Monthly Archives: June 2011

Egypt – The Plight of Egypt’s Copts – Question in The House of Lords, June 23rd 2011

Posted by David Alton on

http://www.copts.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3195&Itemid=1

House of Lords
Thursday, 23 June 2011.
11 am
Prayers—read by the Lord Bishop of Exeter.
Egypt: Religious Minorities
Question
11.05 am
Asked By Baroness Cox
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will make representations to the Government of Egypt concerning the killing of Christians and the attacks on Christian churches in that country, and on the promotion of the safety of all citizens of religious minority faiths in Egypt.
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): My Lords, my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary raised his concerns about the dangers of extremism and sectarianism in Egypt with the head of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, Field Marshal Tantawi, and with the Egyptian Prime Minister when he visited the country on 1 and 2 May. We will continue to urge the Egyptian Government to create the conditions for pluralist and non-sectarian politics and to establish policies that prevent discrimination against anyone on the basis of their religion.
Baroness Cox: I thank the Minister for his reply. Is he aware that since the January revolution there have been at least 20 documented attacks against religious minorities, including not only the Coptic Christians but the Sufi community, and that in many cases the security forces refrain from intervening effectively, giving rise to concerns that they might actually be condoning the violence? Will Her Majesty’s Government raise with the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces the importance of ensuring that the emerging constitution, legal framework and social structures are guided by the principles of equality of citizenship and equality before the law, consistent with the human rights conventions to which Egypt is a signatory?
Lord Howell of Guildford: I can tell the noble Baroness that we are indeed aware of the ugly situation that she describes. Tensions between Christians and Muslims in Egypt had initially eased during the revolution back in February, but regrettably she is right: there has been an upsurge in sectarian violence, including the worst violent clashes between the two communities in early May, when some 15 people died and over 330 were injured. This is obviously a deplorable situation. As for assisting with the emerging constitution, this country has already committed £1.2 million through the Arab Partnership scheme to support the immediate political transition process. That includes projects to build the capacity of government and civil society in developing anti-discrimination legislation, supporting constitutional reform and establishing links between the UK and the Egyptian judiciaries. In addition, the Supreme Council—the transitional Government—has announced that it will draft a new unified law on the construction of places of worship, which is to be equal for both Copts and Muslims, and a new anti-discrimination law to prevent religious discrimination. We are moving in the right direction, but clearly much more is needed.
Lord Janner of Braunstone: I thank the noble Baroness for her very important Question. Does the noble Lord agree that, sadly, this is a serious problem throughout most of the Arab world?
Lord Howell of Guildford: If the noble Lord is talking about a rising intolerance against people for their religious beliefs, he is absolutely right. This is an extremely worrying trend, which we should not only resist but work against most actively wherever it occurs.
Lord Chidgey: Will my noble friend confirm that Article 46 of the previous Egyptian constitution guaranteed freedom of belief and freedom of worship and that the penal code provided for up to five years in jail for exploiting,
“religion in order to promote extremist ideologies”?
Will the Government call on the new Egyptian Administration for these constitutional safeguards to be retained, respected and enforced in their new legislation?
Lord Howell of Guildford: That is certainly the theme of our exchanges and dialogues, and those of my right honourable friend, with the leaders of the Supreme Council. As I said to the noble Baroness, Lady Cox, the Government are drafting a new law on the construction of places of worship, which is to be equal for both Copts and Muslims, and a new anti-discrimination law. That will, in a sense, reinforce what went before. As my noble friend appreciates, Egypt is in the process of moving out of the constitutional pattern of the past and, therefore, all the positive laws that come from the past will need to be reinforced and redrafted.
Baroness Berridge: My Lords, in light of the comments of my noble friend the Minister that there is an increase of religious intolerance, would not now be the time for the Government to adopt the recommendation from the Conservative Party’s human rights group’s report The Freedom to Believe that the Foreign Office should appoint a special envoy for international freedom, religion and belief?
Lord Howell of Guildford: That was an extremely interesting report, which my honourable and right honourable friends are certainly studying closely. I cannot make precise promises on exactly how the recommendations will be implemented or whether they will reflect the pattern of our policy evolution, but I fully recognise that my noble friend’s support for this document is right and that it is a valuable study.
The Lord Bishop of Exeter: Can the Minister tell us what advice the 8 June meeting of the FCO human rights panel offered the Foreign Secretary on how the Government might best respond to these recent attacks on religious minorities in Egypt? Will he also say how the Government have responded to any such advice?
Lord Howell of Guildford: My Lords, the answer to the right reverend Prelate’s question is positively and continuously. I know that he appreciates, because he follows these things closely, that we are dealing with a constantly changing situation. We are in constant dialogue through our posts, and indeed through Ministers and officials, with the Supreme Council in Cairo and with Governments in other countries where there are clear discrimination and attacks against religious minorities, including Christian minorities. I think that I have to tell him that the work of the panel and the continuing work of the Foreign Office are moving in the same direction, which is a positive one.
Lord Alton of Liverpool: My Lords, in declaring an interest as president of the UK Coptic Association, may I ask the Minister whether he recalls the letter that I sent him on 1 January this year, copied to the Foreign Secretary, detailing the attacks made on services at the Church of the Two Saints in Alexandria, in which some 21 people were killed and 79 injured, even predating the Arab spring? Is it not the case that the campaign of asphyxiation against the ancient churches throughout the whole of the Middle East is something that we need to give much more focus to? We should never miss the opportunity, when pointing the finger at organisations such as the Salafis for fomenting this hatred and violence, to enunciate our support for the creation of a plural society where minorities such as the Copts, who constitute a tenth of Egypt’s population, are properly respected.
Lord Howell of Guildford: I would not disagree with a word of that. I remind your Lordships that the noble Lord, Lord Alton, is second to none in keeping us up to speed with what is happening on this whole front. When he asked me whether I could recall a letter that he wrote on 1 January, I have to be quite frank and say that I recall a mass of letters that have arrived from him almost every day of the week since then. I ask him please to go on writing and reminding us all that this is a very frightening and terrible situation to which we must, both at the governmental and the individual level, give our full attention.

1 Feb 2011 : Column 1306

Lord Alton of Liverpool: My Lords, what resources are available within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to champion the issue of religious liberties? In these turbulent times, is the Minister able to give some thought to the plight of the imprisoned Baha’is in Iran; the minorities in the ancient churches, the Chaldeans and Syrianis in Iraq, who have been facing a campaign of asphyxiation; and the Coptic community in Egypt, especially at present following the terrible attacks launched in Alexandria only a couple of weeks ago?
Lord Howell of Guildford: The noble Lord is quite right to begin the catalogue-sadly, it goes on even further than he mentioned-of the persecution of religious minorities. The Foreign and Commonwealth
Office and Her Majesty’s Government are determined, wherever we see such persecution, to make the strongest representations through our posts. The noble Lord mentioned three instances of hideous persecution and I have a list in front of me of four or five more areas of the world where there is direct persecution of religious minorities of a highly intolerant kind. In every instance, personnel in our posts and in the Foreign Office here in London continuously and vigorously pursue our concerns, suggestions and proposals that this intolerance should cease forthwith.

——————————————————————————————————–

Universe Column
January 16th 2011.
David Alton

Christmas and the New Year were marked by two bloody and ominous attacks on Christian worshippers in Iraq and Egypt.
On December 30th, in Baghdad, at least two Christians were killed and nine wounded in a string of six attacks on Christian homes. The areas targeted were predominantly Christian areas, and the homes attacked were specifically Christian homes. And, on new Year’s Eve, an even more lethal attack resulted in the massacre of over 20 Egyptian Coptic Christians in the ancient city of Alexandria.

The old year ended and the new one opened with bloodshed that tragically points to attempts to systematically annihilate the ancient churches of the Middle East.

The word “genocide” – not one which should ever be used lightly or for rhetorical effect – is the correct terminology when a campaign sets out to annihilate an ethnic, religious, racial or national group.

A legal definition of genocide is found in the 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Article 2 defines genocide as “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.”

Consider that definition when assessing first the appalling situation in Iraq – brought home to us by the 31st October attack against the Syrian Catholic Cathedral in Baghdad in which 58 were killed. At the time of the October attacks in Baghdad the perpetrators also threatened violence against Egypt’s Coptic Christian communities – a threat which came to pass on New Year’s Eve. They have vowed to eradicate Christian believers in the region.

The international community may not yet be willing to recognise these events as part of a genocidal campaign but unless they wake up to the nature of these atrocities it will only be a matter of time before the definitions catch up with the realities. No doubt hand wringing “statesmen” will then claim they had no idea how bad the situation had become.

The violence against Egypt’s Copts is hardly new but it has been intensifying – with barely a murmur of protest.

The Alexandria attack sharply underlines the vulnerability of Egypt’s Christians. The bomb attack outside the al-Qidiseen church (“Church of the Two Saints”) took place as worshippers were leaving a midnight service to celebrate the New Year. It is said that if the Mass had ended two minutes earlier the number of fatalities would have been massive. According to the official figures at least 21 were killed and 79 were injured.

The injured also include eight Muslims. The church and a nearby mosque suffered extensive damage from the blast

Initially the authorities believed a car bomb was used, but now they believe a suicide bomber was responsible. The attack prompted angry clashes between Christians and local Muslims during which the mosque opposite the church was further damaged. The police used tear gas to disperse the crowds.

The al-Qidiseen church was one of three churches which were attacked in April 2006 by a man wielding a knife, killing one person and injuring 17 others.

The massacre has been widely denounced by political and religious leaders in Egypt, including the Grand Mufti and other Muslims. This is to be welcomed, but the Egyptian Government’s own role hardly stands up to scrutiny or examination. It is alleged that the authorities withdrew their security officials from the vicinity of the church about an hour before the attacks took place.

These attacks are part of a worsening pattern, sanctioned by the authorities, which I have observed since the publication, in 1992, of my report for the Jubilee Campaign, on the discrimination faced by Egyptian Copts. Having also served as honorary President of The UK Coptic Association I have also seen regular reports of the worsening situation. It disturbs me greatly that there seems considerable global indifference to the escalating violence against the Copts.

Egypt’s Copts make up some 12 million from a population of 80 million Egyptians and they face major human rights violations and are being increasingly persecuted. It is hard to believe that this is happening to them in 21st Century Egypt, which prides itself on being a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council.

The events in Alexandria find an echo in the drive-by massacre of churchgoers leaving midnight mass on Coptic Orthodox Christmas Eve on January 6, 2010, in Nag Hammadi. Six Copts were killed and nine others were seriously injured. Later, in Giza on November 24, 2010, the State’s own forces opened fire on peaceful Coptic protesters, worshipping in St. Mary and St. Michael’s Church.

In between those two incidents there were attacks on churches, collective punishment of Copts, abduction and, in collusion with the State, there have been incidents of Coptic minors being forced to convert – an increasing phenomenon. Increasing, too, have been demonstrations, which have been staged over fifteen consecutive weeks, by radical Islamists – demonstrations which have targeted the Coptic Church and its head, the saintly Pope Shenouda.

These demonstrations have been fanned by radical Muslim clerics and the Egyptian media, based on allegations that the church is abducting Christian girls who converted to Islam and locking them up in monasteries, and of stockpiling weapons in monasteries for later use against Muslims, espousing sectarian hatred and violence against the Copts.

On November 18th the US Commission on International Religious Freedom reported that “This kind of rhetoric goes too far and stokes the fire of extremists looking for ammunition to justify violent acts against religious minorities”. USCIRF has placed Egypt on its watch list for religious freedom that requires close monitoring due to the nature and extent of violations of religious freedom engaged in or tolerated by the government

The number of violations against the Copts for the year 2010 are not yet published, but, from January 2008 to January 2010, there were at least 52 incidents of sectarian violence or tension—about two incidents a month—which took place in 17 of Egypt’s 29 governorates.

The vast majority of such sectarian incidents were waged by Muslims against Copts, taking the form of “collective revenge”. This springs from an irrational conviction that all Christians should be made to pay for any grievance caused by a random Christian, in no way related to the original cause of the complaint.

According to the US International Religious Freedom Report 2010 published on December 17, “The status of respect for religious freedom by the government remained poor, unchanged from the previous year.”

The killings in Alexandria and Baghdad underline the urgency and gravity of the situation. – and the need for all of us to speak up for the persecuted ancient churches.

A letter to the Egyptian and Iraqi Ambassadors in London, to the Foreign Secretary William Hague, and to your own local MP, urging them to demand protection and security for the ancient churches might help to save lives and prevent the escalation of these traumatic events into the full scale genocide which threatens to unravel.

Letter to the Foreign Secretary:

January 1st 2011.

Rt.Hon William Hague MP.
House of Commons,
London
January 1st, 2011.

Dear William,

First, please accept my good wishes for the year ahead.

Over the Christmas break you will have seen reports of attacks on Christian communities in Iraq and Egypt.

On December 30th in Baghdad at least two Christians were killed and nine wounded in a string of six attacks on Christian homes. The areas targeted were predominantly Christian areas, and the homes targeted were specifically Christian homes. The old year ended and the new one has opened with blood shed that tragically points to the systematic annihilation of the ancient churches of the Middle East.

The appalling situation in Iraq – brought home to us by the 31st October attack against the Syrian Catholic Cathedral in Baghdad in which 58 were killed – was commented upon over Christmas by Pope Benedict and by Dr.Rowan Williams. At the time of the October attacks in Baghdad the perpetrators also threatened violence against Egypt’s Coptic Christian communities.

That came to pass last night, on New Year’s Eve, in Alexandria. The violence against Egypt’s Copts has been intensifying – with hardly a murmur of protest. Unless urgent action is taken, Egypt’s Copts will be destined to suffer the same fate as Christians in Iraq.

The Alexandria attack sharply underlines the vulnerability of Egypt’s Christians. The bomb attack outside the al-Qidiseen church (“Church of the Two Saints”) took place as worshippers were leaving a midnight service to celebrate the New Year. According to the official figures at least 21 were killed and 79 were injured. The injured include eight Muslims. The church and a nearby mosque suffered extensive damage from the blast

Initially the authorities believed a car bomb was used, but now they believe a suicide bomber was responsible. The attack prompted angry clashes between Christians and local Muslims during which the mosque opposite the church was further damaged. The police used tear gas to disperse the crowds.

The attack has been widely denounced by political by religious leaders in Egypt. The al-Qidiseen church was one of three churches which were attacked in April 2006 by a man wielding a knife, killing one person and injuring 17 others.

These attacks are part of a worsening pattern which I have observed since the publication, in 1992, of my report for the Jubilee Campaign, on the discrimination faced by Egyptian Copts. Having also served as honorary President of The UK Coptic Association I have also seen regular reports of the worsening situation. It disturbs me greatly that there seems considerable global indifference to the escalating violence against the Copts.

Egypt’s Copts make up some 12 million from a population of 80 million Egyptians and they face major human rights violations and are being increasingly persecuted. It is hard to believe that this is happening to them in 21st Century Egypt, which prides itself on being a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council.

The events in Alexandria find an echo in the drive-by massacre of churchgoers leaving midnight mass on Coptic Orthodox Christmas Eve on January 6, 2010, in Nag Hammadi. Six Copts were killed and nine others were seriously injured. The year end with deadly violence in St. Mary and St. Michael’s Church, in Giza on November 24, 2010, in which the State’s own forces opened fire on peaceful Coptic protesters,

In between those two incidents there were attacks on churches, collective punishment of Copts, abduction and forced

Islamisation of Coptic minors by Muslims in collusion with State Security is also an increasing phenomenon. So, too, are demonstrations, which have been staged over fifteen consecutive weeks, by radical Islamists – demonstrations which have targeted the Coptic Church and its head, Pope Shenouda.

These demonstrations have been fanned by radical Muslim clerics and the Egyptian media, based on allegations that the church is abducting Christian girls who converted to Islam and locking them up in monasteries, and of stockpiling weapons in monasteries for later use against Muslims, espousing sectarian hatred and violence against the Copts.

On November 18th the US Commission on International Religious Freedom reported that “This kind of rhetoric goes too far and stokes the fire of extremists looking for ammunition to justify violent acts against religious minorities”.. USCIRF has placed Egypt on its watch list for religious freedom that requires close monitoring due to the nature and extent of violations of religious freedom engaged in or tolerated by the government

The number of violations against the Copts for the year 2010 are not yet published, but, from January 2008 to January 2010, there have been at least 52 incidents of sectarian violence or tension—about two incidents a month—which have taken place in 17 of Egypt’s 29 governorates. These were the scene of violent incidents which were all waged by Muslims against Christians, according to a two-year study by the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR), a reputable NGO, that monitors the situation of freedoms—especially religious freedoms—in Egypt:

http://www.eipr.org/en/report/2010/04/11/776.

The vast majority of such sectarian incidents were waged by Muslims against Copts, taking the form of “collective revenge” owing to an irrational conviction that all Christians should be made to pay for the mistake committed by a Christian in no way related to them.

The second pattern of collective revenge targets Christians who attempt to conduct religious rituals in a new church they build, or in an existing one which they restore or expand, or in a building they convert into a church, or again by holding prayers in an ordinary building or inside the home of one of them.

The situation is rejected not only by neighbouring Muslims, but also by representatives of the State, who refuse the gathering of Christians for prayer in one of their homes, and, according to the EIPR study, they retaliate by arresting the worshippers and questioning them.

Church building in Egypt is still restricted by the contemporary interpretation of the 1856 Ottoman Hamayouni decree, still partially in force, which requires non-Muslims to obtain a presidential decree to build new churches.

In addition, Ministry of Interior (MOI) regulations, issued in 1934 under the Al-Ezabi decree, specify a set of 10 conditions that the government must consider before a presidential decree for construction of a new non-Muslim place of worship can be issued. The conditions include the requirement that the distance that a church may be no closer than 100 meters (340 feet) from a mosque and that approval of the neighbouring Muslim community must be obtained before a permit to build a new church may be issued. Moreover, the State Security often imposes its authority, making the process difficult even after obtaining a presidential decree.

According to the US International Religious Freedom Report 2010 published on December 17, 2010, “The status of respect for religious freedom by the government remained poor, unchanged from the previous year.”

There is no indication that Egypt’s political leadership, or the wider international community, has come to realise the need to address the “Coptic issue.” While the government makes great efforts to present to the outside world an optimistic picture of the situation of the Copts, it does little to address the reality.

Last week President Mubarak gave a speech regarding the laws in front of Parliament for this session. Once again, and for the 6th year running, the long awaited new law to deal with the regulation of church buildings was omitted.

Let me underline the nature of this serious situation by mentioning three recent violations:

1. Firing Live Ammunition at Coptic Protesters

On November 24, 2010, at the Coptic Orthodox Church of St. Mary and St. Michael’s, in Talbiya, Omraniya district of Giza province, which is still under construction, some 5000 security forces personnel opened fire, used tear gas and hurled stones on men, women, children who were present at the church grounds, in order to disperse them, halt construction and demolish the building. The Copts hurled stones at the forces.

The Coptic crowd, many bearing makeshift crosses, decided to approach the Giza governorate and to protest against what they saw as an unjustified attack against them. They were incensed that the problem had appeared to have been resolved as the governor had sent his secretary to the congregation on the previous evening advising them that the governor has approved the building to be a church.

The clashes resumed in front of the Giza governorate building, where the angry protesters also felt deceived by the governor. They hurled stones at the building facade and at parked vehicles, while security forces opened fire again on them. Some news sites circulated news that security sources explained the unusually harsh response they used against the Coptic demonstrators by claiming the Copts had hurled Molotov cocktails at the Giza governorate headquarters, a claim which eye-witnesses categorically deny.

The clashes resulted in the death of three Coptic men from bullet wounds and a four year old child from tear gas being thrown inside the chapel. More than 79 Copts were injured, suffering mostly gunshot wounds, some severely, and 157 people including women were arrested randomly from the streets. In addition 22 teenagers and children as young as 9-years old were also arrested. The detainees were charged with 14 charges which ranged from demonstrating illegally, carrying white weapons and blocking public roads; to the intentional destruction of public property for a terrorist purpose and the attempt to kill police officials. Such charges carry sentences of 15 years imprisonment.

It transpired that the building had been licensed as a Church-owned-and-operated social services building but the Copts who had for years tried in vain to obtain licence to build a church—Egyptian law and regulations pre-condition almost prohibitive procedures for the licensing of new churches—were using it as a church. The building violation was exposed when they began to add a dome.

The Church Diocese in Giza issued a statement, saying “The Governor of Giza gave instructions to modify the services building to a church building, but a decision by the Chief of the District to halt construction and remove the irregularities angered the people, who congregated next to the building, fearing that the district authorities would cause damage to it, triggered the events and the clashes.”

Some 40 private and human rights lawyers were banned by security officials on orders of the General Prosecutor from attending interrogations of Copts before prosecution.

Injured detainees were shackled to their beds in hospital, or were sent to detainment camps before completing their medical treatment prompting an outcry from Egyptian NGOs.

NGOs in Egypt and abroad condemned the attack, and called on Public Prosecutor to prosecute the security personnel responsible for the death and the injury of Coptic protesters.

November’s events were a serious escalation in the State’s treatment of its Christian citizens. This is not simply about social violence occasioned by the construction of a church, but, according to Hossam Bahgat, EIPR’s Executive Director, “rather security forces opening fire on protesters demanding their constitutional right to worship without arbitrary interference or discrimination.”

Meanwhile the Egyptian Attorney General under pressure by human rights organization and Pope Shenouda, who went into retreat to a monastery in protest, released 133 of the 157 detainees. However, no one was questioned over who was responsible for giving the shooting order.

Human rights advocates reported that this incident exemplified an increasingly prevalent pattern of governmental authorities detaining Copts following sectarian attacks and either holding them without charges or threatening false charges and a police record; the detentions serve as a tool to blackmail Coptic authorities to desist from demanding criminal prosecution of the perpetrators and to dissuade the victims and/or their families from seeking recourse in the judicial system for restitution of damages.

On December 10, in an effort to end any hopes for the Coptic Christians of using the Church of St. Mary and St. Michael’s in Talbiya for prayer services, the Giza Governorate converted overnight a house facing the church into a mosque, less than 100 metres away.

This kind of devious undertaking has often been used by State Security to stop any project for a church, in addition to deploying Muslims in the area to contest the presence of a church in their neighbourhood.

The church premises are now occupied by State Security to make sure that no one prays there, and judging from previous cases the church will remain closed.

The Coptic Church filed a case against the Giza Governorate on the basis that its decision to halt construction of the Church was illegal as the area where the church is built is not subject to any kind of building permissions, being some sort of shanty town:

http://www.aina.org/news/20101129225702.htm

http://www.aina.org/news/20101202210741.htm

2. Muslims Torch Coptic Homes

On November 15 , 2010 the village of al-Nawahid, in Qena province some 290 miles south of Cairo, a Muslim mob of nearly 1000, set fire overnight to 22 houses belonging to Coptic Christians over rumours that 19-year-old Copt Hossam Noel Attallah and a 17-year-old Muslim girl, Rasha Mohamed Hussein had an affair.

They threw fireballs, gasoline and stones at Coptic homes and detonated Butane Gas cylinders. Christian-owned homes were looted and shops were broken into, plundered and burned. Cattle belonging to Copts were stolen, their fields and plants uprooted. There were no reported casualties.

An eyewitness who was himself beaten by Muslims said the mob blocked the fire brigade from reaching the burning homes and one fire engine arrived hours late. He also said that security forces went into the houses of Copts and arrested them.

Copts accused the authorities of severe inadequacy, because although being aware of the incident of the Copt and the Muslim girl, they only stationed three security cars at the entrances of the village. Ra’fat, head of Luxor EUHRO NGO reports that “When the security officers saw the large mobs entering the village from all sides and attacking it, they fled, leaving it unprotected to operations of terrorism, sabotage, arson and looting of Coptic property.” He added that security
forces were only guarding St. George’s Church.

The Chief Prosecutor went to survey the damage but refused to listen to any of the Coptic victims, speak to witnesses who saw the perpetrators or even to register the names of the accused.

It was reported that State Security forced thirteen Coptic families to sign papers stating the fire happened as an “Act of Fate” and was extinguished by security and the village Muslims. A Coptic victim poignantly asked “Have you ever heard of such humiliation?

“Whoever refused to sign was beaten up. We were afraid to be detained by security, so we signed” he added. He confirmed that the police know all of the perpetrators.

As police decided it was an “Act of Fate”, they are not entitled to claim compensation, also none of the Muslim perpetrators were indicted. The Muslim girl was released after undertaking a medical exam which proved that she was still a virgin; the fate of the Coptic young man is unknown:

http://www.aina.org/news/20101116202532.htm

http://www.aina.org/news/20101120134121.htm

The examples of collective punishment of Copts which I have cited were repeated at:

1. Farshout, – where, in November a three day rampage against Copts occurred when 86 Coptic-owned properties were torched, prompted by the alleged sexual assault of a Coptic man on a Muslim girl:

http://www.aina.org/news/20100127220312.htm

http://www.aina.org/news/20091121211751.htm ; and

2, Nag Hammadi, after the Christmas Eve massacre of January 6, 2010, Muslim torched and looted in Bahgoura 43 homes and shops:

http://www.aina.org/news/20100107150122.htm

http://www.aina.org/news/20100110113120.htm;

3.MERSA MATROUH

On March 12 2010, a Muslim mob assaulted some 400 Christians during prayers in the church of the services building affiliated to the Coptic Church in Rifeyah, Mersa Matrouh, under the pretext that the Copts had carried out construction work without permission from the authorities placing a fence around their newly acquired plot of land with a gate that would close a short-cut to the adjacent mosque

The mob, estimated to be between 2000-3000 of Bedouins and fanatical Muslim Salafis, hurled stones at the building. Four priests, the deacons and 400 parishioners were trapped for 14 hours inside the building until Security forces arrived from Alexandria and escorted the 400 terrorised Copts to their homes.

While the Copts were trapped, the mob moved on to other areas not protected by security, vandalizing and torching Coptic homes, shops, businesses and cars in the streets surrounding the services building.

Twenty-five Copts were seriously wounded, including women and children. Eighteen houses, twenty-two shops and sixteen cars were destroyed and burnt down.

The Reverend Matta Zakaria said that “The violence started after the Muslim evening prayer when the Mosque’s Imam, Shaikh Khamees, preached the need to fight the ‘enemies’, and said ‘we don’t want Christians to live among us.’”

Egyptian Security authorities arrested 13 Copts, including 4 minors between 13 and 17 who were later released due to being underage.

The suspects and 9 Copts, faced charges of illegal congregation, destruction of public property, arson and assault. The church pulled down the fence.

Copts, albeit the victims, were arrested as usual to force the church to accept an unfair reconciliation with the perpetrators, who always escape indictment, to get the Copts out of prison:

http://www.aina.org/news/20100313012827.htm

http://www.aina.org/news/20100317224225.htm

You will, I am sure, agree that this situation is grievous and that far more needs to be done to encourage the Egyptian authorities to provide security and protection for its Coptic minority – and to work much harder at promoting religious toleration and respect. I very much hope that you will arrange for an assessment to be made of the deteriorating situation facing Egypt’s Copts.

I am copying this letter to David Howell, William Wallace, and Ambassador Asquith.

With kind regards,

David.

Pakistan: Question In The Lords June 22nd

Posted by David Alton on

Pakistan: Religious Minorities
Question
3 pm
Asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what advocacy the Foreign Office is undertaking on behalf of persecuted religious minorities in Pakistan.
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): My Lords, we engage regularly with the authorities in Pakistan on issues of religious freedom. Most recently, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, my honourable

22 Jun 2011 : Column 1305

friend Mr Burt, discussed religious freedom with the newly appointed Pakistan Prime Minister’s Advisor on Interfaith Harmony and Minority Affairs. He also met religious leaders from across Pakistan as part of the Ministry’s Interfaith Council. Ministers and our High Commission in Islamabad will continue to maintain regular contact.
Lord Alton of Liverpool: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. However, what does the abject failure of the authorities in Pakistan to bring to justice those who were responsible for the brutal murder of Salman Taseer, the Governor of Punjab, and of Shahbaz Bhatti, the courageous Minister for Minorities, say about their commitment to uphold the rule of law and to protect minorities? Is not impunity for murder, forced conversion, rape, forced marriage, the denial of civil rights and the failure to protect Ahmadis, Sufis, Shias, Christians, Hindus, and others, directly linked to the rise of the Taliban in Pakistan? Does it not point to the crucial importance of returning to the original vision of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, who insisted on upholding the rights of minorities, saying that they should have a full place in Pakistan society?
Lord Howell of Guildford: My Lords, the noble Lord has set out a grim and very telling catalogue. The events he has described are appalling, particularly the recent murders and the apparent support by some members of the public in Pakistan for those who may even have carried out these atrocities. These are very worrying matters that we raise again and again with our friends and the authorities in Pakistan. We see Pakistan as a country to which we are bound by longstanding ties, but also a country where we must put forward our values in a strong and effective way. I have to say to the noble Lord that no one can be happy about this pattern of affairs, or with the advance in extremism around the country, no doubt encouraged by apparent aspects of impunity. All these matters are constantly in our minds and constantly in the way that we are developing our relationship with Pakistan, a great nation that needs certain help and support at this difficult time.
Lord Elton: My Lords, as the minority groups in Pakistan number some 14 million people, of whom around 3 million are Christian, this is a major problem. Can the Minister confirm that 1.2 million people living in this country are of Pakistani origin, and that this form of violence has now been exported here, particularly in relation to the Ahmadi population? Perhaps it is worth mentioning what the noble Lord, Lord Alton, did not say. In his speech, Jinnah said:
“Minorities … will be safeguarded. Their religion, faith or belief will be secure. There will be no interference of any kind with their freedom of worship”.
Lord Howell of Guildford: My noble friend is right, as was the noble Lord, Lord Alton, to remind us of the original qualities and values which the founders of the state of Pakistan, and obviously Mr Jinnah himself, put forward. In the present situation we want to try to maintain, deepen and, in some cases, resurrect these

22 Jun 2011 : Column 1306

things. As to our own direct links with Pakistan, I am told that there are 1 million British citizens in this country with family connections in Pakistan. Believe it or not, the number of visits and journeys undertaken between this country and Pakistan each year amounts to 1.4 million. So our ties are close, which puts us in a position where we have responsibility and, I hope, credibility and some authority in dealing with our Pakistani friends.
Lord Ahmed: My Lords, is the Minister aware that Articles 20, 21, 22, 26 and 27 of the Pakistan constitution guarantee rights for all minorities? Does he agree that the rights of all citizens, regardless of their religion or group, should be protected? Pakistan is at war with extremists and terrorists, and since expressing its support for Operation Enduring Freedom, has lost some 34,000 citizens. Is not the right approach that of supporting Pakistan’s institutions and its democratic Government, as Her Majesty’s Government are already doing? It is better to support friends when they are in difficulties rather than kicking them when they are down.
Lord Howell of Guildford: The noble Lord is correct. No one questions the fact that Pakistan is facing fearful challenges of all kinds, one of which is its contiguity to Afghanistan and the challenges of extremism. Taliban operations are just one example of many pressures on Pakistani society. Of course we must approach these matters in a supportive mood, but we must also uphold our values. The fact is that, for instance, the blasphemy legislation is part of the Pakistan penal code. We have raised the issue of that kind of legislation by pointing to some of the tensions and excitements it generates. We would like to see a pattern where that kind of regulation, along with the attitudes and terms it generates, is less prominent. That might lead to some reduction in the violence and the apparent readiness of some people to commit acts of terrible atrocity, particularly the two murders just mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord Alton.
Lord Avebury: My Lords, can my noble friend say whether the Prime Minister himself has made any representations to President Ali Zardari to provide adequate protection for Ahmadi Muslims, who have been subject to multiple assassinations and incessant persecution fuelled by the Khatme Nabuwat, who openly incite to murder in leaflets and public speeches? Will the Prime Minister take up with Zardari the denial of voting rights to Ahmadis by requiring them to make a sworn statement contradicting an article of their faith in order to be included on the electoral register?
Lord Howell of Guildford: My right honourable friend the Prime Minister was in Pakistan only a few months ago and certainly made representations on all aspects of human rights and religious persecution in Pakistan, and I think that his views were very well received. Specifically on the Ahmaddiyya, we meet regularly with representatives of the Ahmaddiyya community to listen to their concerns. Most recently Mr Burt, whom I have already mentioned, and my noble friend Lady Warsi met representatives of minority religious groups to discuss freedom in Pakistan. About

22 Jun 2011 : Column 1307

a month ago, my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary publicly condemned the Lahore attacks on the Ahmaddiyya community. We are well aware of these pressures and we dislike them, as does my noble friend. We continue to raise these issues as vigorously as we can.
———————————————————————————
Written Questions June 23rd 2011.

Lord Alton of Liverpool to ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the government of Pakistan about the 2002 executive order which denied four million Ahmadiyya Muslims the right to vote, unless they are willing to sign a declaration denouncing their own community. HL10428
Lord Alton of Liverpool to ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the government of Pakistan about violence against the Ahmadiyya Muslims; and what assessment they have made of the threats and intimidation against that community in the United Kingdom. HL10429
Lord Alton of Liverpool to ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the likelihood of the government of Pakistan ratifying the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and signing both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture. HL10430
———————————————————————————

http://davidalton.net/2011/06/12/the-plight-of-pakistans-minorities-ahmadis-christians-hindus-buddhists-and-zoroatrians-facing-campaign-of-relentless-violenve/

Article for E-Politix.com ahead of House of Lords Question on the plight of Pakistan’s minorities, June 22nd 2011: Question to be raised by Crossbench Peer, Lord Alton of Liverpool.

North Liverpool Community Justice Centre

Posted by David Alton on

21 Jun 2011 : Column 1145

House of LordsTuesday, 21 June 2011.
2.30 pm
Prayers-read by the Lord Bishop of Exeter.

Justice: North Liverpool Community Justice Centre
Question
2.36 pm
Asked By The Lord Bishop of Liverpool

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have for the future of the Community Justice Centre in Liverpool and for the creation of other centres.

The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord McNally): My Lords, we are considering the options for taking forward community justice and evaluating the effectiveness of the North Liverpool Community Justice Centre as part of that. We will consider the results of this evaluation once it has been completed later in the summer.

The Lord Bishop of Liverpool: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that very encouraging response. Is he aware that the time taken from first hearing to sentencing is, on average, 26 days at the justice centre, which compares with the national average of 174 days? Can he assure the House that the evaluation will be independent and will look at the benefits, both social and economic, for the whole of the criminal justice system?

Lord McNally: My Lords, I think that I can give the right reverend Prelate that assurance. We are trying to learn all the lessons from the justice centre, which is a unique and innovative court model employing problem solving, partnership working, community involvement and a single-judge approach to tackling reoffending and improving community confidence in the justice system. We will seek in the study to learn lessons across the board which we can take into the wider criminal justice system.

Lord Corbett of Castle Vale: My Lords, can the Minister be clearer about the assurance that he has just given to the right reverend Prelate? What will be the independent component of this investigation? Will he name the people, or the areas from which they are likely to come? It would be quite improper to leave this to the Ministry of Justice to do it itself.

Lord McNally: I am not sure whether it would be improper for the Ministry of Justice to do it itself. The Ministry of Justice is very able to carry out this kind of assessment. When the assessment is completed and we draw our conclusions from it, it will be fully published and open to debate and question in Parliament.

21 Jun 2011 : Column 1146

Lord Alton of Liverpool: My Lords, in assessing the effectiveness of the North Liverpool Community Justice Centre, will the Minister pay particular tribute to His Honour Judge David Fletcher, who has shown formidable and robust leadership as the single judge administering this system? Inasmuch as the Minister has already referred to the reduction in the time between arrest and sentencing, will he also say a word about the role of restorative justice in repairing the wrong done to victims, in which this court has shown such leadership?

Lord McNally: Indeed, Judge Fletcher describes his approach as gripping-meaning that he is able, through this system, to deal holistically with the problems. The noble Lord, Lord Alton, is right about restorative justice, which is not unique to the Liverpool experiment. Much of the evidence that we have received shows that there is benefit both to the victim, who gets some closure in the trauma they have gone through, and to the defendant, who receives a form of punishment that points in the direction of rehabilitation as well. I also have to say that in the experiments we are conducting, we have to look at the cost of the facilities as well as the various benefits they bring.

Lord Storey: My Lords, I am delighted to hear about the robust appraisal of the North Liverpool Community Justice Centre. As the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Liverpool said, the speed with which cases are handled is phenomenal, as is the high rate of guilty pleas. Another important consideration is the need to have a member of the judiciary at the heart of a deprived community, with all the strength that that person brings. Could that be part of the appraisal, please?

Lord McNally: It certainly is part of the appraisal. One factor that has played very heavily is the fact that the centre is in a deprived community and has a permanent judge of very high rank who is able to hear a wide range of cases. These factors come into effect, but we also have to weigh other factors. The study so far does not show a great impact on reoffending rates, but that has to be a factor. The overall cost of the facility also has to be taken into account in present circumstances. However, we are looking across the board and later in the summer we will be able to draw lessons from the study.

Lord Woolf: My Lords, does the Minister appreciate that this initiative followed one that happened in the United States? There, it has been an immense success. I disclose an interest not only because of my chairmanship of the Prison Reform Trust but because I was responsible for recommending to Ministers in the previous Administration that they should look at what was happening in the States and introduce this experiment here. They did so and were very impressed. The experiment provides a solution where other systems do not. Above all, it can tackle repeated offending, which is so important.

Lord McNally: My Lords, most certainly this followed a similar experiment in the United States, although I think that I am right in saying that the experiment was

21 Jun 2011 : Column 1147

not repeated across the United States. It is one of a number of pilots initiated by the previous Administration. We are trying to draw the best lessons that we can from these pilots, including lessons about reoffending and cost effectiveness. That is partly why we are conducting the review and trying to learn lessons from other pilots that are being conducted in other parts of the country.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I declare an interest as the Minister who laid the foundation stone of the centre. Will the noble Lord take into account the cost savings that are generated by virtue of the fact that the centre produces faster results than elsewhere? The right reverend Prelate mentioned 26 days and the 82 per cent guilty rate. Will the department take into account also the experiment in Salford, which took the results of the centre and spread them more widely?

Lord McNally: My Lords, I will gently say, beware those who have laid foundation stones, either real or metaphorical, when you judge the efficiency and effectiveness of any project.

Noble Lords: Oh!

Lord McNally: I hear the growl of approval; I presume it is from all the foundation stone layers in this House. I assure the noble and learned Baroness that the study will look in the round at the effectiveness of the centre. When that is done, we will report to Parliament.

Euthanasia and the reckless manipulation of the public debate

Posted by David Alton on

Why Public Safety could be jeopardised by a change to the law on euthanasia:

http://davidalton.net/2011/03/06/liverpool-legal-medical-society-votes-against-euthanasiaassisted-suicide/

And how the public debate is being recklessly manipulated:

The BBC and Breach of WHO Guidelines

In their one-sided coverage of euthanasia and assisted dying, the BBC have failed to give a proper sense of balance to the debate about assisted dying, rarely mentioning the opposition of the BMA, Royal Colleges, the hospices and Disability Rights Organisations, or the care and attention which has been given to this issue in Parliament – and which, on three occasions, has led to the rejection of proposals to change the law, on grounds of public safety and ethics:

The House of Lords has had two full Select Committee enquiries to examine the current law. On the last occasion, the enquiry covered some 246 Hansard columns and two volumes of 744 pages and 116 pages respectively, 15 oral sessions, 48 groups or individuals giving evidence, with 88 witnesses giving written evidence, 2,460 questions asked and the committee receiving 14,000 letters. After consideration of all the issues raised, as on the previous occasion, proposals to change the law were rejected by a wide margin. When the last vote took place in the House of Commons the proposal was defeated by 91 votes to 236. The Scottish Parliament recently reached the same conclusion.

Contempt for due process and Parliament, and the obsessive pursuit of a driven agenda, funded by public money, has come to characterise the BBC’s treatment of this issue. Credible voices which dare to question what has become the latest touchstone issue for those who believe that personal autonomy and choice trump all other considerations are kept out of studio debates, Question Time, Any Questions and news bulletins – or presented as representing antediluvian or obscure positions. In publicly expressing their own support for assisted dying, anchormen and women, whose role is supposed to be to moderate studio discussions, forfeit the right to be taken seriously as impartial or objective.

There are few things more frightening than self proclaimed liberals masquerading as liberals but in reality behaving in ways which manipulate debate and attempt to propagandise public opinion. Nor are there many things more sickening than repugnant voyeurism, turning a person’s death into a form of prime time entertainment, or the battle for programme ratings trumping ethical considerations – and all dressed up in the name of a hollow compassion.

Where was any proper examination of the motives and practices of those who run euthanasia centres like Dignitas?

The cover of the latest issue of the BBC’s Radio Times claims that watching a man die in Switzerland is “5 minutes of television that will change our lives”. The sub editor who chose that caption perhaps failed to appreciate its irony: that the 5 minutes it took to change our lives, irredeemably ended another’s life. In this country 550,000 people die each year. Very rarely do any make the newspapers or the media. Why does one lethal cocktail – but not 549,999 deaths – warrant wall to wall campaigning coverage. Macmillan nurses, hospices and palliative care give the overwhelming majority in Britain a dignified death which does not involve commissioning doctors and nurses as patient killers. By all means agitate for improvement where the provision or practice isn’t good enough but let the BBC end this one sided and relentless campaign. We’re all in favour of dignity in dying – but we don’t need a doctor to kill us to achieve a good death.

Where, also, in their coverage is any analysis of the economic arguments that are now driving this debate, characterised by Lady Warnock’s remark that: “If you’re demented, you’re wasting people’s lives – your family’s lives – and you’re wasting the resources of the National Health Service.” Perhaps it would make Broadcasting House uncomfortable to reveal this part of the debate.

Next week they will broadcast their next broadside, A Living Death. Then they are planning to give huge coverage to the conclusions of an “independent” Commission established by Lord Falconer and which has no known opponents of euthanasia amongst its membership. This will be another attempt to manipulate the argument and should be roundly denounced.

Those who are so determined to encourage people to end their lives should bear in mind the guidance given by the World Health Organisation. In 2000 they warned that coverage of the suicide issue should not involve celebrities or go into detail about the methods involved. They warn of the contagious effect and the risk posed to public safety by the sensationalising of this issue. If increasing numbers of copycat deaths now occur, especially amongst those who are depressed, then the programme makers, and those who authorise the transmission of such programmes, will bear a very heavy responsibility.

I have pasted below some direct quotes from the WHO (2000) document…

“Media play a significant role in today’s society by providing a very wide range of information in a variety of ways. They strongly influence community attitudes, beliefs and behaviour, and play a vital role in politics, economics and social practice. Because of that influence media can also play an active role in the prevention of suicide.”

“Suicide is perhaps the most tragic way of ending one’s life. The majority of people who consider suicide are ambivalent. They are not sure that they want to die. One of the many factors that may lead a vulnerable individual to suicide could be publicity about suicides in the media. How the media report on suicide cases can influence other suicides.”

“Television also influences suicidal behaviour. Philips (7) showed an increase in suicide up to 10 days after television news reports of cases of suicide. As in the printed media, highly publicized stories that appear in multiple programmes on multiple channels seem to carry the greatest impact – all the more so if they involve celebrities. However, there are conflicting reports
about the impact of fictional programmes: some show no effect, while others cause an increase in suicidal behaviour (8)

“Sensational coverage of suicides should be assiduously avoided, particularly when a celebrity is involved. The coverage should be minimized to the extent possible. Any mental health problem the celebrity may have had should also be acknowledged. Every effort should be made to avoid overstatement. Photographs of the deceased, of the method used and of the scene of the suicide are to be avoided. Front page headlines are never the ideal location for suicide reports.

Detailed descriptions of the method used and how the method was procured should be avoided. Research has shown that media coverage of suicide has a greater impact on the method of suicide adopted than the frequency of suicides. Certain locations – bridges, cliffs, tall buildings, railways, etc. – are traditionally associated with suicide and added publicity increases the risk that more people will use them.

Suicide should not be reported as unexplainable or in a simplistic way. Suicide is never the result of a single factor or event. It is usually caused by a complex interaction of many factors such as mental and physical illness, substance abuse, family disturbances, interpersonal conflicts and life stressors. Acknowledging that a variety of factors contributes to suicide would be helpful.
WHO/MNH/MBD/00.2

Suicide should not be depicted as a method of coping with personal problems such as bankruptcy, failure to pass an examination, or sexual abuse.

Reports should take account of the impact of suicide on families and other survivors in terms of both stigma and psychological suffering.

Glorifying suicide victims as martyrs and objects of public adulation may suggest to susceptible persons that their society honours suicidal behaviour. Instead, the emphasis should be on mourning the person’s death.”

Anyone who has ever experienced a suicide in their family, or among their circle of friends, knows how devastating are the effects of that death on those who remain behind. The five minutes involved in ending a life can have profound and unimagined implications. A distorted and tasteless piece of television theatre is no way to address these and the many other issues which are raised by euthanasia.

http://lordalton.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=1886&action=edit

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2011/jun/15/choosing-to-die-terry-pratchett

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100092115/why-is-the-bbc-so-keen-on-people-topping-themselves/

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/dominic-lawson/dominic-lawson-why-the-disabled-fear-assisted-suicide-2297116.html

BBC Breaches World Health Organisation’s Guidlelines On How To Report Suicide

Posted by David Alton on

The BBC’s recent programmes celebrating assisted suicide breach the World Health Organisation’s (2000)guidelines in a number of respects. These are some extracts…

“Media play a significant role in today’s society by providing a very wide range of
information in a variety of ways. They strongly influence community attitudes, beliefs and
behaviour, and play a vital role in politics, economics and social practice. Because of that
influence media can also play an active role in the prevention of suicide.”

“Suicide is perhaps the most tragic way of ending one’s life. The majority of people who
consider suicide are ambivalent. They are not sure that they want to die. One of the many
factors that may lead a vulnerable individual to suicide could be publicity about suicides in the
media. How the media report on suicide cases can influence other suicides.”

Television also influences suicidal behaviour. Philips (7) showed an increase in suicide
up to 10 days after television news reports of cases of suicide. As in the printed media, highly
publicized stories that appear in multiple programmes on multiple channels seem to carry the
greatest impact – all the more so if they involve celebrities. However, there are conflicting reports
about the impact of fictional programmes: some show no effect, while others cause an increase
in suicidal behaviour (8)

Sensational coverage of suicides should be assiduously avoided, particularly when a
celebrity is involved. The coverage should be minimized to the extent possible. Any
mental health problem the celebrity may have had should also be acknowledged. Every
effort should be made to avoid overstatement. Photographs of the deceased, of the
method used and of the scene of the suicide are to be avoided. Front page headlines are
never the ideal location for suicide reports.

Detailed descriptions of the method used and how the method was procured should be
avoided. Research has shown that media coverage of suicide has a greater impact on
the method of suicide adopted than the frequency of suicides. Certain locations – bridges,
cliffs, tall buildings, railways, etc. – are traditionally associated with suicide and added
publicity increases the risk that more people will use them.

Suicide should not be reported as unexplainable or in a simplistic way. Suicide is never
the result of a single factor or event. It is usually caused by a complex interaction of
many factors such as mental and physical illness, substance abuse, family disturbances,
interpersonal conflicts and life stressors. Acknowledging that a variety of factors
contributes to suicide would be helpful.
WHO/MNH/MBD/00.2

Suicide should not be depicted as a method of coping with personal problems such as
bankruptcy, failure to pass an examination, or sexual abuse.

Reports should take account of the impact of suicide on families and other survivors in
terms of both stigma and psychological suffering.

Glorifying suicide victims as martyrs and objects of public adulation may suggest to
susceptible persons that their society honours suicidal behaviour. Instead, the emphasis
should be on mourning the person’s death.

Describing the physical consequences of non-fatal suicide attempts (brain damage,
paralysis, etc.) can act as a deterrent.

48,000 Repeat Abortions in 2010 – some as many as 8 abortions – and at a staggering cost to the public purse

Posted by David Alton on

Latest statistics show that 48,000 people have had more than one abortion in the last year – some as many as eight. 6.2 million abortions have taken place since 1968 and in the past eight years fewer than 10 have been in emergency cases where a life was at risk. The cost to the NHS was £90 million last year alone and this does not include the cost of abortions performed by the independent sector, which were commissioned directly by Primary Care Trust commissioners. The Government say that information is not collected centrally. A Government which says it cares how public money is spent should surely be interested in how much money is given to the private sector. I am surprised no-one has made a Freedom of Information request to PCTs to see whose pockets they have been pouring their money into- and how much. Or, don’t we care? Just as we don’t seem to care about the staggering number of abortions – some of them repeated again and again. And take a look at the figures from London. What’s happened to that fanciful slogan about abortion being “rare” and only in desperate circumstances?

Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench)

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many women in each strategic health authority area in England and Wales who had had (a) one, (b) two, (c) three, (d) four, (e) five, (f) six, (g) seven, (h) eight, (i) nine, and (j) 10 or more, previous abortions had an abortion in 2010.

Hansard source (Citation: HL Deb, 14 June 2011, c167W)

Photo of Earl Howe

Earl Howe (Conservative)

The information requested is provided in the following table.
Number of previous abortions by Strategic Health Authority of residence, 2010
Strategic Health Authority 0 1 2 3 4 5 or more Total
Number of previous abortions
East of England 11,242 4,087 1,114 280 71 35 16,829
East Midlands 8,523 2,614 566 119 34 13 11,869
London 27,391 13,726 3,933 1,115 348 173 46,686
North East 5,002 1,563 362 79 .. .. 7,029
North West 17,396 5,904 1,257 276 67 33 24,933
South Central 7,734 2,931 687 136 .. .. 11,533
South East 8,550 3,518 865 208 35 24 13,200
South West 9,245 2,968 585 135 36 16 12,985
West Midlands 13,141 5,448 1,331 296 68 47 20,331
Yorkshire & Humber 10,795 3,668 827 184 48 25 15,547
Wales 6,252 1,921 368 62 .. .. 8,632
England and Wales 125,271 48,348 11,895 2,890 787 383 189,574

Notes:

Number of previous abortions are grouped where totals are less than 10 (between 0 and 9) or where a presented total would reveal a suppressed value from previously published data.

Suppressed value less than 10 (between 0 and 9).

———————————————————————————————————

Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench)

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many abortions have been performed under the Abortion Act 1967 as amended by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990; and how many and what proportion were performed (a) in an emergency to save the life of the mother, and (b) in cases of rape.

Hansard source (Citation: HL Deb, 16 June 2011, c201W)

Earl Howe (Conservative)

There have been 6.26 million abortions performed on residents of England and Wales between 1968 and 2010. Between 1968 and 2002, 401 of these were performed under Section 1(4), in an emergency to save the life of the pregnant woman. For all of the years since 2003 the number of abortions performed under these grounds was less than 10 (between zero and nine) and the data have been suppressed in line with Office for National Statistics guidance on the release of abortion statistics, 2005.

Information about abortions due to rape is not collected by the department.

——————————————————————————————————–
Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench)

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the cost to the National Health Service of providing abortions in (a) NHS hospitals, and (b) approved independent sector places in 2010.

Hansard source (Citation: HL Deb, 14 June 2011, c168W)

Earl Howe (Conservative)

The total cost to National Health Service providers (NHS trusts and primary care trust (PCT) provider arms) of providing abortion services in 2009-10 was £82.6 million.

Information on the cost of abortions performed by the independent sector, which were commissioned directly by PCT commissioners, is not collected centrally. However, the department does collect the cost to NHS providers (NHS trusts, foundation trusts and PCT provider arms) of commissioning or contracting abortions from independent sector providers. The cost of this in 2009-10 was £7.5 million.

Source: published reference cost data.

The Cross and The Third Reich by Dr.John Frain

Posted by David Alton on

The Cross And The Third Reich – Catholic Resistance In The Nazi Era” by Dr.John Frain
by David Alton

“The Cross And The Third Reich – Catholic Resistance In The Nazi Era”by Dr.John Frain

In his concluding remarks at the end of this admirable book (published by Family Publications), John Frain tells us that he is neither a historian or a theologian – just a layman who wants to truthfully and honestly describe the role played by the Catholic Church in Nazi Germany. He has no need to be modest or apologetic for this is a significant contribution to understanding that fateful era and the reaction of Christians to Hitler’s murderous ideology.

Disturbed by the repetition of claims of Catholic collaboration and indifference, Dr.Frain decided to revisit the sources, test the arguments, and examine the charges. He does so in carefully authenticated detail, painstakingly assembling the facts, bringing back to life extraordinary men and women.

This account of what happened in Germany some seventy years ago is given contemporary edge and is enriched by his personal accounts of visits he made to the concentration camps and by speaking to some of the remaining survivors.

What emerges is a rich text of great scholarship, both refuting baseless and headline grabbing caricatures while reminding us of the great bravery and faith of those who did stand in Hitler’s way. He rightly reminds us that all human beings err and does not gloss over institutional failings and errors of judgement – such as the role of Austria’s Archbishop, Theodore Innitzer (or the Vatican’s immediate rebuke) . He also faithfully examines the narrow range of options open to individual laymen, pastors, bishops and the papacy, and the ease with which retrospective decisions based on hind-sight, and which cost nothing, can be made. This is a labour of love and a labour of truth.

Although those who hate the Church may find its scholarship inconvenient, any fair-minded person who believes that we should never appease secular ideologies when they threaten humanity will learn from these accounts and, indeed, be inspired by them.

History is a great teacher and the wise man will have regard to the past if he wishes to predict what will occur in the future.

History has a habit of repeating itself – “Never Again” too often happens all over again.

This book hold may clues for those who are interested in averting such calamities in the future.

How we reacted to the great tyrannies of the twentieth century can be instructive in shaping our response to the continuing genocides and crimes against humanity that erupt from Cambodia to Rwanda, from the Balkans to Burma, from the Congo to Darfur, from the Middle East to the Caucuses.

As I read the accounts of the torture and misery inflicted on those who opposed Nazism my own mind travelled back to a visit I made in 2004 to the genocide sites of Rwanda. One site, Murambi, had been a technical college where men, women and children took refuge. 50,000 people were murdered there.

Murambi is now a memorial. Some of the mass graves have been excavated. The classrooms are filled with human remains. In some cases the corpses have been preserved in quicklime and retain tufts of hair and recognisable features. Now in the classrooms lie thousands of white skeletons, sometimes frozen in the positions they fell. It is as if a man-made Pompeii had swept over the hill and through the buildings. Some still clutch their rosaries. Some of the women were clearly pregnant. Skulls bear the marks of the machetes used to hack them down.

It’s because of places like Murambi that we need to constantly remind ourselves of the importance of taking a stand. “Never Again” must not be allowed to casually occur all over again.

While I was reading John Frain’s text Pope Benedict XVI was making his pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Land.

Just as history can repeat itself in new outrages of genocide, so can attempts to rewrite history and to traduce reputation and character.

During Benedict’s visit we heard echoes of the false charge laid against Pius XII that he was “Hitler’s Pope” and the repetition of the lie that Catholics seek to deny the Holocaust.

Pope Benedict’s visit to Yad Vashem, the Jewish memorial to the six million Jews who died in the Holocaust, was bound to be a profoundly sensitive and poignant moment – because of the Pope’s own German origins and because, like other young Germans, his name was included in the membership of the Hitler Youth. In his autobiography the then Cardinal Ratzinger speaks of his brief and enforced membership. He never played any part in its activities and has been opposed to Nazism all his life and is horrified by the crimes committed by his countrymen. At Yad Vashem he said: “May the names of these victims never perish! May their suffering never be denied, belittled or forgotten! And may all people of goodwill be vigilant in rooting out from the heart of man anything that could lead to tragedies such as this.”

Pope Benedict’s insistence that the despicable denial of the Holocaust – such as that enunciated by Richard Williamson (a formerly excommunicated follower of Marcel Lefebvre who gave him Episcopal rank) – can have no place in the Catholic Church may disappoint those who want to caricature the Catholic Church as a cat’s cradle of Anti-Semitism, but it is utterly consistent with the stand taken by the men and women whose lives are described in this book.

Anti-Semitism is not merely a historical phenomenon. In one recent year official figures reveal 547 Anti-Semitic attacks in Britain (the second worst figure on record). There is only one place of religious worship in Britain where believers are advised not to linger outside after services: the synagogue. Even in places like leafy Surrey there have been reports of swastikas being daubed on vehicles, pavements and signposts.

All forms of hatred against people – whether on the basis of their race, religion, sexuality or outlook – are an unqualified and unmitigated evil. For those of us who call ourselves European, the Holocaust means that Anti-Semitism holds a unique and special horror. It is a horror that had its origins in 2000 years of hatred directed at Jewish people. Blood libel and caricature has mutated into new forms of hatred, sometimes masquerading on the internet under the guise of free speech, sometimes originating as part of new virulent ideologies from heads of state.

The Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has famously denied the Holocaust, has described the Jewish people as“filthy bacteria”,and said he would like to use nuclear capability to wipe Israel off the map: “Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation’s fury… Israel is a rotten, dried tree that will be annihilated in one storm…They have invented a myth that Jews were massacred and place this above God, religions and the prophets. The Zionists avail themselves of the fairy tale of Holocaust as blackmail and justification for killing children and women and making innocent people homeless.”
Jewish people often try to put a brave face on all of this and make light of such systematic hatred – like the rabbi who quipped that a telegram was sent by a relative to his family: “Start worrying, details to follow.”

Well, we know precisely what details have invariably followed.

We also know that Anti-Semitism never stops with the Jews – its tentacles extend and embrace every other form of intolerance too. In this dangerous world it is more vital than ever that we understand one another’s stories and stand alongside each other – a sentiment brilliantly expressed in “The Home We Build Together” by our British Chief Rabbi, Dr. Sir Jonathan Sacks.

So much for the contemporary reasons to worry but when the industrial killing at Auschwitz and the other death camps was being orchestrated how did the international institutions, including the Catholic Church react?

Dr.Frain carefully documents the Church’s repeated denunciation of Anti-Semitism and Nazism from 1928 onwards. In that year the Vatican issued a “binding condemnation” of “that hate which is now called Anti-Semitism”.

He also details the year by year condemnations issued by the German bishops: beginning in 1929 with Bishop Johannes Gfollner of Linz warning against “the false prophets” of Nazism and telling the Catholic faithful: “Close your ears and do not join their associations, close your doors and do not let their newspapers into your homes, close your hands and do not support their endeavours in elections.”

In 1930 the Bishop of Mainz declared Nazism and Catholicism to be irreconcilable; in 1933 the bishops of Cologne, Upper Rhine and Paderborn said they would deny the sacraments to anyone involved in parties hostile to Christianity; and the bishops of Bavaria condemned Nazi racism and their eugenic ideology with its scorn for the sanctity of life of the unborn and its belief in euthanasia.

Even before the Second World War began the Reich had compulsorily sterilised 350,000 people and begun the elimination of what it called “useless eaters”, people possessing “life unworthy of life” – which the Vatican condemned in 1933 as government degenerating into cattle breeding laboratories and in 1940 as “contrary to both the natural and the divine positive law.”

In 1937 Pope Pius XI condemned events in Germany stating: “Seldom has there been a persecution so heavy, so terrifying, so grievous and lamentable in its far-reaching effects. It is a persecution that spares neither force, nor oppression, nor threats, nor even subterfuge of intrigue and the fabrication of false facts.” In 1938 he said that no Christian could be Anti-Semitic because “spiritually, we are all Semites.”

Above all others, the story of Bishop von Galen – the Lion of Munster – is one of immense courage and bravery – with Martin Bormann demanding his execution; and Dr. Frain is right to record the details of von Galen’s heroic stand.

Bishop von Galen described the National Socialists as “the hammer” and “we are the anvil” and “the anvil is harder than the hammer.” He resolutely lived up to his family motto: Nec laudibus nec timore (Neither men’s praise nor fear of men shall move me).

In many ways “The Third Reich and The Cross” is at its very best when it animates us with the spirit of those who gave their lives speaking for truth.

Here are the stories of Erich Klausner, the General Secretary of Germany’s Catholic Action, who was shot dead; Adelbert Prost, Director of the Catholic Youth Sports Association, also murdered; Fritz Gerlich, a Catholic journalist murdered at Dachau (known as “the priest’s camp” because 2,670 priests from around 20 countries were held there: 600 died at Dachau and another 325 died during “transport of invalids”.

We are reminded of the arrest of Catholic politicians, the suppression of Catholic political activity, the confiscation of church property and the suppression of over 200 Catholic publications.

Some stories – those of Blessed Titus Brandsma, St. Maximilian Kolbe, and St.Edith Stein are quite well known. Others, such as Fr.Jacques Bunel, Blessed Marcel Callo, Fr.Alfred Delp S.J., Blessed Nikolaus Gross (a miner and Catholic trades unionist), Blessed Franz Jagerstatter, the Austrian farmer beheaded by the Nazis, Blessed Restituta Kafka, guillotined on Bormann’s orders, Blessed Karl Leisner, Blessed Bernhard Lichtenberg (declared “Righteous Among The Nations” at Yad Vashem), Blessed Rupert Mayer S.J., Fr.Max Metzger, Fr.Franz Reinisch, are less well known.

Dr.Frain is also right to recall the role of the Protestant members of the Confessing Church, particularly Dietrich Bonheoffer, Karl Barth and Martin Niemoller; and the Catholic and Protestant members of the White Rose student resistance movement led by Hans and Sophie Scholl.

In 1931 there were around 21,000 Catholic priests in Germany and over 8,000 of them, one third, clashed with the Reich and several hundred were eliminated by the Reich.

Fr.Maximilian Kolbe who died giving up his life in the place of another prisoner at Auschwitz, said “No one in the world can change truth, and beyond the hecatombs of the extermination camps, of what use are the victories on the battlefield if we are defeated in our innermost personal selves”: words that sum up the spirit of all the men and women cited by John Frain, who rightly asks “how can any of these facts ever be made t sound like complicity?”

Page after page of this book refutes the libel that German bishops were docile or indifferent when confronted with Nazism.

Perhaps the greatest calumny of all concerns the role of Pope Pius XII. Dr.Frain describes “the cottage industry” of detractors and their failure to objectively examine the facts. He cites Rabbi David Dalin who describes such books as “Best sellers made out of bad history”.

Rabbi Dalin says that “The truth about Pius XII must be restored. This hijacking of the Holocaust must be repudiated.”

Dalin cites Pinchas Lapide, an historian and Israeli consul, who said that Pius XII “was instrumental in saving at least 700,000, but probably as many as 860,000 Jews from certain death at Nazi hands.” In the context of the 6 million who perished he contrasts this record with the abject failure of others to save the Jews.

In his forensic analysis of the facts Dr.Frain details what the Nazis themselves said about Pius – “he has always been hostile to National Socialism”; “Pacelli was the live spirit which stood behind all the anti-German activities of Rome’s policy.” The Nazis described Pius XII as “Jew loving.”

Most telling of all are the recorded comments of the Jews who were contemporaries of Pius XII.

After the War he was thanked by survivors of the Holocaust and tributes included one from Israel’s first President, Chaim Weizmann and Isaac Herzog, Chief Rabbi of Israel. Rome’s Chief Rabbi, Israel Zolli, became a Catholic and took the Pope’s name as a tribute to him.

At the time of his death, in 1958, Golda Meir said “When fearful martyrdom came to our people in the decade of Nazi terror, the voice of the Pope was raised for the victims.” The Jewish Chronicle recorded: “Confronted by the monstrous cruelties of Nazism, Fascism and Communism, he repeatedly proclaimed the virtues of humanity and compassion…many hundreds of fugitive Jews found sanctuary in the Vatican by the Nazis. Such actions will always be remembered.”

There is no doubt that the recent attempts to rewrite this history has placed a barrier between closer Catholic-Jewish relations. This is something which has motivated a New York Jew, Gary Krupp, to found the Pave The Way organisation. He says that a proper understanding of the history of this period, and the role of Pius XII is crucial because “Pius XII, in just one day, hid 7,000 Jews, from the Nazis”. Krupp says he “grew up hating Pius.” Having carefully researched the facts Krupp has come to the conclusion that “he was the greatest hero of World War Two. We can prove it. We have something on our side – documented proof – where the revisionists haven’t a scrap of paper to support their theories.”

One of the most telling refutations of Vatican indifference to the rise of Nazism and the appalling events of the Holocaust came from Albert Einstein who had escaped from Nazi Germany. In 1940 he said: “only the Church stood squarely across the path of Hitler’s campaign for suppressing the truth…I am forced thus to confess that what I once despised I now praise unreservedly.”

Those who read this excellent book may not be able to bring themselves to Einstein’s conclusion – and perhaps we should all be wary of every extolling or praising anyone or anything unreservedly – but John Frain has surely done us a great service in reminding us of the truth of something else that Einstein said. “The world” he insisted “is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil. But because of the people who don’t do anything about it.”

This book is a chance to both celebrate the memory of those who did do something about it and to be challenged in our own lives and our own times to confront the new evils that confront us.

March Till They Die – North Korea’s Prison Camps – http://www.channel4.com/news/the-3-000-mile-exit-route-from-north-korea

Posted by David Alton on

March Till They Die: see Channel 4 Report, June 2011, – 3,000 mile exit from North Korea.

The dramatic release from North Korea of two American journalists was a timely reminder that the challenge posed by North Korea has not gone away.

Laura Ling and Euna Lee were imprisoned after they strayed across the border between North Korea and China. On assignment for Current TV, a company owned by the former American Vice President, Al Gore, they were intending to report on the trafficking of women across the border. The North Koreans sentenced them to 12 years hard labour.

Gore’s former boss, Bill Clinton, intervened on their behalf; he flew to Pyongyang, and earlier this month they were released.

Their arrest was not entirely unexpected. The Chinese authorities, and missionaries working in the region, had been warning for some time that the North Koreans were looking for high profile scalps to use as bargaining chips. Two foreign journalists fitted the bill perfectly. Their connection with the former Vice President was an additional bonus.

The whole episode has exacerbated the already dangerous situation and difficulties facing North Korean refugees on the border – not least because, unpardonably, the two journalists were carrying with them recordings of interviews they had made with refugees. The revelation of those identities and stories places these refugees and their families in acute danger. Some of their family members have probably already been imprisoned.

Life in North Korea’s prison camps is dehumanising and degrading.
The United Nations estimate that 400,000 people have died in the camps in the past 30 years. Many of the stories that have emerged from escapees reveal a primitive brutality.

Ironically, many of these barbaric practices were first pioneered by the Japanese during their occupation of the Korean Peninsular. After the Korean War, the Communist regime in the North used many of the same methods to stamp out dissent.

One of the most vivid accounts of these depredations appears in a harrowing account published in 1955 by a Columban missionary in Korea, Fr.Philip Crosbie.

“March Till They Die” is the story of his imprisonment between 1950 and 1953.
Unlike seven of his Columban colleagues who died in prison, Philip Crosbie, an Australian priest, survived to tell his story.

Those who paid with their lives included the Chicago born Monsignor Pat Brennan and Fr.Tony Collier, who worked with Fr.Crosbie at the mission station of Chunchon.

During his epic ordeal Fr.Crosbie, and others imprisoned with him, were marched from place to place, given starvation rations, and frequently left exposed to the elements.

One of his companions was Monsignor Thomas Quinlan who originated from Thurles in Tipperary – one of a pioneering group of Columban missionaries who went to Korea from Ireland – and Fr.Frank Canavan from Galway.

Another was a Maryknoll priest, Bishop Patrick Byrne.
Others on the forced march included a captured group of Carmelite nuns along with French nuns from the Community of St.Paul of Chartres, and their provincial superior, 76-year-old Mother Beatrix.

They were later joined by other prisoners: members of the British and French Legations in Seoul; the Anglican Bishop Cecil Cooper and the Reverend Charles Hunt; members of the Methodist mission; Herbert Lord, head of the Salvation Army in Korea; and a clutch of South Korean politicians. Later they were joined by a group of American Prisoners of War.

The title of Fr.Crosbie’s book is drawn from the remarks of a North Korean major.
When Commissioner Lord protested that many of the group were elderly or infirm “…but they will die if they have to march” the Korean major responded “Then let them march until they die.”

Among the fatalities was Mother Beatrix – who had given more than fifty years of her life caring for the sick, the poor and orphans in Korea.

When she could walk no further and lay by the roadside one of the guards shot her dead.
Following his capture in July 1950 Fr.Crosbie saw many deaths and terrible suffering.
On November 18th, Mother Mechtilde – a Belgian Carmelite succumbed and was followed, on November 25th, by that of Bishop Byrne.

Fr.Crosbie records his burial “The only sign of his rank was a light cassock of black silk, with red buttons and piping. The buttons under their covering of red cloth were of metal. Some day they may help to identify the remains.”

Charles Hunt and Fr.Canavan died a few days later.
The remaining prisoners were marched ever onwards – and their peregrinations took them to the River Yalu (close to where the American journalists would be arrested in 2009), to the Chinese border, and back again to Pyongyang. Some, including Monsignor Quinlan, Bishop Cooper and Herbert Lord, survived and were eventually freed.

Monsignor Quinlan returned to South Korea in 1954 as Regent to the Apostolic Delegation.
On May 25th 1953 Fr.Crosbie was handed over to an official of the Soviet Union, taken to Moscow and was freed. Staff at the Australian Embassy welcomed him: “And so”, he wrote, “I came to freedom.”

He movingly describes his return to “laws that respect an individual’s freedom while providing for the good of the State; …a land where the Muses are not completely chained to the chariots of politicians; where books and newspapers are freely published, and I can freely read them. …All this I prize; but I have gained a still greater and more precious freedom. It is the freedom to believe in God and openly profess my faith.” Philip Crosbie prized his regained freedom but he also remarked that the cruelty and atrocities had not only flowed in one direction.

He concluded his account with a prayer for those who did not live to see freedom; and a prayer for those who had captured and abused them: “May there be none of us who will not find Him at the end!”

That must still be the hope we express for the hundreds of thousands still interred in North Korea’s prison camps – for it will be on the foundations of these sacrifices and such pain that one day a more gentle and tolerant Korea will be built.