Brexit: How travel to the European Union from 2021 will change

Technically the UK has left the European Union, but from the traveller’s point of view, nothing significant has changed during the transition phase. This comes to an end at 11pm GMT (midnight Western European Time) on 31 December 2020.

After that, life for British visitors to the EU becomes very different. The one exception is for Ireland, where very little changes: notably customs and motor insurance rules.

For everywhere else in Europe, these are the most critical changes.

Passports

Even if you have a burgundy passport with “European Union” on the cover, it will continue to be valid as a UK travel document. The problem is, from 1 January 2021, European rules on passport validity become much tougher.Read more

On the day of travel to the EU (as well as non-members Andorra, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, San Marino, Switzerland and the plucky Vatican City) your passport must pass two tests.

1. Was it issued less than nine years, six months ago?

2. Does it have six months’ validity remaining.

The reason: the UK has traditionally given renewals up to nine months’ extra validity in addition to the normal 10 years. So a passport issued on 30 June 2011 could show an expiry date of 30 March 2022.

While this was fine when the UK was part of the European Union, British travellers must now meet the strict rules on passport validity for visitors from “third countries”.

In particularly, passports issued by non-member countries are regarded as expired once they have been valid for 10 years.

While the expiry date printed in the passport remains valid for the UK and other non-EU countries around the world, within the European Union the issue date is critical.

A passport issued on 30 June 2011 is regarded by the EU as expiring on 30 June 2021. Therefore if the holder attempted to board a plane to the European Union on New Year’s Day 2021, it would be considered to have insufficient validity and the airline would be obliged to turn them away – even though the British passport has almost 15 months to run.

Until September 2018, the government appeared unaware of the problem. Once the issue was identified, the practice of giving up to nine months’ grace ended abruptly.

Border formalities

EU fast-track lanes for passport control will no longer be open to British travellers, although countries that receive a large number of visitors from the UK, such as Spain and Portugal, may make special arrangements.

The process is likely to be slower, and with no guarantee of entry.

At present, all a border official can do is to check that the travel document is valid, and that it belongs to you.

From 1 January 2021, the official is required by EU law to conduct deeper checks. They may ask for the purpose of the visit, where you plan to travel and stay, how long you intend to remain in the EU and how you propose to fund your stay.

Length of stay

From 1 January 2021, the “90/180 rule” takes effect. For holidaymakers and business travellers who normally stay a long time in Europe, it has significant effects. You may stay only 90 days (about three months) in any 180 (six months).

Example: if you spend January, February and March in the EU – totalling 90 days – you must leave the zone before 1 April and cannot return until 30 June.

You will then be able to spend the summer in Europe until 27 September, when you must leave again – and can’t come back until Boxing Day.

Any time spent in the EU up to the end of 2020 does not count. So if you spend December in Spain, the clock does not start ticking until New Year’s Day.

The UK government says: “Different rules will apply to Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus and Romania. If you visit these countries, visits to other EU countries will not count towards the 90-day total.”

British citizens can stay as long as they like in the Republic of Ireland.

People who have a work or residential visa for a specific EU country will be treated differently.

Visas

Initially they will not be needed, but from 2022 (or possibly later) British visitors will need to register online and pay in advance for an “Etias“ permit under the European Travel Information and Authorisation System.

Brexit briefing: How long until the end of the transition period?

Returning to the UK

Previously there were no limits on the value of goods you could bring in from European Union nations. From the start of 2021, the European Union will be treated the same as the rest of the world – which means that there are now strict limits on what you can bring back free of duty.

For alcohol, the limits are 4 litres of spirits or 9 litres of sparkling wine, 18 litres of still wine and 16 litres of beer, which hopefully will see you through at least an evening. Arrivals to the UK will also qualify to bring in 200 duty-free cigarettes.

“Anything that increases the availability of tobacco is a negative step for public health,” the British Medical Association says.

If you exceed any of these limits, you will pay tax on the whole lot.

There is a limit of €430 – roughly £400 – for all other goods, from Camembert to clothing.

Health care

For more than 40 years, British travellers have benefited from free or very low-cost medical treatment in the EU and its predecessor organisations. The European Health Insurance Card (Ehic) and the document it replaced, the E111, have proved extremely valuable for many elderly travellers, and/or people with pre-existing medical conditions.

Since the EU referendum, the government has repeatedly said that it hopes to establish a reciprocal health treaty mirroring the European Health Insurance Card (Ehic).

For example, the then-health minister, Stephen Hammond, said: “The department recognises that people with some pre-existing conditions rely on the Ehic to be able to travel.”

The pretence has now been dropped, and the government now says: “You should always get appropriate travel insurance with healthcare cover before you go abroad.

“It’s particularly important you get travel insurance with the right cover if you have a pre-existing medical condition.”

The Association of British Insurers warns: “Claims costs within Europe are currently reduced due to the presence of the Ehic, which covers some or all state-provided medical costs.

“In the absence of the Ehic or similar reciprocal health agreement, insurers will inevitably see an increase in claims costs – this could have a direct impact on the prices charged to consumers.”

One bit of latitude: if you enter an EU country by 31 December 2020, your Ehic will remain valid until you leave that country.

Driving licences

Your licence carries the EU symbol but, as with passports, will still be valid as a UK document from 2021 until its expiry date.

The government says: “You may need extra documents from 1 January 2021. You might need an international driving permit (IDP) to drive in some countries.”

In fact, you may need two. A 1949 IDP (valid one year) is required for Spain, Cyprus and Malta, while the 1968 version (valid three years) is valid everywhere else in the EU.

The IDP is an antiquated document available at larger post offices. Take your driving licence plus a passport photo and £5.50 for each permit that you need.

Motor insurance

Under the European Union 2009 motor insurance directive, any vehicle legally insured in one EU country can be driven between other European nations on the same policy.

From 1 January you will need a “Green Card” – an official, multilingual translation of your car insurance that demonstrate you meet the minimum cover requirements for the country you’re visiting.

Insurers will generally provide them free of charge, but require around two weeks’ notice.

Flights

At present, there is no legal agreement for any flights between the UK and the European Union from 1 January 2021.

The transport secretary, Grant Shapps, says: “The government’s priority is to ensure that flights can continue to operate safely, securely and punctually between the UK/EU at the end of transition period, regardless of the outcome of negotiations.

“Air travel is vital for both the UK and the EU in connecting people and facilitating trade and tourism, and we are confident measures will be in place to allow for continued air connectivity beyond the end of 2020.”

Some UK airport disruption caused by tough new passport rules may occur in the first few days if significant numbers of British travellers are denied boarding.

Ferries/Eurotunnel

Ships will continue to sail and trains will continue to run, but the National Audit Office (NAO) warns that motorists taking their cars to France on ferries from Dover or Eurotunnel from Folkestone face waits of up to two hours once the Brexit transition ends – and that queues could be “much longer” in summer.

Eurostar

Passenger trains linking London St Pancras with Paris, Brussels and Amsterdam will continue to run – but because of travel restrictions applied in response to the coronavirus pandemic, services are currently extremely limited.

Mobile phones

From 1 January 2021, the EU-wide ban on roaming charges for phone calls and internet use no longer applies to people with UK mobile phones. Providers will be free to impose whatever fees they wish.

But all the big providers have told The Independent they do not intend to bring back roaming charges.

O2 says: “We’re committed to providing our customers with great connectivity and value when they travel outside the UK. We currently have no plans to change our roaming services across Europe, maintaining our ‘Roam Like At Home’ arrangements.”

3 says: “We’ll give you free EU roaming just the same.”

EE says: “Our customers enjoy inclusive roaming in Europe and beyond, and we don’t have any plans to change this based on the Brexit outcome. So our customers going on holiday and travelling in the EU will continue to enjoy inclusive roaming.”

Vodafone says: “We have no plans to reintroduce roaming charges after Brexit.”

Should these or other providers introduce roaming charges, the government says it will cap the maximum for mobile data usage while abroad at £49 per month unless the user positively agrees to pay more.

Pets

For many years British travellers have been able to take a cat, a dog or even a ferret abroad with minimal formalities.

The government says it is “working with the European Commission to ensure a similar arrangement for pet travel between Great Britain and the EU from 1 January 2021.

“However, if an agreement is not reached there could be new requirements in place for those travelling with a pet from Great Britain to the EU from 1 January 2021.”

The hope is that the UK will become a “Part 1 listed country” under the Pet Travel Scheme. This would be the least bad option compared with what we have now.

But the issue is still not settled, so for now we have to assume the worst – that the UK will be “unlisted”. In that case, your pet must have a blood sample taken at least 30 days after its primary rabies vaccination. That sample will be sent to an EU-approved blood testing laboratory.

Then, you must “wait three months from the date the successful blood sample was taken before you can travel,” according to the government.

So if you start the process on 1 January 2021, you should be able to take a pet abroad from 1 May 2021.

One thing we do know: coming home will be no different. “There will be no change to the current health preparations for pets entering Great Britain from the EU from 1 January 2021,” says the government.

Algeria: European Parliament calls for action on human rights and expresses solidarity with demonstrators

On 26 November, the European Parliament adopted an urgency resolution highlighting “The deteriorating human rights situation in Algeria, in particular the case of journalist Khaled Drareni,” who was sentenced to two years in prison on 15 September 2020. Proposed by six out of the seven political groups, the resolution signals a broad agreement across the political spectrum. The undersigned national and international civil society organizations consider its adoption to be a timely and much needed step to address the escalating crackdown on civil society, peaceful activists, artists, journalists, and the independence of the judiciary.

The adopted text recalls the EP’s urgency resolution from 28 November 2019 on the situation of civic freedoms in Algeria, and expresses solidarity with “all Algerian citizens – women and men, from diverse geographic, socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds – who have been peacefully demonstrating since February 2019”. It highlights that “in 2020 women’s rights movements have intensified in their denunciation of the increasing violence against women” and have called for “the review of existing laws in order to guarantee full equality.”

European-Parliament-calls-for-action-on-human-rights-and-expresses-solidarity-with-demonstratorsDownload

Religious Freedom Awards 2020 recognizes 3 Spanish Professors

“Mejora Foundation awards three prestigious teachers in the 7th Edition of the Religious Freedom Awards”

The Church of Scientology Foundation for the Improvement of Life, Culture and Society, in consultative status with the United Nations since 2019, presented the Religious Freedom Awards, in the form of a Tizona sword, to Prof. Dr. Alejandro Torres, Prof. Dr. Rafael Valencia and Prof. Dr. Catalina Pons-Estel, in an online ceremony attended by Prof. Dr. Mercedes Murillo, Director of Religious Freedom of the Spain’s Ministry of Presidency (Prime Minister’s Office).

The ceremony, inaugurated by Ivan Arjona, President of the European Office of the Church of Scientology for Public Affairs and Human Rights, and Isabel Ayuso, Secretary General of the Mejora Foundation, began with the viewing of two videos regarding the right to freedom of thought, religion and conscience (one of them based on the works of L. Ron Hubbard‘s book “The Way to Happiness”), as well as a music video by international artists such as Chick Corea with a message of “Spread a Smile and not something else”, very suitable for the times of health crisis that are being experienced worldwide.

Prof. Dr. Mercedes Murillo – Religious Freedom Director at the Spain’s Prime Minister’s Office.

Following this, Mercedes Murillo, Director of Religious Liberty for the Ministry of the Presidency, addressed the award winners and attendees at this online ceremony, saying, “Once again this year the Church of Scientology Foundation is presenting its Religious Freedom Awards, a pioneering initiative, and so it is also appropriate for another year to recognize and appreciate this opportunity to bring together people concerned about this right around the world“

Murillo continued by saying “we are meeting this afternoon to present some well-deserved awards to three recognized specialists in this field whom I would like to congratulate” words after which the master of ceremonies went on to present the winners, who personally thanked the Fundación Mejora, of the Church of Scientology, for the award received and for the initiative that seeks to encourage people to promote and defend freedom of conscience .

Isabel Ayuso, Secretary General of Foundation, in her presentation said of these awardees that “they are the heroes of our times”…”they have changed the battleground for the classroom, the swords for the quill… on a real battle for freedom”

Prof. Dr. Alejandro Torres, Universidad Pública de Navarra

The first winner of the celebration was Prof. Dr. Alejandro Torres Gutiérrez, Full Professor of Law at the Public University of Navarra with an incredible production of publications and professor in the field of religious freedom. His publications are focused on the study of the financing and tax system of religious denominations, models of Church-State relations in Spain, Austria, Portugal and France, the status of minorities and multiculturalism in the United States, Canada and Austria. In his acceptance speech he left, among other messages, messages such as “the study of freedom of conscience is still relevant because we should not have fewer rights as a result of being less”… “in a society like ours in which there is still much violence for religious reasons I understand that the study of tolerance is important”… “the protection of diversity is key in a state like ours in which all possible interpretations of the universe have a place as long as they respect the ethical minimum of which we all participate in a democratic society”.

Prof. Rafael Valencia, Universidad de Sevilla

After which, Arjona gave the following Tizona to Prof. Dr. Rafael Valencia Candalija, currently Professor of Ecclesiastical Law at the University of Seville and that in addition to having opened religious diversity in Spain in a practical way to thousands of law students, will soon be publishing a book on Religious Freedom in Football, a pioneering prism in the field. Prof. Valencia said at the ceremony that “there is no prize today for an professor of religious freedom law giving a greater hope and joy as a recognition for protecting religious freedom” … ” we must continue to fight, therefore we must continue to work in defense of religious freedom … for those situations that violate this great right that occupies us and above all, we must continue to seek and continue to establish proposals for a better protection of the good, that is our work, and that should be our mission“.

Prof. Dr. Catalina Pons-Estel, Universtitat Illes Balears

And in this 2020, 40th Anniversary of the Law of Religious Freedom, could not miss an award for Prof. Dr. Catalina Pons-Estel Tugores, from the University of the Balearic Islands, who in addition to teaching this subject since 1997, this year has completed a series of lectures reviewing and commenting on the current Spanish law with the vision of both minor and major religious entities, as well as professionals in the field both scholars and government officials, which she has brought to the general public in addition to classrooms. In her acceptance speech, Prof. Pons-Estel explained that “religious freedom is a very current subject, a subject that is very much alive and close to all citizens” … “although we have all taken for granted the importance of the fundamental right of religious freedom, in these times in which everything seems to be in crisis, it never hurts to remember the importance of these rights that have cost us so much to achieve and guarantee”.

The ceremony was recorded online and can be accessed on the Foundation’s social networks and HERE.

The event also had space for a statement by the Director of Religious Freedom of the Ministry of the Presidency, to remind citizens about the current health situation: “I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the responsibility that all religious entities have had in this situation to limit their various forms of worship and replace them with other ways of providing spiritual care to their faithful … Therefore, I appreciate this task that they have been developing and that has not only maintained the possibility of meeting those who share their beliefs, but also in a difficult situation I know that all have maintained their solidarity activities towards the most vulnerable”.

Is France using political Islam to target religion as such?

The law meant to tackle political Islamism in France should not target religion

The resurgence in attacks by radical Islamists in France, home to Europe’s largest Muslim population, has rekindled fierce debates about Islam, secularism, and discrimination. The deplorable assassinations in October 2020 of Samuel Paty, a teacher, and three Catholics in the Basilica of Nice have accelerated the political will of the authorities to adopt a law meant to tackle some of the root causes of Islamist terrorism.

The proposed law announced in October by the President of the Republic and the Minister of the Interior was often titled ‘law on separatisms’, in the plural, while other times it is in the singular form. This was not a mistake, an inaccuracy or a hesitation about spelling or grammar. It reflected the current uncertainty of whether to take the risk of identifying the problem as a religious one and to exclusively target one religion: Islam.

According to the French authorities, a specific group of Muslims are said to separate themselves from the historical majority of society and from its values in a dangerous manner, for example by rejecting scientific truths such as the evolution theory or by contesting the Holocaust.

To avoid the accusation of Islamophobia and concerns about religious discrimination, the government planned to include other religious groups, especially ones labelled ‘sectes’, to instrumentalize them as an alibi of its good faith. All the while, authorities would continue ignoring some very closed Jewish communities. The inherent flaw with this approach is that the security threat is considered religious in nature, which it is not.

A few days ago, the French authorities made the draft law and its new title public. It has changed entirely and is now the “Draft Law Strengthening Republican Principles”. Its scope is much wider than what had been announced, but it still targets separatism. The Council of State has begun examining it. 

The source of the problem that France is attempting to solve is a political ideology: radical Islamism. It is not Islam.

Radical Islamism’s objective is to impose a theocratic governance in Muslim minds whether they are in Muslim majority countries or not. This is accomplished by instilling its ideology in Muslim families, parents, and children, even before school education.

The enemy to combat is not a religion or some religions and their disciples, but a political project. If the French authorities persist in singling out an entire religious community as a threat, they will make the work of radical Islamism all the easier.

Therefore, the law should not target Islam as a religion, but should instead tackle political Islamism, in particular Salafism and its organisations such as the Muslim Brotherhood and its satellite associations.

In line with this objective, about 50 suspicious mosques have been closed since the appointment of Gerald Darmanin as Minister of the Interior in July 2020. However, closing ‘suspicious’ mosques is not a solution and is in fact counterproductive. Such a restrictive measure angers the Muslims who are deprived of their right to collective worship, which is a violation of the international standards on freedom of religion or belief. It’s not ‘mosques’ that disseminate extremist ideas, but rather the individuals in leadership roles in some mosques who instrumentalise religious teachings for political purposes. Certain imams and preachers, who have been identified by the authorities for a very long time, behave as political militants instead of providing faith-building to their communities. The draft law must combat them, not the religious community they belong to.

The draft law sets the fight against radical Islamism at the religious level when it should only be carried out at the ideological and political one instead. Other religious or spiritual communities and other categories of believers have nothing to do with this political militant activism and should not be targeted.

The French government’s plan is to present the draft law to the Council of Ministers after it has been finalized on the basis of the remarks of the Council of State. The choice of the date of 9 December 2020 will coincide with the anniversary of the 9 December 1905 Law which regulates the relations between state and religions in France.

All religions should feel concerned by this law. Indeed, several vague concepts in the draft law such as ‘behaviours threatening human dignity’ and ‘psychological pressures’ may open the door to many abuses in the implementation of the law on other religious groups as well.

Moreover, an article of this law provides that if any member of a group is considered to have acted in violation of a point of the law, it will allow the ban of the whole association by the Council of Ministers.

It is to be hoped that the Council of State will keep in mind the guidelines of the OSCE/ ODIHR about freedom of religion or belief and the Venice Commission recommendations and will contest these questionable provisions.

—

Photo by Sung Shin on Unsplash

Terrorism must not be associated with any particular civilization, religion, nationality or ethnic group

Yesterday’s terrorist attack in Vienna, Austria has once again attested to the fact that in no way could the world community afford selective approaches in the fight against international terrorism, as it is the greatest menace to mankind in our times.

No state is immune to terrorism, and I believe terrorism must not be associated with any particular civilization, religion, nationality or ethnic group.

We express our deep sympathies and condolences to the families of victims of the terrorist attacks and wish the wounded speedy recovery.

It has been more than a month that in full view of the international community Artsakh became a target of terrorism, combating aspirations and attempts of Azerbaijan and Turkey to turn the South Caucasus into a new hotbed of international terrorism.

The Republic of Artsakh faces terrorism and crimes against humanity, suffering human and tangible material loss.

We strongly condemn any attempt whereby communities are subjected to terrorism, and the civilian population is targeted deliberately on the grounds of ethnic or religious belonging.

Any attempt to justify those encouraging, sponsoring or perpetrating terrorism and extremism, as well as those inciting hate crime and violence, should be unequivocally condemned.

The Republic of Artsakh remains committed to those principles and determined to contribute to the fight against terrorism, reinforcing international and regional security, and we will struggle to the end for our right to secure life and development.

Statement by Head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in light of Recent Developments in France

Following today’s attack in Nice and following on from the murder of Samuel Paty on 16 October, the World Head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, His Holiness, Hazrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad has condemned all forms of terrorism and extremism and called for mutual understanding and dialogue between all peoples and nations.

His Holiness, Hazrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad states:

“The murder and beheading of Samuel Paty and the attack in Nice earlier today must be condemned in the strongest possible terms. Such grievous attacks are completely against the teachings of Islam. Our religion does not permit terrorism or extremism under any circumstances and anyone who claims otherwise acts against the teachings of the Holy Quran and contrary to the noble character of the Holy Prophet of Islam (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).

As the worldwide Head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, I extend our deepest sympathies to the loved ones of the victims and to the French nation. Let it be clear that our condemnation and hatred of such attacks is not something new but has always been our position and stance. The Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community (peace be upon him) and his Successors have always categorically rejected all forms of violence or bloodshed in the name of religion.

The fallout from this heinous act has further exacerbated the tensions between the Islamic world and the West and between Muslims living in France and the rest of society. We consider this to be a source of deep regret and a means of further undermining the peace and stability of the world. We must all join together to root out all forms of extremism and to encourage mutual understanding and tolerance. From our perspective, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community will spare no effort in our mission to foster a better understanding of the true and peaceful teachings of Islam in the world.”

Religious liberty endangered by French Draft Law Against “Separatism”

France has a serious problem with radical Islam, but the draft law against “separatism” announced by President Macron may create more problems than it claims to solve. This is the conclusion of a “White Paper” co-authored or endorsed by well-known scholars of new religious movements Massimo Introvigne, an Italian sociologist and managing director of CESNUR (Center for Studies on New Religions) and Bernadette Rigal-Cellard, from the University of Bordeaux, French lecturer in law Frédéric-Jérôme Pansier, human rights activists Willy Fautré, of Brussels-based Human Rights Without Frontiers, and Alessandro Amicarelli, human rights attorney in London and chairperson of the European Federation for Freedom of Belief (FOB).

“Eradicating the social roots of terrorism is a laudable purpose“, say the members of the task force who is launching the White Paper, “and some provisions of the draft law make sense, but there are also serious problems.”

The White Paper can be downloaded as a FREE pdf at the website of CESNUR.ORG

First, the law is being proposed and publicized by some politicians and media with disturbing accents implying that only an “Islam des Lumières,” an Enlightenment-style Islam, is accepted in France, where all conservative Muslims, i.e, the majority of Muslims in France and Europe, are suspected of extremism if not terrorism. “This“, the report says, “risks to fuel extremism rather than containing it.”

Second, the total ban on homeschooling punishes thousands of French parents who are not Muslim, and in most cases do not even decide to educate their children at home for religious reasons. Several sociological studies have concluded that homeschooling is a legitimate form of education and may give good results. “Islamic ultra-fundamentalism“, the authors state, “appears in homeschooling in a tiny minority of cases, and may be controlled or eliminated through adequate controls rather than by banning the practice altogether.”

Third, there is a speedy procedure for dissolving religious organizations deemed to operate against “human dignity” or use not only physical but also “psychological pressures.” This, the White Paper says, is standard jargon used against the so-called “cults” and in fact some French politicians have already announced that the law will be used to “dissolve hundreds of cults” (called in France sectes).

Rather than relying on the pseudo-scientific notions of “brainwashing” or “psychological control,” the White Paper suggests, the law should focus on the “criminal religious movements” (a label several scholars prefer to the elusive “cults” or sectes) that use physical violence or commit common crimes. And, the report adds, the defense of “human dignity” may not lead to violate the corporate freedom of religious bodies, for example when they decide whom to admit or to expel, or suggests that their current members do not associate with those who have been expelled. The White Paper quotes several court decisions stating that excommunication and “ostracism” are part of religious liberty, as religions have the right to take decisions about their own organizations.

Fourth, the reference to places of worship unduly used to spread “hostility to the laws of the Republic” should not mean that sermons should not be free to criticize laws they regard as unjust. Religion has always had the prophetic function of criticizing laws deemed as unfair, which is different from inciting to violence.

“We understand“, the authors explain, “that France has its own tradition and history of laïcité, and our purpose is not to suggest that France should adopt the American model of religious liberty, or the Italian model of cooperation between religion and the state. On the contrary, our aim is to find ways to address, within rather than outside the French legal tradition, legitimate concerns about radicalization and terrorism, without infringing on the rights of religious minorities or breaching France’s international human rights obligations.”

https://www.cesnur.org/2020/separatism-religion-and-cults.htm

Macron gets a request from NGOs around the world to have his anti-separatism bill reviewed by Venice Commission

On October 28, a letter has been sent to Emmanuel Macron, President of the French Republic, asking for review of the future French “law on separatism” by the Venice Commission and the Office for Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the OSCE.

The letter was signed by several NGOs and individuals from all over the world, including the well-known Ligue des Droits de l’Homme, after it had been circulated by the Freedom of Religion or Belief Roundtable Brussels-EU, an informal group of individuals and organizations from civil society who gather regularly to discuss FoRB (Freedom of Religion or Belief ) issues. Writers raise several concerns about the law after the announcements made by Macron and members of his government.

See full letter here:

To:Mr Emmanuel Macron

President of the French Republic

Brussels, the 28^th October 2020

Copies to:

• Kishan Manocha, Head, Tolerance and Non-Discrimination Department, OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights
• Ahmed Shaheed, UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief
• Mr Gianni Buquicchio, President of the Venice Commission
• Mr Eric Dupont-Moretti, French Minister of Justice

Re: The announcements on the “Law on separatism”

Dear Mr President,

We write as an informal group of organizations and individuals who are scholars, religious leaders and human rights advocates. We are from many faiths or acting in a secular capacity, representing a high degree of diversity. While there is very little we agree on theologically, or politically, we all agree on the importance of religious freedom for all faiths and none.

We write to you following the announcements that you and members of your government have made regarding the bill on “separatism” that you plan to approve in the Council of Ministers meeting on December 9. While no draft of the bill has yet been circulated, to our knowledge, we have some concerns which have been highlighted by the announcements that have been made.

We acknowledge the cautious approach that you have taken during your official speech. We have noted your insistence on the fact that you are targeting radical Islam, and not Muslims, as well as the fact that you intend to respect freedom of religion or belief. We agree that terrorism is a real issue that needs to be tackled and that a strong response needs to be taken with regards to the dangers that are posed to the French Republic, and we deeply share the traumatisms that result from the recent tragic terrorist events which hit France.

Nevertheless, we are concerned that some of the proposals may lead to the opposite of what you intend. Furthermore, taking into account the statements made by members of your government after your speech, those statements reinforce the conviction that the measures being proposed will violate France’s international commitments towards freedom of religion or belief.

For example, you announced that you plan to ban home-schooling in order to protect children from illegal schools “often administered by religious extremists”. While we understand that these schools pose a threat, a global ban on home-schooling will affect the majority of parents that for many different reasons are using this freedom with satisfying results, regardless of their faith, or none. There is certainly sufficient provision in French law to organize controls and make sure that the children are effectively educated according to established educational programmes.

The “general concept” of the law was unveiled by your Minister of Interior, Gérald Darmanin, on Twitter. It explained that places of worship will be placed under increasing surveillance and “preserved […] from the diffusion of ideas and statements hostile to the laws of the Republic.” However, how will that apply to a priest or pastor criticizing abortion or same-sex marriage, which are part of the laws of the French Republic. What action will be taken against others who may speak out against certain “laws of the Republic” that penalize the poor and the immigrants? Or even if they criticize a law against blasphemy, as it existed still recently for Alsace-Moselle in France? Is anyone now criticising the law an enemy of the state?

Another announced provision that poses a problem is your statement and that of the Minister of Interior, where it is said that the law will allow religious and other associations to be dissolved directly by the Council of Ministers in the case of  an “affront on personal dignity” and “use of psychological or physical pressures.” These concepts are vague enough to allow the arbitrary targeting of groups that are acting quite legally and without any violent intent but are in ‘disfavour’ by the administrating body. Furthermore there is no guarantee of judicial process or oversight. 

The Minister of Citizenship, Marlène Schiappa, also stated in an interview that, “We will use the same measures against the cults and against radical Islam.” This shows that there is already a clear intent to deviate from the fight against terrorism and enter the realm of prohibiting religious associations on the basis that they do not please someone, simply because they are categorised as “cults” (sectes, in French). 

Legislation aimed at terrorism is not surprising. It is a challenge that many countries face. However, States that have chosen to draft laws with such vague concepts as those cited above are States that have totalitarian tendencies (or are in fact totalitarian). Russia, for example, has passed an anti-extremism law that is now used to prosecute and jail political dissidents as well as members of peaceful religious movements such as the Jehovah Witnesses or followers of Said Nursi on the basis of their definition of “extremism”. 

When the Venice Commission gave its opinion on law of the Russian Federation on Combatting Extremist Activity, adopted at its 91st Plenary Session, it stated: 

7.  The broad interpretation of the notion of ‘extremism’ by the enforcement authorities, the increasing application of the Law in recent years and the pressure it exerts on various circles within civil society, as well as alleged human rights violations reported in this connection have raised concerns and drawn criticism both in Russia and on the international level

(…)

28.  The only definition of ‘extremism’ contained in an international treaty binding on the Russian Federation is to be found in the Shanghai Convention [on Combating Terrorism, Separatism and Extremism of 15 June 2001, ratified by Russia on 10 January 2003]. In Article 1.1.1.3) of the Extremism Law, ‘extremism’ is defined as ‘an act aimed at seizing or keeping power through the use of violence or changing violently the constitutional regime of a State, as well as a violent encroachment upon public security, including organization, for the above purposes, of illegal armed formations and participation in them, criminally prosecuted in conformity with the national laws of the Parties’. The latter clause allows signatory states to prosecute such ‘extremist’ actions according to their national laws.

It made clear that the only definitions of ‘terrorism’ and ‘separatism’ that could be used to take action against individuals or organizations require that violence is an essential element (incitement to, or encouragement of, violence or actual violence). 

The European Court of Human Rights has already applied this approach to Russia, regarding a case that involved the prosecution of followers of Said Nursi accused of extremist activities, in IBRAGIM IBRAGIMOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, which became a final judgment on April 2, 2019.

The UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion of Belief, in the unedited version of his last report on the Elimination of all Forms of Religious Intolerance (October 12, 2020), stated: 

17.    A concerning number of mandate communications highlight the use of inchoate terrorist offenses that are disproportionately applied to religious or belief minorities. Harassment measures broadly linked to countering terrorism and protecting national security illustrate that in almost every region of the world religious minorities appear to be at particular risk of being designated “terrorist groups” and of having members arrested under “extremism” or “illegal activity” charges. A number of communications addressed the use of national security imperatives as the stated objective by some governments in criminalizing membership in and/or activities of certain religious or belief groups.  Such an approach amounts to targeting, and ultimately criminalizing, the peaceful expression of a person’s identity. 

19.    Numerous State authorities have arrested, detained (sometimes incommunicado) and sentenced members of religious and belief minorities for undefined charges such as intent to ‘disturb political, economic or social structures’ , to ‘disrupt state sovereignty’   or to  ‘overthrow the Government’.  Such vague provisions fail to fulfil the principle of legality as enshrined in article 15 of ICCPR and give worrying leeway to States to arbitrarily limit the exercise of freedom of religion or belief of certain groups.

The OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) recently released a new document called “Freedom of Religion or Belief and Security: Policy Guidance”. It states in its introduction: 

While OSCE participating States have adopted different strategies to ensure that their own security measures are fully compliant with their international obligations and commitments pertaining to freedom of religion or belief, certain laws, security policies and practices have placed freedom of religion or belief and other universal human rights under significant pressure. Such measures, especially those that are very broad or applied arbitrarily, are often enacted in the name of “national”, “state” or “public” security, or in the interests of preserving or maintaining “peaceful coexistence”, “social stability” or “social harmony”. Experience shows that such limitations can worsen rather than improve security.

There are many more international human rights documents that deal with this delicate issue, but for reasons of brevity we are unable to carry out a full review in this letter.

We are at your disposal to meet and discuss this issue further. In any case, we respectfully but strongly recommend that you submit to both the Venice Commission and ODIHR the draft of the law when it is ready, in order to get considered international legal expertise as to how the law meets established human rights principles. 

We feel that there is a real risk that contrary to your intention, the proposed measures that have been announced will lead to the targeting of Muslims in general as well as other minority faiths, and that it may well lead to a series of human rights violations.

Respectfully yours,

Organizations

Advocates International, Advocates France, All Faiths Network, CAP Freedom of Conscience, CESNUR – Center for Studies on New Religions, EIFRF – European Interreligious Forum for Religious Freedom, FOREF – Forum for Religious Freedom Europe, HRWF – Human Rights Without Frontiers, International Christian Concern, Law and Liberty International, LDH – Ligue des Droits de l’Homme, LIREC – Center for Studies on Freedom of Religion, Belief and Conscience, ORLIR – International Observatory of Religious Liberty of Refugees, United Sikhs, UPF The Netherlands

Individuals

• Régis Dericquebourg, Président, Observatoire Européen des Religions et de la Laïcité
• Michael P. Donnelly, J.D., LL.M., Senior Counsel, Global Outreach
• The Most Reverend Joseph K. Grieboski, Senior Fellow, The Dietrich Bonhoeffer Institute
• Rimon Kasher, Prof. Emeritus of Biblical Studies, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
• Nancy Lefèvre, Chairwoman, Advocates France
• Brent McBurney, President & CEO, Advocate International
• Kareem P.A. McDonald, Program Associate, Religious Freedom Institute
• Greg Mitchell, Chair, International Religious Freedom Roundtable 
• Scott Morgan, President, Red Eagle Enterprise
• Matias Perttula, Director of Advocacy, International Christian Concern
• Malik Salemkour, President, Ligue des droits de l’Homme (LDH)
• Frans de Wolff, Secretary, Dutch Network for Interfaith Dialogue

[you can read more about the initiative at

Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher Appointed Next Secretary General of World Evangelical Alliance

Deerfield, IL – October 29, 2020

The International Council (IC) of the World Evangelical Alliance (WEA) is pleased to announce the appointment of Dr Thomas Schirrmacher as the next Secretary General / CEO. Bringing many years of experience serving in various roles in the WEA, Dr Schirrmacher was recommended by the Search Committee from among more than a dozen candidates, and unanimously affirmed by the IC on a conference call on October 27. He will assume leadership of the WEA on March 1, 2021.

In a letter announcing the appointment to WEA’s constituency, Dr Goodwill Shana, Chair of the International Council, said: “Thomas will be known to many of you, as he has served in the WEA for many years. He enjoys working with groups of diverse people and seeing people work together to advance the aims of the WEA. He is committed to building partnerships and seeing WEA contribute to the development of the global Christian community.”

“He has a great deal of experience that we believe will benefit the WEA and we are very happy to appoint such a gifted person,” Dr Shana continued and added: “We have every confidence that Thomas is able to lead WEA at this point in our life and history and with great vision for the future. We will continue to covet your prayers and support in ensuring that this very significant step proceeds smoothly and results in the strengthening of the WEA and the proclamation of the gospel around the world.”

Outgoing Secretary-General Bp Efraim Tendero commented: “It is with great joy that I will be handing over the stewardship of the WEA to Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher early next year, the person who is best prepared to lead the global body of evangelicals into the future. As we have partnered together in the WEA Senior Leadership Team for several years, I saw in him the charisma, competence, and capacity that is matched by the character, conviction and calling from God that are needed for such a global task. I have full confidence that he will lead the WEA as empowered by the Holy Spirit in advancing the Good news of the Lord Jesus Christ to all nations, and effecting personal, family and community transformation for the glory of God.”

Upon his appointment, Dr Schirrmacher said: “I am humbled that so many esteemed leaders are putting their trust in me. Having been part of the leadership for a long time, I already feel very much at home in the WEA. Beside all my academic and socio-political involvement, the center of my convictions has always been the transforming power of the gospel of Jesus Christ for each individual and the whole world. And I see WEA as the best place to serve the Church. I feel safe in the assurance that I am carried by the prayer of millions of believers and knowing that I am standing on the big shoulders of my predecessors.”

About Dr Thomas Schirrmacher:

Dr Schirrmacher has served in various roles in the WEA since 1999, and is currently the WEA’s Associate Secretary General for Theological Concerns. Prior to this, he was a member of the Religious Liberty Commission, developed the International Institute for Religions Freedom, built up WEA’s Office for Intrafaith and Interfaith Relations, is Chair of WEA’s Theological Commission, and WEA’s Ambassador for Human Rights.

Dr Schirrmacher studied theology at colleges in Switzerland, the United States, Netherlands and also received a degree from India. He holds several degrees in various disciplines and a number of earned doctorates to his name. He was pastor and co-pastor of local churches in the Bonn area from 1982 – 2000 and, in 2015, was consecrated as an episcopal leader serving the Communio Messianica, a global body of believers from another faith background. He also taught theology and trained future pastors from 1982 – 2018.

Dr Schirrmacher has a great concern for the persecuted church and, with others, started the WEA’s International Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church (IDOP).

Dr Thomas Schirrmacher is married to Dr Christine Schirrmacher. Together they have two adult children and currently live in Bonn, Germany. Christine is a professor of Islamic Studies at the Universities of Bonn and Leuven as well as serving WEA as Commissioner for Islamic Affairs.

Regions request support from the EU and demand to have a voice in Brussels, with "Sign it Europe"

“The initiative was started by the Seklers of Transylvania, though it concerns not only them but many other national regions of the EU”, says their website.

The minority regions of the European Union feel forgotten by the executive authorities. Aid from European funds overlooks these territories, whose linguistic, cultural, ethnic, and religious differences contribute to the diversity of the community. The Sign It Europe initiative aims to get the support needed for Brussels to support these regions financially.

The success and strength of the European Union is based on the union of its territories, including their different national, ethnic, cultural, religious or linguistic characteristics. While in the case of the major countries these differences are taken into account, the surrounding regions, which do not have administrative powers, are forgotten by the institutions on a daily basis.

The EU must ensure the proper economic development of these regions, preventing their economic backwardness, maintaining their development, and preserving the conditions for economic, social, and territorial cohesion. To this end, it must provide all territories with the same opportunities to access its funds, as well as caring for and preserving the specific characteristics of each people, maintaining the development of the EU and its cultural diversity.

PROTECT THE THOUSAND-YEAR-OLD MINORITY NATIONS OF THE EU!

www.signiteurope.com

The Sign It Europe initiative was created with the aim of helping European minority regions to access EU funds, preserving Europe’s ethnic diversity, and to establish a specific funding system for territorial development policy that is direct, exclusive and accessible to regional territories. A campaign of signatures with which to demonstrate in Brussels, the EU’s headquarters, the importance of this issue.

“The initiative is not about protecting minorities. We Europeans are a group of communities of people and nations living in different countries. We represent the majorities that make up each country, which has been able to maintain themselves over time. Now is the time to join the regional territories to have influence in Europe, it is the time to act. Our voices have to be heard in Brussels,” said the organization’s sources.

This campaign, which has a deadline of 7 November 2020, will enable the EU to actively contribute to supporting cultural and linguistic diversity, providing the necessary financial support to the different territories, for the full development of their own language, culture, folklore, and identity within their own country.

“By signing our Citizens’ Initiative you will help European nations to build and preserve the different cultures that make them up. If we succeed in reaching the required signature from EU countries, the European Commission will take the appropriate steps to implement this support. Together, with everyone’s support, we will achieve the conservation and preservation of the essence of Europe and all its territories,” they have said.

Visit www.signiteurope.com to sign the petition.

48 MEPs request the EU appoint an EU Special Envoy on FoRB

The MEPs say that needs to be done with a sufficient amount of staff and funding.

The European Times INFO has learned today about a letter that 48 MEPs from different groups requesting the European Commission to bring to a done the appointment of an EU Special Envoy on Freedom of Religion or Belief, a role formerly tasked to Jan Figel:

“The appointment of a Special Envoy holding a permanent mandate focused primarily on freedom of religion or belief, with a multi-year term, full-time staff, and increased funding would send out the message that the EU is committed to protecting everywhere the victims of violence and persecution because of their religion or belief,” the letter said, which was lodged on Wednesday 14th of October.

The position has been vacant since over one year when the term of Figel finished and after some lack of action on the part of the European Commission and strong requests specially from civil society last july the EU announced that they would renew the mandate, but without giving a name, potential names nor a date.

You can read the full letter and list of MEPs sign it below here:

To: Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission & Margaritis Schinas. Vice-President of the European Commission

Re: Mandate of the Special Envoy for the promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief outside the EU

14/10/2020

Dear President von der Leyen, Dear Vice-President Schinas.

We, the undersigned Members of the European Parliament, write to welcome your decision in July of this year to renew the mandate of the Special Envoy for the promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief outside the EU. Taking note that the EU has not had a Special Envoy for almost one year, we urge you to renew the position as soon as possible.

The Pew Research Center’s study on global restrictions on religion found that in 2017, 83 countries experienced high or very high levels of restrictions. Moreover, persecution based on religion and belief is contributing to the migration crisis and related security challenges which threaten the EU. Promoting freedom of religion and belief, therefore, is not only in line with the values which guide EU external action, it is also essential in strengthening our role in addressing global challenges.

The appointment of a Special Envoy holding a permanent mandate focused primarily on freedom of religion or belief, with a multi-year term, full-time staff, and increased funding would send out the message that the EU is committed to protecting everywhere the victims of violence and persecution because of their religion or belief.

On numerous occasions, the European Parliament called for a stronger EU role in promoting freedom of religion or belief. In this spirit, and considering the commitments in the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy, we recommend that the Special Envoy’s mandate is strengthened while remaining focused specifically on protecting freedom of religion or belief, since the targeted attacks on this freedom in recent years have proven the necessity of both a more targeted and urgent response. This is in line with the intent of the European Parliament, as expressed in the Resolution of 4 February 2016 on the systematic mass murder of religious minorities by the so-called ‘ISIS/Daesh’. and the Report on EU Guidelines and the mandate of the EU Special Envoy, adopted by the European Parliament on 16 January 2019 with overwhelming support.

We thank you for your commitment to working to protect this fundamental right and look forward to working with you and the Special Envoy in furthering the protection of freedom of religion and belief.

Yours sincerely.

Miriam Lexmann MEP (Slovakia) – Zeljana Zovko MEP (Croatia) – Gyorgy Holveny MEP (Hungary) – François-Xavier Bellamy (France) – Milan Zver MEP (Slovenia) – Antonio Tajani MEP (Italy) – Anna Fotyga MEP (Poland) – Lukas Mandl MEP (Austria) – Antonio Lopez-Isturiz White (Spain) – Liudas Mazylis MEP (Lithuania) – Ausra Maldeikicne MEP (Lithuania) – Isabel Benjumea MEP (Spain) – Karlo Rcssler MEP (Croatia) – Balazs Hidveghi MEP (Hungary) – Andrea Bocskor MEP (Hungary) – Ivan Stefanec MEP (Slovakia) – Radan Kanev (Bulgaria) – Leopoldo Lopez Gil MEP (Spain) – Rainer Wieland MEP (Germany) – Lorant Vincze MEP (Romania) – Tomislav Sokol MEP (Croatia) – Ryszard Legutko MEP (Poland) – TomaS Zdechovsky MEP (Czechia) – Michael Gahler MEP (Germany) – David Lega MEP (Sweden) – Roberta Metsola MEP (Malta) – Izabcla Kloc MEP (Poland) – Helmut Geuking MEP (Germany) – Margarita de la Pisa Carrion MEP (Spain) – Jorge Buxade Villalba MEP (Spain) – Salvatore De Meo MEP (Italy) – Adam Kosa MEP (Hungary) – Edina Toth MEP (Hungary) – Peter van Dalen MEP (Netherlands) – Rasa JukneviCiene MEP (Lithuania) – Romana Tome MEP (Slovenia) – Bert-Jan Ruissen MEP (Netherlands) – Markus Ferber MEP (Germany) – Eugen Jurzyca MEP (Slovakia) – Emmanouil Fragkos MEP (Greece) – Hermann Tertsch MEP (Spain) – Juan Ignacio Zoido Alvarez (Spain) – Anne Sander MEP (France) – Charlie Weimers MEP (Sweden) – Peter Poliak MEP (Slovakia) – Elzbieta Kruk MEP (Poland) – Cristian Terhes MEP (Romania) – Dominik Tarczynski (Poland)

Together with 48 colleagues, we have called on the @EU_Commission to renew the post of the EU Special Envoy for the Promotion of Freedom of Religion or Belief as soon as possible pic.twitter.com/yOPPOiSm1R

— Miriam M. Lexmann (@MiriamMLex) October 15, 2020