GENEVA: After the UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution on Wednesday denouncing recent events of Quran desecration, speaking on behalf of the OIC, Pakistan accused the West of giving their commitment to eliminating religious hate “lip service.”
After the 47-member Council adopted the resolution with a vote of 28 in favour, 12 against, and seven abstentions, Ambassador Khalil Hashmi, Pakistan’s permanent representative to the UN offices in Geneva, said, “The opposition of a few in the room has emanated from their unwillingness to condemn the public desecration of the Holy Quran or any other religious book.”
The resolution was vehemently opposed by the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, and others claiming it goes against their understanding of freedom of expression and human rights. They lack the political, legal, and moral guts to denounce this crime, and it was the least the Council could have expected from them, according to Ambassador Hashmi, who spearheaded the motion.
“Countries that voted against the resolution conveyed a message to Muslims and people of other faiths that their devotion to preventing religious hatred is limited to lip service,” the sponsor said.
Countries that voted in favour of the resolution included Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Algeria, Argentina, Bangladesh, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Bolivia, Cameroon, China, Ivory Coast, Cuba, Eritrea, Gabon, Gambia, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Senegal, Somalia, South Africa, Sudan, Ukraine, Vietnam, Morocco, Pakistan, and Qatar.
Countries that voted against the resolution included Romania, the UK, Belgium, Costa Rica, the Czech Republic, Finland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Montenegro, the US, France, and Germany.
When asked about the resolution’s concerns from the West, Ambassador Hashmi responded, “It does not intend to restrict the right to free speech. It aims to strike a prudent balance between exercising this right with special duties and responsibilities. Unfortunately, some states have attempted to avoid taking on their obligations to fight the plague of religious hate”.
He claimed that the language was fair, themed, and solution-focused. “The language does not target any particular country, in contrast to the strategy used by other nations, including those who rejected the current resolution. It attempts to address a systemic impact on human rights caused by deliberate, legal deterrence and absence of prevention, said Ambassador Hashmi. —APP
