis environments, and, ultimately, promotes long-term stability and global peace. In short, the presence of minorities in full possession of their human rights, including religious freedom, is fundamental for producing stable and peaceful societies and is a powerful antidote to those seeking to produce future humanitarian crises.
• Though there is often a desire and commitment on the part of humanitarian actors to help all affected by crises, the needs of vulnerable religious minorities are often missed or inadequately addressed. It is possible that disparate and inadequate provision for minority communities may be the unfortunate result of systemic biases and discrimination, which may become more pronounced during times of chaos or crisis.

To address these challenges, an unprecedented gathering of human rights activists, humanitarian actors, representatives of governments and international organizations, and members of religious minority communities took place from 12-14 November 2018 at Wilton Park in the United Kingdom. The meeting discussed how the international community can better ensure delivery of humanitarian and development aid, underpinned by the rule of law and international norms, in a way that addresses the complex and contextual needs of religious minority groups in conflict and crisis settings.

The following key points emerged during the discussions:

• Humanitarian responses ought to be guided by the principles of humanity and impartiality. These principles call for the provision of assistance on the basis of need alone, ensuring that no one is unfairly excluded from receiving assistance. Although the principle of impartiality is vital to provide a person-centred approach, humanitarian practitioners may need to focus more intently on understanding the distinct needs and vulnerabilities of religious minorities in order to be effective; the extent to which a group identifies as a community needs to be understood in conflict responses; and more broadly to ensure ‘Do No Harm’ conflict-sensitive assistance.
• Humanitarian responses recognise the need to build resilience, conduct assessments, and improve the delivery of services for vulnerable populations and religious minorities. However, there is a dearth of creative approaches and tools to empower and protect populations made vulnerable as a result of their ethnic and religious diversity. To fulfil this need, leadership and policies are required at agency level to champion the inclusion of religious and ethnic minorities in responses.
• Humanitarian actors are faced with the challenge of providing vulnerable religious minorities protections in the midst of a programme paradigm that seeks to be blind to the faith of the recipients. While “need not creed” is a key humanitarian principle that guides service provision for all people regardless of their demographic identifiers, there are many cases where religious identity should be acknowledged as a part of the situational analysis, programme development and evaluation phases of humanitarian response.
• Vulnerability due to religious identity should be included in vulnerability criteria, particularly where religious identity has played a role in the conflict, and also where certain groups, such as converts, face a particular threat.
• Disaggregated data throughout (in needs assessments, monitoring of delivery, and final evaluations) can help humanitarian practitioners determine whether vulnerable groups and religious minorities most at risk are able to access and utilise humanitarian assistance. Given the risk of collecting sensitive information on religion and ethnicity, policies are needed to reduce the risk that this data might inadvertently further endanger vulnerable and marginalised religious communities.
• Increasing protection for religious minorities should be undertaken by means of a two-track approach. Decades of work on gender and disability demonstrate that, like religious minorities, women and people with disabilities often run a greater risk of neglect and discrimination during crises and conflicts.

Responses to this enhanced vulnerability have involved inclusive humanitarian and development policies including both (1) mainstreamed protections, and (2) targeted interventions to help prevent deep-rooted discrimination and exclusion.

• Assistance policies should more effectively encourage and facilitate the participation and partnership of local and national religious communities in determining specific needs of vulnerable religious minority individuals and communities. The inclusion of local religious leaders can also significantly strengthen humanitarian responses by challenging prejudice, reducing tensions along religious lines and promoting local engagement, thus enhancing the sustainability of humanitarian efforts and reducing the risks of future conflicts.
• Particular attention should be given to ways in which programme implementation can show faith-sensitivity to religious communities, to include working with them to equip and empower them. This includes considering culturally sensitive delivery mechanisms, for example in the context of protection issues such as trauma counselling and grievance processes. Humanitarian agencies should ensure religious minorities are represented within staffing, especially in sensitive settings such as refugee interviews.
• Finally, it is important for aid agencies to proactively include religious minorities in their communication strategies. Religious minorities need to know their rights and understand processes that relate to them, such as how to register as refugees, become aware of the international assistance that is being provided or be included in communications about political processes (such as returns, access to education and work). Religious minorities, as well as the wider population, benefit from transparency and accountability in the provision of aid and assistance, which will help to build the citizen-state contract, and the contract between citizens and humanitarian agencies.