CSW is a Christian organisation working for religious freedom
through advocacy and human rights, in the pursuit of justice.
Rue Joseph II, 166
B-1000 Brussels
Belgium
T: + 32 (0)2 282 1055
F: + 32 (0)2 282 1059
E: [email protected]
W: www.csw.org.uk
29/05/15
Tolerance and respect: preventing and combating anti-Semitic and
anti-Muslim hatred in Europe
Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW) is a Christian human rights organization that
promotes freedom of religion or belief. We promote this freedom for people of all faiths,
religions and beliefs. Our advocacy efforts focus on national governments as well as on
regional and international policy makers and human rights mechanisms. We work in more
than 20 countries around the world and have offices in London, Brussels and Washington
DC.
The following responses have been prepared to answer the questions set by DG Justice. The
questions posed are open in nature and, as such, the text provided by CSW does not
represent an exhaustive treatment of these questions, but rather highlights trends and
patterns that we have observed.
1.
Can you inform about new trends showing an increase in anti-Semitic and
anti-Muslim incidents? What are to your mind the underlying factors for each of
these phenomena: religion, culture, socio-economic or political circumstances,
prejudices, etc.?
CSW’s work does not focus on European countries, but we do monitor the religious
freedom situation in Europe.
There has clearly been an increase of anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim incidents in Europe. The
Pew Research Centre concluded that Jews were harassed in 34 out of 35 countries in
Europe. Data produced by the Fundamental Rights Agency shows similar patterns. Academic
and government research from within EU member states concurs.
The problem is not isolated to one member state:
•
In Austria, the number of anti-Semitic incidents doubled in the course of the last year
and in 2013.
•
While official figures need to be approached with caution due to a perennial problem
with not reporting hate crime, Iin the UK, despite a 26% fall in racially or religiously
President: Jonathan Aitken Patron: The Baroness Cox of Queensbury Life Vice-President: David Atkinson Chief Executive: Mervyn Thomas
Board of Trustees: David Taylor (Chairman), Franklin Evans (Deputy Chairman), Dr Peter Bibawy, Anne Coles, Simon George, Mike Gibbons, Sir Andrew Green KCMG, Nigel Grinyer, Hector
Mackenzie, David Shearman, Sarah Snyder.
Board of Reference: Shola Ameobi, David Amess MP, Lord Anderson of Swansea, His Grace Bishop Angaelos, Lord Ashbourne, Lord Bates of Langbarugh, The Revd Preb Richard Bewes, The Rev
Lyndon Bowring, Viscount Brentford, Alistair Burt MP, Lord Clarke of Hampstead, Gerald Coates, The Rt Rev Chris Cocksworth, The Rev David Coffey, The Rev John Coles (New Wine), The Rt Rev
Chris Edmondson, Roger Forster, Lord Hastings of Scarisbrick CBE, Andy Hawthorne, The Rt Rev and Rt Hon David Hope (KCVO), Simon Hughes MP, Canon J John, The Rt Rev Thomas McMahon (RC
Bishop of Brentwood), The Rev Mark Melluish (New Wine), The Rt Rev Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, The Rt Rev Patrick O’Donoghue, The Earl of Powis, Andrew Reed, Rev David Shoshanya ,The Rev Martin
Smyth, The Most Rev Dr John Sentamu (Archbishop of York), Sir Peter Vardy DL, Phil Wall, Paul Weaver, Ian White, Dom Timothy Wright OSB.
Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW) is the operating name of Registered Charity No. 281836, a company limited by guarantee, incorporated in England (Reg No. 1536426). Christian Solidarity
Worldwide Belgium is an AISBL (Reg No. 0898586224)
Page 1
aggravated offences in England and Wales between 2006-7 and 2010-11, in 2011, recorded
hate crime from police forces in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, still stood at 44,361
incidents. Of these 35,875 were recorded as race hate crimes with 1,773 were recorded as
religious hate crimes. According to research by Faith Matters, as of early 2012 only 3 out of
43 police forces collated information about anti-Muslim hate crime. However, an indicative
breakdown (2011) reveals that of those where the victim’s religion was ‘known’ (n. 1,216),
52% (632) were recorded as religious hate crimes against Muslims (compared to 26% against
people of Jewish faith; and 14% against Christians). When it comes to religious hate crimes in
Europe, most victims are Muslim. .
•
It must additionally be noted that while statistics including those above have been
collected, there remains a systemic lack of data collection and analysis with regard to the
number of anti-Muslim incidents in Europe.
•
In France, the French Ministry of Interior and Service de Protection de la
Communauté Juive note that in 2014 alone, 851 anti-Semitic acts were reported in France.
Following the Charlie Hebdo incident in Paris on 7 January 2015, the NGO Tell MAMA
documented 51 anti-Muslim attacks and incidents in the 9 days after 7 January. . The rise of
attacks not only indicates growing social hostilities, but in turn fuels unhelpful discourses,
such as anti-immigration rhetoric, giving it a wider platform.
Whilst in some EU Member States Muslims are more politically active and exercise their
right to vote more so than their non-Muslim counterparts, the rise in social animosity
towards Muslims in the last decade is ever making more difficult decreasing the chances of
Muslims’ successful social integration into European societies. This fact has sparked a series
of conferences to discuss how Muslims could be better integrated into the different
European countries with civil society and religious groups including EMISCO and the Conseil
Européen des Ouléma Marocains (CEOM) European Council of Moroccan Ulema being
amongst the many groups to haveto hosted recent events on this topic over the past month
alone.
Hatred towards Muslims and Jews is expressed in several ways, from verbal and physical
assaults to the vandalisation of places of worship and gravesites. The increase in
discrimination and intimidation has led to some Muslims and Jews to hide their identity and
not to demonstrate their faith in public.
The underlying factors for the increase of anti-Muslim and anti-Semitic hatred are complex.
The financial crisis and the increasing poverty gap have played a role in making vulnerable
communities even more vulnerable. The economic divide and reduction in opportunities for
socio-economic development have made the ground fertile for an increased support of rightwing parties across Europe. These parties are one manifestation of the growing intolerance
towards groups that are perceived to threaten the ‘indigenous’ culture. Their rise, not only
indicates growing social hostilities,, but, in turn, fuels unhelpful discourses, such as antiimmigration rhetoric, giving it a wider platform. In such discourses, race and religion are
often conflated and it can be difficult to distinguish which of these causes is most responsible
for a fear of the other.
The growth of internet technology has also provided cheap platforms for the anonymous
spreading of ideas. The internet is an effective tool that can be used to disseminate hate
speech or metanarratives that fuel the ‘victim’ identity of a people.
In the case of countering hate crimes, it is important to note that individual actions are not
only motivated by local grievances and/or opportunities, but also by global-level
metanarratives and the indirect grievances or opportunities that they convey (whether real
or perceived). On the one hand, global narratives can provide young people with a sense of
purpose or opportunity, e.g. the Islamic State’s call to support a new Caliphate garnered
support. On the other hand, they can foster fresh grievances, which the listener may not be
able to critically analyse. For example, last summer, the conflict in Israel and Gaza fuelled an
existing meta-narrative that research has linked to a rise in Muslim extremism and antiJewish sentiment, thereby acting as a trigger event that not only had effects in Gaza, but also
in Europe.
The deployment of anti-Muslim or anti-Semitic rhetoric and the use of negative stereotypes
by mainstream media outlets have contributed to the increased acts of hatred against Jews
and Muslims in Europe. The negative stereotyping of religious actors, especially Muslims, has
filtered popular culture, targeting younger people, as can be seen in films such as American
Sniper. The film and video game industries often depict Muslims as terrorists or as antiWestern. Unfortunately, the occurrences of extremist attacks on European soil have
provided material to concretize such prejudices and to demonize Muslim communities
across the EU.
2 – To which extent do you think anti-Semitism and Muslim hatred require a
specific or a common response?
Firstly, coordinated, common responses that include different types of actor are important.
Anti-Semitism has to be tackled at various levels and by various government departments,
agencies and civil society stakeholders, given the multifarious nature of its root causes. In
terms of tackling its most severe manifestation, that is violent extremism, it is important to
note that violent extremism often emerges from a system with different actors involved
(from instigators to perpetrators of violence). Government departments need to use a
healthy balance of security measures and social measures to address it. On the latter social
measures, these should not be overweighed by the former. For hatred to decrease,
governments must identify vulnerable communities and seek to reduce their socio-economic
grievances, whilst improving services such as education, which can help to combat extremist
ideologies and hatreds. However, civil society and faith-based organisations, however, also
have an important role to play in awareness raising, bringing together people of different
faiths and providing platforms to increase mutual understanding.
Secondly, a common European response is important. At a European level, different member
states take different approaches to religious freedom and to social integration. There should
be more learning from each other’s experiences. It is important to acknowledge that hatred
and hate speech against Muslims and Jews are expressions of racism and thus, part of a wider
problem in Europe. Consequently, a mixed approach combining both specific interventions
addressing anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim hatred as well as broader interventions targeting
racism is required. These interventions should also take into consideration the intersection
of other factors as well such as gender, socio-economic positions and the real and/or
perceived grievances of the instigators of violence and ethnicity.
3 – Beyond security measures, which are necessary to ensure the security of
people and sites, how can the feeling of security of Jewish and Muslim
communities in European States be improved?
There are many ways in which a feeling of security could be improved. Three examples are
given below:
Firstly, closer interaction between faith communities and police can be mutually beneficial
and can increase the trust of faith communities in the police leading to an increased
reporting of hate crimes. In several countries, the police are already engaging with religious
minorities through collaborative forums and networks where police and religious
communities can discuss pressing issues affecting religious communities. A Europe-wide
toolkit including reference material and mandatory training sessions that provide the police
with more understanding of how to work with religious communities, and that includes
some background information on the different features of religious communities, would be
useful. These measures would enable them to adopt more sensitive approaches and to
better understand the concerns of Jewish and Muslim minorities.
Secondly, neighborhood initiatives bringing together different members of communities and
encouraging their social interaction could help to tackle prejudices and increase the feeling of
safety amongst Jewish and Muslim communities.
Thirdly, increasing awareness of human rights and legislation as well as providing relevant
information about appropriate government mechanisms such as the non-discrimination
ombudsman may be useful tools to increase the feeling of security in Jewish and Muslim
communities.
4 – Which measures do you think would be most effective in tackling the issue of
hate speech, including online, with a particular focus on expressions of antiSemitism and Islamophobia?
Public campaigns against hate speech such as the online youth targeted No Hate Speech
campaign that has been run by the Council of Europe are important channels in tackling hate
speech. Such campaigns have the potential to raise general awareness and participation in
human rights discussions.
Online forums can also be used to promote ‘flower speech’. Anti-Muslim and anti-Semitic
narratives should be actively and purposefully tackled by the establishment of alternative,
creative platforms for positive speech. Tackling hate speech via increasing “flower speech” in
social media in Burma can be seen as a positive example of a response tackling anti-Muslim
rhetoric in Burma.
New and more effective online mechanisms could also be developed to track and monitor
hate crimes. A Europe-wide mechanism of this kind could also provide data that would lead
to a better understanding of the narratives and grievances that fuel extremism, which could
inform future policy. Using this data, better programs can be established to target anti-hate
speech information to those who click on websites that encourage, for example, antiSemitism or Islamophobia; this should reduce the online exposure to materials that incite
violence against Muslims and Jews, whilst providing powerful counter-messaging. Such
counter-messaging should be credible and needs credible figureheads to engage in its
production and promotion.
CSW further encourages States to make use of the Rabat Plan of Action on the prohibition
of advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to
discrimination, hostility or violence to combat hate speech. More effort should be made to
raise awareness of the Rabat Plan of Action as well as to facilitate multi-stakeholder
conversations on how to implement it alongside reviews to monitor progress.
5 – What are the main challenges and gaps in effectively combatting racist, antiSemitic and Islamophobic speech and crime in terms of legislation and its
implementation? What should be done to overcome these challenges and how
do you think the EU could facilitate this?
In order to effectively combat racist, Islamophobic and anti-Semitic speech, it is important to
enforce existing EU non-discrimination legislation and to ensure that it is domesticated and
implemented at a national level. Furthermore, to aid the combat of racist, anti-Semitic and
Islamophobic speech and crime, wider discussion on hate speech, how it is defined and how
it can be tackled should be facilitated by the EU in international platforms. Hate speech is
one of the most pressing universal human rights concerns in the world as no country is free
from hatred. As a consequence, the wider international community should seek to find ways
to tackle it together.
At a national level, anti-Muslim sentiments have been re-enforced by the adoption and
implementation of laws such as: the legal ban of face veils or niqabs in, for example, France
and Belgium and some regions of Italy and Spain as well as in Danish courtrooms; the
construction of new minarets in Switzerland; or more recently, the passing of controversial
reforms to Law on Islam in Austria. Indeed, in France, women who violate the niqab law are
subject to a fine of up to 150 Euros and/or have to attend a "citizenship" course. The
impacts of this law on the individual require further research. CSW recommends that a full
pan-European discussion is had on the prohibition of some religious dress and symbols to
combat the negatives consequences these laws have had on public opinion of Muslims and
Jews.
The training of law enforcement officials, to increase increasing their knowledge and
understanding of hate crimes, remains important for the combating of racist, anti-Semitic and
Islamophobic speech and violence. Their skills should also be kept up-to-date in this area in
light of new trends. This is especially important given their key role in implementing and
ensuring the fair and just prosecution of such crimes.
The declaration by the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly to declare 22 July as a
European Day for Victims of Hate Crime is a positive step forward and should be backed by
the EU with pan-European workshops, trainings and social media campaigning to highlight
the issue and tackle hate speech and crime together.
6 – What would be the most effective avenues of cooperation to ensure greater
effectiveness in preventing and combating anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim
discrimination and hatred (i.e. in the area of investigation, prosecution, data
collection, victims’ reporting and support, etc.)? What would be the role of civil
society and national and local authorities and communities?
We do not have enough information to respond in detail to the first part of this question.
However, in order to achieve greater effectiveness vis-à-vis policing, we would make the
following recommendations:
Greater cooperation is required between the police and different actors from within
religious communities. Best practices are to be found in Finland, where the police force
regularly meets with religious leaders. European countries should also provide both
compulsory human rights training as part of the police education curriculum and should
encourage consultations with religious communities to better understand beliefs. Local civil
society organisations may help with establishing and running such meetings. Furthermore,
equal opportunities and diversity monitoring should be enforced in police recruitment with
more officers being trained on how to better protect religious minorities from targeted
attacks. Ensuring that Muslims and Jews are proportionately represented in the police force
is fundamentally essential.
The above measures are necessary to increase effectiveness in reporting as the lack of
confidence in criminal systems and the police has led to the underreporting of hate crimes
against Jews and Muslims in Europe and as a consequence, information about the nature and
scale of hate crimes against Jews and Muslims at national or regional level, is inadequate.
Establishing relationships between religious leaders and the police can help to counter any
real and/or perceived racist attitudes and behaviour of the police force, increasing the trust
of Jewish and Muslim minorities vis-à-vis the police and encouraging a levelling-up of
practices within the police force itself.
7 – How can social inclusion and inter-cultural cooperation contribute to actively
combat anti-Semitic and Anti-Muslim discrimination and promote equality?
What can be done at local level to contribute to actively combat such
discrimination? Could you give some examples of best practices? What are in
your opinion the most effective tools to counter amalgams, stereotypes and
negative perceptions?
Given that European societies are increasingly diverse and pluralistic, there is a risk that
when citizens are excluded or ghettoised that this could lead to a cycle of discrimination and
structural violence. Social inclusion tackles structural violence by promoting positive peace
and by fostering cultural understanding amongst communities and in turn combats antiSemitic and Anti-Muslim discrimination. Social inclusion breaks down barriers of otherness
and difference, enabling citizens to experience the dignity of the other.
At a local level, measures could range from raising awareness of human rights in schools to
incentivising vocational training and encouraging businesses to hire the most socially
vulnerable. Open days, local community gatherings and initiatives that link people together in
a spirit of solidarity are important in fostering social cohesion.
CSW has long worked with Dr Brian Grim and his research, which has received UN Global
Compact support, on encouraging businesses to consciously consider FoRB in their
CSR/CSV strategies, is another avenue that could be explored at the local level, whilst being
advocated by the EU at multilateral settings.
Whilst CSW does not have statistical data on best practices in tackling anti-Semitism and
Islamophobia across Europe, one of the best ways of countering negative stereotypes is to
break them down by providing credible counternarratives and counterexamples. In terms of
best practices and inclusiveness, policies should be devised to ensure their applicability to
everyone in society.
8 – What are the main gaps and obstacles (legislative, political, administrative,
or financial) to fill at national/local level to counter discrimination based on
religion, belief and/or ethnic origin in practice? How can such gaps be tackled at
EU level?
Firstly, as noted above, there are different models of how religion engages in the public
sphere across Europe and there are different concepts of secularism. The merits and
weaknesses of each model deserve more study and reflection and after such thought,
subsequent ideas must further be translated into policy and legislation.
Secondly, CSW further recommends that the EU increases its support of pan-European
debates on issues such as secularism and sub-issues such as the displaying of religious
symbols and participation of religious groups in public life. For such discussions to be
fruitful, CSW recommends that the EU encourage Member States to establish roundtables at
the ministerial, regional and local levels, or to strengthen those already in place for the
discussion of these topics. The roundtables would help to reveal some of the critical issues
for the stakeholders and give direction to policy-makers and local officials. Religious
communities and faith-based organisations would be ideal partners to advocate for and to
support said roundtables.
Thirdly, the link between religious freedom or racism and economic prosperity has been
firmly established. From the riots that swept European capitals through to the more recent
radicalisation and recruitment of young people to ISIS, there is a clear link between
impoverished economic circumstances, grievances and extremist ideologies. Politically, as
noted above, the effects of the financial crisis and discourses of austerity and the rise of antiimmigration rhetoric, amongst others, provide obstacles for social cohesion. Politicians can
act with a short-term focus due to their need to remain in power, but equally public opinion
can act as an impetus for, or an obstacle to, positive change.
The lack of political solutions and confidence in political leaders provide further obstacles for
contentness with the current system and, in turn, seeing that religious communities,
including Muslim and Jews', participation in society does not inherently play a part individuals'
unsatisfactory circumstances. Young people, who find themselves without socio-economic
opportunities are less likely to be manipulated if avenues for education, economic
development and broader community participation are open to them.
Fourthly, administratively, policies that aim to increase religious tolerance should not be
seen as tick-box exercises and need to be seriously implemented. Obstacles to the
implementation of policies need to be overcome in order to ensure that discrimination
based on religion or belief is practically implemented. Beyond this, the approach to religion
in EU policies should avoid the pitfalls of being confined to a security paradigm.
Lastly, states should ensure that those inciting violence are brought to justice.
9 – What role could leaders, including religious and community leaders, play in
proposing social representations and a narrative which are inclusive, based on
common values and mutual understanding? Which are the most effective
practices taken that have effectively evidenced a positive impact and a potential
for replication, in particular at local level and amongst and by young people?
What could be the role of the media in this respect?
CSW encourages political and religious leaders to strongly condemn and denounce any acts
of hatred perpetrated by people who belong to their faith communities. Indeed, leaders are
able to play a crucial role in helping to tear apart untrue metanarratives that stereotype and
stigmatise different religious believers, including via projects such as housing interfaith
dialogues, celebrations and other meetings and interactive projects that help achieve such
aims.
As religious and community leaders are in a position to engage with their local communities
and thus instill a narrative based on common understanding and mutual values, CSW
recommends that the EU support, financially and otherwise (i.e. training), religious and
community leaders to engage in interfaith projects and dialogue.
The media also plays a crucial role in the way that Muslims and Jews are portrayed due to
the media’s ability to strongly impact public perception. In many countries the mainstream
media has adopted counter-terror rhetoric homogenizing Islam and all Muslims. The media
should avoid sensationalist prose but rather reflect a diversity of faith, linguistic, and religious
groups. Sensationalist messages that could trigger social hostility should be countered,
especially whilst reporting on international crises. Furthermore, the media can increase the
positive image of Jews and Muslims by providing them with platforms. Journalists should seek
opportunities to cover and interview Muslims and Jews regarding variety of issues, including
sports, culture and politics. Muslim voices should not only be heard in crisis reporting
relating to terrorism or radicalism.
The media can also facilitate deeper understanding and provide platforms for positive speech
to counter hate-speech.
10 – What type of discriminatory obstacles Jewish and Muslims experience most
frequently in the field of education and employment?
Whilst CSW does not have sufficient data to comment upon the frequency by which these
communities experience discriminatory obstacles in the fields of education and employment,
according to the observatory for religion in the workplace and the Randstads Institute’s
April 2015 report, in France, the number of religious disputes in the workplace doubled over
the past year.
Issues faced by communities include (but are not limited to):
Access to employment: as recent research by the FRA shows, young Muslim men face
disproportionate obstacles when trying to access the job market across the EU.
Conscientious objection: where religious views are seen as incompatible with other rights or
practices. For example, a Muslim doctor’s freedom not to perform abortion where this
conflicts with his/her religious views or where working hours prevent a candidate from
receiving a job or a promotion as he/she feels that they cannot work on a particular
day/time.
Religious symbols: the discussion on wearing religious symbols and in particular the niqab,
has occurred in several EU member states, including France, Germany, Spain, the UK, the
Netherlands and Italy. Whilst some policies in Europe have even been introduced to avoid
direct discrimination, such as removing all religious symbols, including those relating to the
State or official religion, from public spaces such as classrooms as seen in the Lautsi case,
such actions may be interpreted in some contexts as anti-religious and may result in indirect
discrimination.
For example, in France, civil servants, including teachers, are legally prohibited from
displaying religious symbols, and students cannot attend public schools if they display any
flamboyant religious symbols. This means that the Muslim headscarf and the Jewish kippah
are prohibited. In Germany, half of the states have passed laws that prohibit public school
teachers from wearing visible religious clothing and symbols. Human Rights Watch has
argued that the focus of such legislation was to introduce a headscarf ban, again raising
questions about the compatibility of Muslims’ European and religious identities and increasing
grievances.
11 – How could the society adjust to an increasing diversity? What is the society
at large ready to accommodate for a better "living together"?
On the issue of freedom of conscience, the legal principle of reasonable accommodation
could be more widely discussed at an EU level.
12 – What are/could be concrete measures with the greatest impact to be taken
by businesses (in public and private employment) and social partners to facilitate
and encourage inclusion of ethnic and religious minorities and foster mutual
understanding, and how could they be disseminated?
Public and private employers can address the issues of discrimination against Muslims and
Jews in Europe in many ways. They can make sure that they accommodate religious diversity
within employment processes and non-discriminatory accessibility of employment and
establish monitoring and tracking system to ensure diversity policies are implemented
effectively.
Workplaces are also one of the front-line areas where Muslims and Jews can experience
discrimination and where religious conflicts happen. Businesses should therefore foster an
environment of respectful and trust-building communication and have anti-discrimination
policies with relevant monitoring mechanisms in place. Diversity and gender equality training
should also form an integral part of workplace policies.
Furthermore, businesses can ensure that their supply chain is FoRB friendly and that they do
not partner with clients and other companies that spread racism and anti-Semitic or antiMuslim views. For instance, in April 2015, a Finnish textile company, Finlayson, ended
cooperation with a Finnish store due to the shop’s close relationship with a media house
that was criticised for publishing anti-Semitic materials. The news about the end of this
cooperation was widely discussed in the media and opened new public debates across
Finland.
Active engagement and open dialogue between businesses and NGOs and faith-based
organisations could also increase awareness of human rights and best practice on achieving
social cohesion in the workplace and community worked in.
13 – Which further initiatives could Member States, EU institutions and
international organisations take in order to promote common values and mutual
understanding and counter stereotypes in the educational sphere (e.g.
citizenship education; education about the EU history, its fundamental values
and EU rights; intercultural workshops in school, training for teachers, guidelines
for educators, etc.). What are already existing best practices in this respect?
Human rights education and learning about other religions, cultures and countries is crucial.
Schools should provide opportunities to visit mosques, synagogues and other places of
worship where students could observe Muslims and Jews worshiping and discuss the faith
with believers. Furthermore, the schools and work places should be encouraged to
acknowledge and reasonably accommodate students’ needs during non-Christian festivals,
such as Ramadan Eid al-Fitr and Rosh Hashanah. An example of best practice is ensuring that
school lunches provide halal and kosher options to their pupils.
Education is, additionally, one of the most effective means by which equality and nondiscrimination may be promoted, engaging with the next generation of leaders to have a
more informed and respectful outlook on other religions. CSW encourages the EU to
engage with States to ensure that educational systems, including those supported by
community and religious leaders, are equally respectful of each individual, are sensitive to
their personal religious beliefs and that they promote a pluralistic presentation of different
groups. Furthermore, CSW recommends that human rights forms an integral part of
teacher’s training and be included in the national curricula. Some best practices relating to
providing Human Rights education in schools can be seen, for example, in schools in Berlin
and Moldova, where a values curriculum, Youth Leadership Programme, and course entitled
“I Have the Right to Know My Rights” have been created respectively. See these and further
examples in the OSCE, Council of Europe, OHCHR and UNESCO report on best practices
regarding human rights education1.
Lastly, the history of the EU and different relgions' role in it should be properly and equally
represented and discussed in the school curriculum so as to combat ideas of Muslims and
Jews being historically inherently 'non-European'. The roles of Islam and Judaism should be
included in the European narrative.
1
http://www.osce.org/odihr/39006?download=true