IV. Conclusion

The adoption of the Declaration will not magically cause such persecution to cease. Yet it is an important and fairly concrete standard to be applied when public or private appeals are made to governments, when complaints are aired in United Nations forums such as the Commission on Human Rights and the Subcommission on the Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. The United Nations may now turn its (not-so-speedy) attention to drafting a Convention to give treaty form, and perhaps even more detail, to the content of the Declaration. It may even include

in its next product some specific forms of enforcement procedure for dealing with religious persecution, analagous to the procedures in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Convention and the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In the meantime, vigilance is important. Religious persecution will never be eliminated un

less somebody takes the time to monitor what is going on and then speaks out.

FOOTNOTES

1. See Annex 1 for the text as adopted by the Third (Social,

Humanitarian and Cultural) Committee of the General Assembly

on 9 November 1981.

2. Clark, "The United Nations and Religious Freedom," 11 New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, 197, 220 (1978), reproduced as Annex 2. See further on the drafting of the Declaration Liskofsky, "Eliminating Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief: the U.N. Role," 8 Reports on the Foreign Scene (American Jewish Committee) (1968); Claydon, "The Treaty Protection of Religious Rights: U.N. Draft Convention on the Eliminations of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief," 12 Santa Clara Lawyer 403 (1972).

3. Cf. West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943) (requirement that Jehovah's Witnesses children salute flag held unconstitutional, overruling Court's prior contrary decision in Minersville School District v. Gobitis, 310 U.S. 586 (1940)) with Kachasu v. Attorney-General of Zambia, 10 Zambia Appeal Cases (1969) (requirement that Jehovah's Witnesses children salute flag "reasonably justifiable in a democratic society" and "required in the interests of defense and for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedoms of others.").

4. Note the difficulties discussed in, e.g., F. Spotts, The

Churches and Politics in Germany, 203-205 (1973).

57

5. The line between discrimination and intolerance is not a sharp

one.

"Discrimination" tends to be used to denote laws or practices which draw invidious distinctions (in this case on the basis of religion). For the most part, "intolerance" refers to unfavorable attitudes (prejudices, if you will) held by individuals or groups concerning other individuals or groups, often expressed by hostile public or private treatment of those others.

6. See Clark supra note 2, at notes 30 and 60.

7. See also the discussion of Article VIII of the Declaration,

infra.

8. The Declaration is not as forthright as it might be on the right to have religious organizations as such, or on educational institutions.

9. See, for example, two articles which appeared in Awake! Vol. 57, No. 20, 22 October 1976 entitled "Is the U.N. Maneuvering to Curb Religion?" and "Religion's Future Under U.N. Attack." The articles argue, inter alia, "The compromise third paragraph of the preamble says that one of the reasons for taking measures against intolerance is that 'the disregard and infringement of human rights and fundamental freedoms, in particular of the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief, have brought, directly or indirectly, wars and great suffering to mankind, especially where THEY serve as a means of foreign interference in the internal affairs of other States and amount to kindling hatred between peoples and nations.' (Capitals and italics added) If you are not sure what 'THEY' are that cause 'wars and great suffereing...foreign

interference...and amount to kindling hatred,' your confusion is just what the diplomats intended! Those who interpret the villainous 'THEY' to be 'disregard and infringement of human rights' can have their wish, while those who interpret 'THEY' to be religion or belief' can also have it their way." Id. at

4-5.

10. See discussion supra at note 6.

11. The best discussion of the historical material, as of the issue of religious discrimination in general, is Arcot Krishnaswami's Study of Discrimination in the Matter of Religious Rights and Practices published by the United Nations in 1960. It is now out of print but has been conveniently reprinted in 11 New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 227 (1978). 12. The Declaration is silent on the compatibility of freedom of religion and an established church. Drafts of the Declaration contained a provision, later simply dropped, that said: "Neither the establishment of a religion nor the recognition of a religion or belief by a State nor the separation of Church from State shall by itself be considered religious intolerance or discrimination on the ground of religion or belief..."

13. Krishnaswami, supra note 11 at 6.

14.

15.

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, con-
science and religion; this right includes freedom
to change his religion or belief, and freedom,
either alone or in community with others and in pub-
lic or private, to manifest his religion or belief
in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of
thought, conscience and religion. This right shall
include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or
belief of his choice, and freedom, either individu-
ally or in community with others and in public or

private, to manifest his religion or belief in wor-
ship, observance, practice and teaching.

2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would
impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion
or belief of his choice.

3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs
may be subject only to such limitations as are pre-
scribed by law and are necessary to protect public
safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental
rights and freedoms of others.

4. The States Parties to the present Covenant under-
take to have respect for the liberty of parents and,
when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the reli-
gious and moral education of their children in con-
formity with their own convictions.

16. See also the Part of the Final Act dealing with Co-operation
in Humanitarian and Other Fields, sec. 1(d): "They [the Par-
ticipating States] confirm that religious faiths, institutions
and organizations, practising within the constitutional frame-
work of participating States, and their representatives can,
in the field of their activities, have contacts and meetings
among themselves and exchange information."

17. See the numerous Reports of the Hearings Before the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe that discuss issues of religious rights.

18. "In Many Places It's Still Dangerous to Believe," A.D., publication of the United Presbyterian, April 1981.

19. The 1980 Report, for example, contains material relating to religious persecution in Ethiopia, Malawi, Zaire, Cuba, El Salvador, Republic of Korea, Philippines, Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, France, Greece, Romania, Spain, U.S.S.R. and

Egypt.

20. The 1981 Report contains material on persecution of one sort or another in about 45 countries.