Gender Specific Religious Persecution

Fiona Bruce Excerpts

Thursday 17th March 2022 Westminster Hall

[Fiona Bruce (Congleton) (Con)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) on securing this debate. I hope the Minister will forgive me for repeating several of his points. However, given that millions of women around the world are suffering those abuses, those points bear repetition.

Freedom of religion or belief is a fundamental human right, extending to everyone, everywhere, without distinction of any kind, be it race, ethnicity, gender, political or other opinion, or economic or social status. The three main components of FORB are the right to have a religion or belief; the right to change it; and the right to practice it. Unfortunately, millions of people around the world are not able to do those things freely.

While religious persecution against men tends to be focused and often public, such as killings during conflict, religious persecution against women is more likely to be complex and hidden. However, it too can be very violent. Global FORB violations against women, as women, can be characterised in three words: complex, violent and hidden.

Despite the often distinctive nature of FORB abuses of women, which are often sexual, until recently much of the research and data on FORB has been gender blind, possibly because the majority of official representatives of religion and belief communities across the world are men, and because their experiences have been used as a default reference. Yet, in many societies, men and women live very different lives. Women all too often do not have the same access to resources. They are assigned different roles. Many women do not exercise the same autonomy as men, even in relation to religion or belief practices in their local communities, let alone in other ways.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the factors that result in religious persecution against women are many and complex, and we all, including those of us who work on FORB much of the time, need to better understand those factors. Some work has been done by the FCDO in response to recommendation 5 of the Truro review, but not enough. I put that on the record, as the three-year deadline for reviewing the independent Truro review will be upon us at the beginning of July. But not enough work has been done.

That is why I am grateful to Aid to the Church in Need and Open Doors for their recent reports, “Hear Her Cries” and “The Persecution of Christian Women and Girls”. They are moving and critical. When I read “Hear Her Cries”, as a woman, I cried. I brought a copy for the Minister and I implore him to read it. It is heartrending.

Recommendation 5 of the review, which was accepted by the FCDO, states—I read it into the record, as we, fortunately, have the liberty of time in this debate:

“Bolster research into the critical intersection of FoRB and minority rights with both broader human rights issues (such as people trafficking, gender equality, gender based violence especially kidnapping, forced conversion and forced marriage) and other critical concerns for FCO such as security, economic activity, etc. recognising the potential for religious identity to be a key marker of vulnerability.”

The particularly important part is its final sentence:

“Use such research to articulate FoRB-focussed policies to address these issues.”

That sentence poses a critical question, one I hope will be considered by the independent reviewers of the Truro review. How has any such research done by the FCDO been used to augment, amend or develop Government policies over the last two and a half years, so that the UK can better help tackle the tragic global phenomenon of widespread FORB violations against women and girls? What changes have been made to FCDO policies?

Some good Government-funded work has been done by the Coalition for Religious Equality and Inclusive Development. It states four reasons why women from religious minorities may be especially vulnerable to FORB abuses. I will summarise them briefly. First, when women are poor, and they belong to religious minorities in societies where people from a different faith are often viewed as “other”—someone different or alien—they can be particularly powerless. They can expect very little support from society as a whole. I will give an example later of a migrant woman from Qatar.

Secondly, CREID says that in some societies the bodies of women who belong to religious minorities are being used as battlegrounds in wider political and geostrategic struggles. That can lead to them being targeted for ideological reasons. Their vulnerable position in society makes them even more vulnerable. An example, as we heard from the hon. Member for Strangford, are the Yazidis in and around 2014. We also know of the Uyghurs in China; we have heard terrible stories about them being sexually abused and undergoing forced abortions.

Thirdly, some forms of sexual grooming of girls and women can be motivated by ideology. This was demonstrated in the example given by the hon. Gentleman, which I will refer to later, of forced marriage and forced conversion being justified by ideology from other faiths.

Finally—although not finally in terms of my speech, Ms Rees—women can face stigma and discrimination in their own communities. Tragically, women who have been subjected to sexual violence are often seen as bringing shame on their community and they can be targeted for honour-based violence from their own families and community. That is why it is critical to work with whole communities, including religious leaders, to challenge the acceptability of religiously motivated violence against women and bring about social change.

We have to make more explicit the links between gender, religion, marginality and poverty. Women in many countries appear to be victims of not just double but triple forms of persecution: they are women; they are of a particular religious or belief group; and they have low socioeconomic status and live in the margins. Those different layers reinforce each other, making women particularly vulnerable.

It is insufficient for us to say that we must raise awareness of the intersection of those vulnerabilities—we must be moved to action. Otherwise, religiously marginalised, economically excluded women will continue to fall through the cracks, experiencing appalling inequality, discrimination, persecution and violence, which will continue to be overlooked, ignored or minimised. I hope that the conference the UK is hosting on 5 and 6 July 2022 on freedom of religion or belief will promote some practical steps as to how we can address that issue and, working together with the international community concerned about FORB, encourage both Governments and civil society to do so.

I will unpack those thoughts a little. I am grateful to Stefanus Alliance International for providing an example of the complexity of the causes of FORB abuses against women by way of a migrant woman in Qatar. There is already a lack of legal protection for Qatari women in general. Christians are a minority group in Qatar; they do not enjoy the same level of rights and freedoms as the majority Muslim population. A foreign Christian woman working as a maid in Qatar can often have her immigration papers confiscated by her employer; she therefore has little or no hope of legal protection should he abuse her. That is just one example of the multi-layered intersectionality of human rights violations for women, and why women can be particularly vulnerable to FORB abuses.

Another example of the differences between men and women in terms of FORB violations is that when they occur against women, they are often hidden. Tragically, the abuses are often perpetrated within a woman’s own home, which is, of course, where women spend much of their time—in the private sphere. Sadly, such abuses may even be perpetrated by her own family or community. Practices such as female genital mutilation, sex-selective abortion, female infanticide, forced marriage, child marriage, sexual violence, marital rape, honour killings and the denial of access to work can all fall into the category of religiously motivated FORB abuses.

If a woman converts to another religion, she may well face additional challenges from her own family, such as physical or emotional torture to persuade her to deny her new faith. She may be excluded from family social networks, which can have severe consequences for a woman when they are her main—and sometimes only—social contacts. Leaving the family will not be an option. When a woman’s educational opportunities, and therefore her job opportunities, may also have been limited, she is financially dependent on her family. Sadly, any chance of recourse to justice can also be severely limited for her. Too often, we hear of the police taking no action, or of local courts taking no action at all when a young woman who has been forcibly married, for example, applies for justice.

Sadly, perpetrators of sexual violence often receive no evident public repercussions. In too many places, the impunity related to such crimes makes the continued targeting of women by others for their religious beliefs a low-risk activity. The sexual violence experienced by many women often remains unreported because of stigma and shame. Sadly, it is one of the most common forms of FORB violations against women and many underage girls. The female body becomes a battlefield used by perpetrators to control a woman’s personal faith or faith communities at large.

I am aware of one young woman who has been in hiding for well over a year as she is in fear of her abductor, who forcibly married her—by which we mean rape, and often continual rape. She is too frightened to come out of hiding for fear of the whole community. Rape is widely used as a weapon of armed conflict, as we heard and saw in 2014, as the Syrian conflict affected the Yazidis. Thousands of Yazidi women were abducted and held as sex slaves by ISIS soldiers. I heard of a young woman called Ekhlas, who was captured by ISIS soldiers. When she asked them, “Are you going to murder me?”, they said, “Oh, no. We’re going to make you suffer much more than that.” They took her as a sex slave.

Those women have faced challenges if they have tried to flee captivity or reintegrate themselves into their communities, which have practices and regulations on pre-marital intercourse or interreligious marriages. As we now know, some 2,700 such women, many of whom have children, remain missing to this day. I would appreciate it if the Minister could update me—perhaps not today, but in due course—on what practical support and resources have been applied to help those women since the answer I received on 26 October last year, when I last raised this issue.

Rape can even be used outside conflict in disputes between religious groups. As the Coalition for Religious Equality and Inclusive Development says, sexual grooming of girls and women can be motivated by ideology. Shockingly, it can sometimes even be used with the appearance of respectability. Each year, hundreds of Christian, Hindu and Sikh girls are reportedly abducted and forcibly married, and it is justified by ideology.

“Hear Her Cries”, a report by Aid to the Church in Need, relays brave women’s accounts of their kidnapping, forced conversion, sexual victimisation and unimaginable suffering. I, too, was going to read out the account of little Farah, aged 12, who was abducted from her grandfather’s home in that way, but the hon. Gentleman has already done so. That report should do more than just move us to tears; it should move us to action.

Tragically, although men are more likely to be killed as a result of religious persecution, they are also more likely than women to be celebrated as martyrs, whereas women, who are more likely to be subject to sexual abuse, are not rewarded the same honour. Their complex trauma is often additionally burdened with re-traumatisation in the form of isolation and rejection from their own faith communities. The blame falls on the victim, suffering continues long after the event, and counselling is unavailable.

What can we do to address all that? I will ask the Minister to consider a few things. We must ensure much wider humanitarian assistance for such women, and more extensive training in specialised trauma counselling. There need to be targeted programmes of aid for women and girls who face vulnerabilities as women of faith or belief, with those factors clearly recognised as criteria of vulnerability by UK aid. Women need to be involved in designing and implementing aid and other support programmes. There needs to be strengthened dialogue and co-operation between women’s rights activists and FORB activists to help to overcome a perception that achieving FORB for all women is incompatible with women’s rights.

We need to call out authorities in countries, including Governments, at the highest level. I implore the Minister to do so whenever the opportunity occurs. We need to call out abuses when authorities turn a blind eye or, tragically, even at times condone action, such as where local policing or the country’s legal system fails to protect women subject to FORB abuses. We must ensure that steps are taken against perpetrators to hold them to account and end cultures of impunity. We must learn to better identify early warning signs to avert atrocities and work with others in the international community to do so. We must challenge those Governments who have put FORB in their constitutions or signed up to international treaties, such as article 18 of the universal declaration of human rights, but do not apply them.

We must gather data to better understand the double or triple jeopardy of women who are members of religious minorities—often also among the poorest and most vulnerable in their societies. More dialogue must be promoted within and across religious communities, including women at all times, to reflect on traditional practices, such as patriarchal ones, that have a negative impact on FORB. We must help women in local communities to voice their concerns. We need to look at how we can use the declaration of humanity, which was launched by Lord Ahmad, our Human Rights Minister, during the pandemic. It has not, perhaps, had the profile and subsequent impact that it could have. There is more to do. Will the Minister say how the UK Government, which commissioned it, could help to take that forward? The three-year deadline for implementing the Truro review, which was a manifesto commitment, will shortly be upon us, but that is no reason not to continue working on recommendation 5 and all the others. We must not stop just because the three-year period of the Truro review ends this July. Much more needs to be done.

From my experience of working on FORB in depth and detail over the past year and three months or so, as the Prime Minister’s special envoy for freedom of religion or belief, I do not believe that championing FORB and calling out its abuses across the world is sufficiently embedded in the culture of the FCDO. Experience has shown me that the FCDO, both at desks here and at posts in countries, needs to be bolder and more public in calling out specific cases of FORB abuses—not least those relating to some of the women we have heard about today. Inadequate advocacy is being provided for individual cases of concern. I am not being appropriately encouraged to undertake it. Tailored responses are not being provided to me when I raise individual cases of concern. Generic remarks in response to my raising such cases, such as, “FORB is a key human rights priority for the UK,” are simply not good enough.

Nor is the argument that it is better to raise such cases in private good enough. I have been concerned about one such case for almost a year and a half, and officials are aware of it. Still the poor girl continues to suffer. Arguments that raising a case by name could put an individual woman in danger, when she is already effectively being imprisoned under risk of mob violence, are unacceptable, particularly when so-called “in private” advocacy appears to yield little result. In one such case, I was asked not to name a young girl who had been abducted because it might put her at risk. She had been abducted by Boko Haram. She was at risk. Her family wanted her case to be raised. It is very interesting that today we are celebrating the freedom of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, whose plight has not been out of the public domain for six years.

I will close with the words of Eleanor Roosevelt, one of the architects of the 1948 universal declaration of human rights. She said:

“Where, after all, do universal rights begin? In small places, close to home—so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighbourhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere.”

--- Later in debate ---

[James Cleverly]

I shot a quick look across to my officials, who will have heard that request. To be completely honest, at the moment the situation in Ukraine means that we are still in response mode, so the normal generosity of spirit demonstrated by my Department is being stretched somewhat. However, we recognise that this is an important issue, and we will seek to find a time to liaise as soon as possible.

[Fiona Bruce]

rose—

[James Cleverly]

I suspect that the cavalry is about to ride to my rescue.

[Fiona Bruce]

I would be delighted to facilitate such a meeting in the Department.

[James Cleverly]

Told you.

This is a shocking and painful issue, especially when we hear specific cases such as those brought up in the Chamber today—they are harrowing beyond belief. People who already have the least power and the most suppressed voices in their communities and societies once again find themselves the target of misogynistic persecution, attack and sexual violence in the name of religion, although it is not honestly driven by that religion.

We will continue to champion freedom and democracy around the world. Freedom of religion or belief and gender rights will remain at the forefront of our international efforts as a Government.