New international guidance on tackling online incitement to hatred recognises the rights of the non-religious and calls on states to repeal blasphemy laws in line with recommendations from Humanists UK.

The Glion Recommendations on Implementing the Rabat Plan of Action in the Digital Age were drawn up by Switzerland’s Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, freedom of expression organisation ARTICLE 19, and the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) following an expert-led workshop in Glion, Switzerland. The Recommendations have been submitted to the UN Human Rights Council, ahead of its next session in February 2027. Humanists UK responded to a consultation on the draft in August and has welcomed the Recommendations in their final form.

The Rabat Plan of Action is one of the most comprehensive and authoritative documents on the relationship between freedom of expression and freedom of religion or belief. It sets a high threshold for prohibiting speech to prevent the criminalisation of even hostile criticism of religion or belief, while protecting people from incitement to hatred. It also calls on states to repeal blasphemy laws. However, the digital landscape looks very different from when Rabat was first drafted in 2012. The Glion Recommendations aim to make sure Rabat’s standards are interpreted and applied consistently online, to address how the rapid expansion of social media and artificial intelligence has changed how expression is created, disseminated, and amplified.

A clear call to repeal blasphemy laws

Non-religious people and religious minorities can fall foul of blasphemy laws simply for saying what they believe. The risks are especially acute online, where accusations of blasphemy can spread rapidly across borders and lead to threats and violence offline.

The Glion Recommendations recognise that blasphemy laws have been abused ‘to suppress dissent and disfavoured voices’. They also recall Rabat’s warning of the ‘risks to human rights stemming from the abuse of vague or counter-productive legislation, jurisprudence and policies’ and its call to repeal blasphemy laws.

As Rabat warns, blasphemy laws are themselves counter-productive to social cohesion, stifling the open dialogue and debate about religion on which tolerance depends. It also makes clear that freedom of religion or belief does not include a right to have a religion or belief that is free from criticism or ridicule. Treating offence to beliefs as a form of intolerance lends weight to the very logic blasphemy laws rely on.

In its written submission to the consultation on the draft, Humanists UK called for the Recommendations to reaffirm Rabat’s call for the repeal of blasphemy laws. It also urged the drafters to keep a clear distinction between speech that harms people and speech that merely offends beliefs, so that criticism of religion – including so-called blasphemy – is not treated as a form of intolerance. This is also reflected in the final Recommendations.

Recognising the non-religious

Humanists UK consistently calls for the non-religious to be recognised in international efforts to tackle intolerance. In March, at the UN Human Rights Council, it reminded states that the non-religious can also face stigmatisation, discrimination, and violence because of their beliefs, and that humanist leaders and communities can help put solutions into practice.

When guidance speaks only of religious groups and religious leaders, the non-religious are rendered invisible – both in the risks they face and the contribution they make – and states can overlook them when putting guidance into practice. In line with Humanists UK’s written submission, the Glion Recommendations refer to ‘religious or belief’ groups and minorities, and recognise the importance of engaging with religious and belief leaders in countering online hate speech. They also name people ‘who are questioning, leaving or have left a religion’ among those for whom the internet has lowered barriers to freedom of expression, enabling them to connect, organise, and take part in public debate. People who doubt or reject a religion can face hostility from family and community, and sometimes accusations of blasphemy. Online spaces are often where they first find information, support, and others who share their experience, and where they can make their voices heard.

Humanists UK also welcomes the Recommendations’ recognition that women and girls who leave or criticise religion may be disproportionately exposed to technology-facilitated gender-based violence, and their call on faith-based actors to refrain from incitement online and to speak out against it when it targets religious or belief minorities, dissenting believers, converts, apostates, and the non-religious.

Staying vigilant

The international consensus is that human rights law protects people, not beliefs. That consensus was hard-won. For over a decade, the UN Human Rights Council and its predecessor passed resolutions on ‘combating defamation of religions’. That approach gave way in 2011 to Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18, which moved the focus from protecting religions to protecting people. It calls on states to tackle intolerance, discrimination, and incitement to violence against people because of their religion or belief, and recognises that open debate of ideas can help to combat religious hatred. The Rabat Plan of Action followed in 2012.

Since then, there have been repeated attempts to row back. In 2023, Humanists UK warned the Council that a resolution on religious hatred evoked the language of anti-blasphemy laws, reminding states that international law protects people, not religious feelings or venerated objects. In 2024, together with the Danish Humanist Society, it urged the Council to ‘stop the blasphemy backslide’, after Denmark – which had repealed its blasphemy law in 2017 – banned the ‘inappropriate treatment’ of religious texts. Even guidance written to uphold these standards needs careful scrutiny to make sure it does.

The same standards apply closer to home. In June, Members of the Legislative Assembly voted to add the repeal of Northern Ireland’s blasphemy laws to the Justice Bill, following a long campaign by Northern Ireland Humanists. The Bill now awaits its final stages. Northern Ireland is the last part of the UK and Ireland with blasphemy laws on its books, and even unused laws in a liberal democracy signal to repressive states that punishing so-called religious insult is acceptable. Repealing its blasphemy laws would bring Northern Ireland in line with the international standards the Glion Recommendations restate.

Humanists UK Policy and Campaigns Manager Laura Newlyn said:

‘We welcome the Glion Recommendations, which reflect our key asks. They make a clear call for blasphemy laws to be repealed, and they recognise non-religious people, and those who question or leave religion, who are too often overlooked in international work on combating intolerance.

‘For humanists, atheists, and people who leave religion, simply saying what they believe can be branded blasphemy. When guidance like this leaves them out, it becomes easier for states to overlook their rights. We will keep pressing for those rights to be recognised worldwide, and we will resist any attempt to roll back the international consensus that human rights protect people, not beliefs. That includes seeing through the repeal of Northern Ireland’s blasphemy laws, so that no part of the UK lends cover to their use elsewhere.’

Source link