By Tom Farr

(The author is director of the Office of International Religious Freedom at the Department of State. The following article appeared as a question-and-answer interview in the Democracy and Human Rights November 7 electronic journal "Religious Freedom as a Human Right.")

The International Religious Freedom Report was released on October 26, 2001. Below, Tom Farr, the director of the Office of International Religious Freedom at the Department of State, which releases the report, explains its roots and what defines its mission and purpose. Moreover, Farr says, the report characterizes "religious freedom as one of the foundational human rights. To protect this freedom means protecting something common to every human being."

Question: What is the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998?

Farr: Congress passed this law to promote religious freedom as a U.S. foreign policy goal and to combat religious persecution around the world. The law identifies a wide range of diplomatic and economic tools that might be utilized to encourage freedom of religion and conscience throughout the world as a fundamental human right. The most important of these tools are the Annual Report on International Religious Freedom, and direct U.S. advocacy -- by the Office of International Religious Freedom -- with foreign governments. It also seeks to promote U.S. assistance to newly formed democracies in implementing freedom of religion and conscience.

Q: What is the Office of International Religious Freedom and what is its mission?

Farr: The Office of International Religious Freedom in the U.S. State Department was created by the secretary of state in the summer of 1998, implementing a recommendation by the secretary's Advisory Committee on Religious Freedom. The Office was subsequently mandated by the International Religious Freedom Act, and it is headed by an ambassador-at-large. The office is responsible for issuing an Annual Report on the status of religious freedom and persecution in all foreign countries by September of each year. On the basis of the report, the State Department designates "countries of particular concern" for their "systematic, ongoing and egregious" violations of religious liberty. The report has become the standard compendium on the status of religious freedom worldwide.

Q: How does the Office of International Religious Freedom carry out its mission?

Farr: The office carries out its mission by monitoring, on a daily basis, religious persecution and discrimination worldwide. The ambassador and the office's staff travel directly to countries where problems exist and advocate with host governments on behalf of those who are victims of persecution and discrimination. In doing so, the office draws on international standards of religious freedom.

The office also shines a spotlight on the status of religious freedom worldwide through the Annual Report on International Religious Freedom. Nations designated by the secretary of state (under authority delegated by the president) as "countries of particular concern" are subject to action, including economic sanctions, by the United States. The mission is also carried out through testimony to the U.S. Congress, and sponsorship of reconciliation programs in disputes, which divide groups along lines of religious identity. The key objective is not to punish particular countries, but to promote religious liberty.

Q: How does the Office of International Religious Freedom differ from the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom?

Farr: The Commission on International Religious Freedom was created by the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 as a separate and independent source of policy recommendations on religious freedom for the president, secretary of state and the Congress. The Commission issues its own report, which focuses on a few countries and -- unlike the Department of State's Annual Report -- makes recommendations for U.S. action. The Commission is an entirely separate body from the Office of International Religious Freedom and the State Department. The commission has advisory and monitoring authority only, including the authority to hold hearings, unlike the executive office in the State Department that has the authority to act. The Commission is composed of three commissioners selected by the president, four by the leaders of the party in Congress not in the White House, and two by the leaders of the president's party in Congress.

Q: What is the root of U.S. concern with religious freedom?

Farr: Religious freedom always has been at the core of American life and public policy. It is the first of the freedoms enumerated in the Bill of Rights, the first 10 Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The law was enacted in 1998 after a period in which the perception of religious freedom as a universal human right had grown enormously. Religious freedom was incorporated (Article 18) into the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, and in a number of other postwar international covenants. In addition, during the 1980s and 1990s particularly, individuals and religious organizations lobbied to focus U.S. foreign policy on religious persecution abroad to a greater extent than heretofore. But the root cause is the American passion for religious liberty -- not the promotion of a particular religion -- but the conviction that every human being has, by virtue of his or her existence, the inviolable right to seek religious truth and to practice religion. This right is not granted by the state, but existed prior to governments and society. .

Q: The Annual Report on International Religious Freedom was first issued by the State Department in September 1999. What has been the general reaction to the report?

Farr: Governments that are criticized in the reports have, not surprisingly, reacted negatively. Some of them charge that the reports represent a form of "cultural imperialism" by the United Sta
tes, which has no right to impose its moral norms on others. Our answer is that we are measuring behavior on the basis of internationally accepted norms, such as Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which guarantees religious freedom, and to which most nations of the world have committed themselves.

Other governments have privately praised the reports, and use them. Most NGOs, human rights groups and faith-based organizations have praised the reports as the standard reference on the status of religious freedom worldwide.

Q: What does the U.S. hope to accomplish with the Annual Report?

Farr: Our goal is to tell the truth about the status of religious freedom around the world, with objectivity and integrity. The report does not make policy recommendations; rather, it serves as a factual basis for policy makers. As such, it is widely recognized as an effective report.

Q: How are the reports prepared and how have they evolved? Specifically, what changes are reflected in this year's report?

Farr: The first drafts of country chapters are done by U.S. embassies abroad. The drafts are then refined among the various State Department bureaus concerned. The most significant changes in the report came last year when country chapters were reorganized to make them more "user-friendly."

Q: What in your view is the relationship between religious freedom and human rights in general, and between religious freedom and democracy?

Farr: Religious freedom is one of the foundational human rights. To protect this freedom means protecting something common to every human being -- the sanctity of the conscience in matters of ultimate truth, worship, ritual and codes of behavior. This right was not created by governments, but exists prior to governments and societies. As the UDHR puts it, "All men are endowed with dignity and conscience."

No government which fails to protect freedom of religion and conscience is likely to value the other fundamental rights, such as freedom from arbitrary arrest or torture. By the same token, the elevation of religious liberty is a sign of a healthy democracy -- one which values not only freedom of conscience, but the other rights necessary to religious freedom, such as free speech and assembly.

It is also true, as the president's Faith-Based Initiative emphasizes, that religious freedom facilitates the good works of religious people -- works which contribute to civil society -- such as care for the aged, and the running of hospitals and schools, and the building of strong families.

Q: The U.S. issues an annual report on human rights. Why have a separate report on one particular human right, namely religious freedom? Does the U.S. view this human right as more important than any other?

Farr: No. Religious freedom is foundational because it supports the other fundamental rights. For example, it is intrinsically connected to freedom of speech and assembly.

Q: How do you answer the charge that the Annual Report is interference in the internal affairs of other countries?

Farr: The standard we apply in our policy of promoting religious freedom -- including the issuance of the Annual Report -- is an international standard, accepted by virtually every nation of the world. The idea that religious freedom is inviolable and inalienable is not an American invention -- it is reflected in international instruments such as the Universal Declaration and in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Q: The U.S. seems to have a very broad view of religious freedom compared with many other countries. How would you define religious freedom?

Farr: Religious freedom is the right of every human being, of every region or culture, to follow the dictates of his or her conscience in matters of fundamental truth, worship and morality, within the due limits noted by international norms (such as lawful limits to protect public safety or public health). This includes the right, either individually or in community with others, and in public or private, to manifest a religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.

This is not an American definition. It comes from Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

In advocating this policy, we are not imposing the "American way" on other cultures. We are fulfilling our responsibilities to the international community of which we are a part.