Chairman ZABLOCKI. The time of the gentleman from Illinois has expired. The Chair would like to note that we have two other pieces of legislation to consider. Obviously, this is not an all-inclusive resolution. I would suggest, therefore, that the subcommittee chairman withdraw House Resolution 433, and prepare a simple so-called generic resolution on the issue which we will consider at some future date. Mr. BONKER. Mr. Chairman. Chairman ZABLOCKI. The gentleman from Washington. Mr. BONKER. Mr. Chairman, I would ask unanimous consent to delete all the whereas clauses beginning on page 2, beginning with "Whereas in Iran, the Baha'i community," and through page 3 to line 1. I would also request that the report language, if there is a report prepared to accompany this legislation, would note the countries which were the subject of hearings by the subcommittee on the problem of religious persecution. Chairman ZABLOCKI. The Chair would like to note that if the gentleman, by amendment, strikes the whereas clauses on the pages he has indicated, it would be the Chair's preference that the gentleman introduce a new House concurrent resolution, a clean bill, because we would have the very same discussion we are having here in committee if it were an amendment which would strike just certain clauses. Is it the intention of the gentleman from Washington to introduce a clean bill? Mr. BONKER. Mr. Chairman, if we just delete the whereas clauses to which I referred, it is a clean bill. Chairman ZABLOCKI. No; the amendment will show the language in the bill as now printed, with an amendment striking the whereas clauses in question. You would still have all the countries mentioned, and the discussion on the floor would therefore be along the same lines as the current committee debate. Mr. BONKER. I understand what the chairman is saying. Chairman ZABLOCKI. We would not have to call another meeting because we have already discussed this. The committee could be discharged by unanimous consent. Mr. FASCELL. Mr. Chairman. Chairman ZABLOCKI. The gentleman from Florida. Mr. FASCELL. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that we act on this bill as if it were a clean bill, and allow the chairman to sponsor a clean bill and get a number, and the action of the committee on the bill before us be tantamount to action on the clean bill with a new number. Chairman ZABLOCKI. Is there objection? Mr. DERWINSKI. I think that is a very practical suggestion. The question occurs on the House Concurrent Resolution 433, which will be reassigned a new number as a clean bill, striking the whereas clauses as indicated by the gentleman from Washington. All those in favor signify by saying "aye." [Chorus of "ayes."] Chairman ZABLOCKI. Opposed, "no." [No response.] Chairman ZABLOCKI. The "ayes" have it, and a clean bill is approved.1 [Whereupon, the committee proceeded in consideration of other business.] 1 The new bill, H. Con. Res. 434, passed the House of Representatives on Dec. 17, 1982. See app. 27 for text of resolution. RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION AS A VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS National and International Remedies TUESDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1982 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 11:40 a.m., in room 2255, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Don Bonker (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. BONKER. The Subcommittee on Human Rights and International Organizations will come to order. I would like to apologize for the delay. Whenever the full Foreign Affairs Committee is in session, subcommittees cannot meet. It is a committee rule, so we had no other choice than to delay this morning's hearing until after the full committee had concluded its work. The subcommittee today is taking up the last in a series of hearings on the subject of religious persecution. We have attempted over the course of the last two sessions of Congress to take a different approach to human rights. We have tried to identify the various contributing factors to human rights violations so that as a government, we can focus more acutely on what constitutes human rights violations. In the last session of the Congress, with the help of Mr. Shestack, we identified disappearances as a human rights violation. That resulted in the passage of a congressional resolution which directed our delegation to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights to set up a working group, which has been very effective in dealing with that problem. We also included disappearances as part of the basic description as to what constitutes a human rights violation in both sections 502B and 116 of the Foreign Assistance Act. Let me note that we attempted at the outset of these hearings to narrow the scope of this subject. We recognized that we could get into questions of religious freedom, religious intolerance, and into all kinds of areas. In focusing on religious discrimination and persecution, we wanted to find those instances where people were victims of repression solely because of their religious beliefs. As a result, we have had a chance to focus on places like Iran where the Baha'i faith is experiencing ongoing repression over a period of 138 years. We have looked at the Copts in Egypt. We have looked at the church in Latin America, Presbyterians in certain Asian countries, Christians and Jews in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. We really feel we have been fairly comprehensive in these hearings in trying to identify those instances or areas where religious persecution is an acute problem. Finally, the Foreign Affairs Committee this morning passed our resolution which was adopted by the subcommittee a few weeks ago in anticipation of trying to get final action before this lame duck session expires-if it ever does-the resolution on religious persecution. The resolution notes international treaties and other documents concerning religious freedom. It also cited those instances to which I just referred where the subcommittee has identified problems of religious persecution. The operative sections of the resolution would direct the President to do all he can at international forums, specifically the United Nations to bring more attention to religious persecution. It mandates our delegation at the U.N. Commission on Human Rights to set up a working group on this problem. Unfortunately, some on the committee objected to a "whereas" clause which identified the problems of the Coptic Christians in Egypt. They argued that the clause would bring ill will to our relationship with President Mubarak of Egypt, so there was an effort to remove that provision. I countered with another amendment which suggested that we remove all "whereas" clauses which made reference to any country. That amendment passed and it is my hope that the full House will take up this resolution during the week. 1 This session today is very important in that we want to explore ways in which we can be effective on the problem of religious persecution. The panelists are all very experienced in this area. If we come up with any new ideas, we still have the opportunity of maybe amending the resolution on the floor or going into the Senate for concurrent action so we can expand the resolution. In any case, we are looking forward to your testimony on this our final hearing on the problems of religious persecution. [Mr. Bonker's prepared statement follows:] PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DON BONKER, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS This is the ninth and final hearing in the series on the subject of religious persecution as a violation of human rights. Over the past year, the Subcommittee has heard dozens of expert witnesses on the problem of religious persecution around the world. They gave detailed testimony as to the desperate situation of the Baha'is in Iran, the Church in Latin America, Jews and Christians in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, Presbyterians and other Christians in Asia, the Copts in Egypt, and the Falasha Jews in Ethiopia. From all the available evidence presented to the subcommittee there can be no doubt that the free exercise of religion is limited in most parts of the world. Discrimination, imprisonment, torture and death are often the price that are paid for one's religious belief. At its last hearing, the Subcommittee considered and passed a comprehensive resolution condemning all forms of religious persecution and discrimination as a violation of human rights. The resolution, which was adopted by the Foreign Affairs Committee this morning, cites numerous references to the fundamental right of reli 1 House Concurrent Resolution 434 passed the House on December 17, 1982. See app. 27 for text of resolution. gious freedom in international and national laws. It calls upon the President and other official representatives of the United States to work for the establishment of a working group on the elimination of all forms of religious persecution and discrimination at the 39th session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. It is my expectation that the full House will take up this important resolution during the week. As the Subcommittee examined the various instances of worldwide religious persecution around the world, we were continually faced with the question: What can the American people and their government do to pressure foreign governments to allow the free practice of religion or belief? How do we help those individuals to immigrate to countries which will allow them to worship freely? It is unlikely that the United States can end religious persecution but we can make the issue an integral part of our foreign policy. If America is to remain faithful to her past and the values inherent in those documents which formed this great democracy, then we must stand for religious freedom and human rights in the many countries that still abuse their citizens. Religious freedom is synonymous with the protection and promotion of human rights. This morning we are priviledged to have with us three distingiushed witnesses to assist us in addressing national and international remedies to the problem of religious persecution. Mr. BONKER. We shall begin with the former head of our delegation to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights during the 36th session, Mr. Jerome Shestack, who is now president of the International League for Human Rights. Jerry is a very noted leader in this important area and in the field of human rights and no stranger before our subcommittee. Jerry, it is always a pleasure to have you appear before the subcommittee. We are always enriched by what you have to say. We look forward to your testimony this morning. STATEMENT OF JEROME SHESTACK, FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE TO THE U.N. COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Mr. SHESTACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. May I begin by congratulating you on your reelection, which is a tribute to your ability and also to the good sense of the voters of Washington State. I might say at this point in exercising the kind of nostalgia one encounters, at this time of year that when you first became chairman of this subcommittee, many in the human rights community wondered what you would be like, since you were following a very distinguished predecessor. And we have found that your decency and commitment to human rights, your willingness to take initiatives, your courage in the face of opposition, have been a real boon to the Human Rights Committee and to the human rights community. Speaking as one representative of that community, we congratulate you on your achievements and are glad to consider you a friend of human rights. Mr. BONKER. Thank you, Mr. Shestack. Mr. SHESTACK. I am going to speak today on measures to improve the effectiveness of the new Declaration Against Religious Intolerance which was adopted last year at the United Nations. I have a prepared statement, and with your permission, Mr. Chairman, I shall submit that statement and considerably abbreviate my testimony before the subcommittee today. Mr. BONKER. Without objection, Mr. Shestack's statement will be 'placed in the record. |