Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

---

        Although there is no doubt about the prohibition of defamation as one of the legitimate restrictions on the right to freedom of expression, but the boundaries of this prohibition are controversial, and one of the main controversies is about the kind and the nature of defamation's victim. In this case, a group of scholars believe that only human beings are the object of defamation, and the subjective values such as national identity, religion or national symbols cannot be the object of defamation. In contrast, some scholars believe that human beings are not the exclusive object of defamation. Ratification of a resolution entitled "Defamation of Religions" by the Human Rights Commission in 1999 and reiteration of such a resolution by the Commission and the Human Rights Council and even the UN General Assembly thereafter indicates the depth of the above difference. Despite that the above institutions, given the ratification of the above resolutions, have confirmed the possibility of defamation of religion, some scholars, especially the Thematic Rapporteurs of the above institutions have opposed these resolutions and thereby have rejected the concept of defamation of religion. This article, while reflecting the spread of opposition to the above resolutions, reviews the arguments of the oppositions to them. Overall, the author concluded that these resolutions have been actually codified to protect the rights and dignity of persons and religious groups; therefore, they are consistent with the International Standards of Human Rights.    

Keywords: Defamation of religion, Religious feelings, Right to Freedom of Religion, Hate Speech

Full-Text [PDF 284 kb]   (3049 Downloads)    

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

---