The International Religious Freedom Report describes the status of religious freedom, government policies violating religious belief and practices of groups, religious denominations and individuals, and U.S. policies promoting religious freedom. The reports, prepared by the U.S. Department of State, are submitted in compliance with the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998.

• Secretary of State Kerry at the Release of the 2012 International Religious Freedom Report
• Remarks by Ambassador-at-Large Suzan Johnson Cook on the 2012 International Religious Freedom Report
• Follow the conversation on Twitter at: #IRF12
• Learn more: Read the recently released 2012 Human Rights Report

Secretary of State John Kerry:

“But as a country, as a society, we live and breathe the idea of religious freedom and religious tolerance, whatever the religion, and political freedom and political tolerance, whatever the point of view…” – Youth Connect: Berlin, Ministry of Foreign Affairs – Berlin, Germany

“I am deeply concerned about the fate of U.S citizen Saeed Abedini, who has been detained for nearly six months and was sentenced to eight years in prison in Iran on charges related to his religious beliefs…” – On Pastor Abedini’s Iranian Detainment for his Religious Beliefs

Former Secretary of State Clinton:
“But the truth we have learned, through a lot of trial and error over more than 235 years in our country, is that we defend our beliefs best by defending free expression for everyone, and it lowers the temperature.  It creates an environment in which you are free to exercise and to speak about your religion, whether your neighbor or someone across the town agrees with you or not. In fact, the appropriate answer to speech that offends is more speech.” -  At the first implementation meeting for UN HRC Resolution 16/18

Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination’s Thematic Discussion on “Racist Hate Speech:”
“Banning and punishing offensive and hateful speech is neither an effective approach to combating such intolerance, nor an appropriate role for government in seeking to promote respect for diversity. As President Obama stated in a speech delivered in Cairo, Egypt in June 2009, suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away.” – “Curtailing Freedom of Religion is Not the Way to Combat Hateful Speech,” August 2012

Additional Remarks on International Religious Freedom

President Barack Obama:

• Remarks to UN General Assembly on Freedom of Expression in Regards to Religion, September 25, 2012
• On the Occasion of Ramadan, White House – July 20, 2012

Former Spokesperson Nuland:

• On the Two-Year Anniversary of the House Arrests of Iranian Opposition Leaders – Washington, D.C. – February 15, 2013
• Condemnation of Attack on Worshippers in Iraq – Washington, D.C. – January 23, 2013
• On the Release of Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani – Washington, D.C. – September 10, 2012

Ambassador-at-Large Suzan Johnson Cook:

• Peace Building Across Religious Divides, Pacem in Terris Conference – The Catholic University of America, Washington, D.C. – April 9, 2013
• Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom Visits China
• Opening Remarks “Religion, Violence, and Coexistence: Civil Society Perspectives” Panel Discussion, U.S. Department of State – October 22, 2012
• Remarks at Istanbul Process Meeting, U.S. Department of State – December 12, 2011

Acting Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism Michael Kozak:

• Ambassador Kozak on International Holocaust Remembrance Day – January 2013

There are a series of issues I’d like to address today, ranging from refugee crises overseas to our own domestic programs that resettle refugees in America and help them to rebuild their lives.

I want to update you on the latest actions of the Bureau of Population Refugees and Migration during what is proving to be a busy time. I’ve been told you all have a special interest in developments in Africa, so I will spend a few extra minutes on African refugee issues.

Devastating overseas emergencies are pushing more and more refugees from their homes, and the United States plays a leading role in responding to these emergencies.

Our overall approach to responding to these crises will remain consistent: working multilaterally with international organization partners such as the UN Refugee Agency (or UNHCR), the International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Organization for Migration; focusing on protection and finding safe places for refugees to re-start their lives; and burden-sharing with host governments as well as other donor governments.

We will also continue to look to aid agencies that serve as our partners to augment the international response.

PRM is dealing with a major refugee crisis in the Middle East at the same time as a number of new refugee and displacement crises in Africa.

These include people fleeing violence in northern Mali who have yet to get to go home, refugees crossing the border from Sudan into South Sudan, and continued violence in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. How are we doing in responding to these crises?

In Syria, more than 70,000 are dead, 1.4 millon people are refugees and millions more displaced or hurt inside Syria. We applaud the generosity of Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq for hosting the Syrian refugees who have crossed onto their territory. I have visited each of these countries, met with Syrian refugees, and sought help for them from senior government officials. Much is being done but, quite frankly, the daunting scale of this crisis is challenging everyone involved. Inside Syria, along with USAID, we support efforts to get aid to those who need it despite shifting battle-lines.

At the same time as this major crisis grips the headlines, the conflict in the north of Mali has resulted in nearly 300,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs) and nearly 180,000 refugees in neighboring countries.

Last Fall, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and I traveled to Damba refugee camp in Burkina Faso, just 50 kilometers from the Mali border. Part of our mission was to draw attention to the crisis, so we appeared all over the newspapers and airwaves in Ouagadougou and then repeated ourselves before the media and diplomats of Geneva.

Prospects for peace in Mali are hard to gauge, but this crisis has not been forgotten. Yesterday, a donors conference was held in Brussels for Mali and at that conference there was an understanding that there needs to be more development in that country, especially in the north. The US announced another $32 million, bringing total US funding through international and non-governmental organization for Malian refugees and IDPs to more than $180 million.

On July 1st, the UN will start bringing in MINUSMA 11,200 peacekeeping troops and more than 1400 police. MINUSMA will subsume the African-led AFISMA mission that was set up last September – essentially many MINUSMA troops will be West African peacekeepers who are already on the ground. A separate French strike force will remain to deal with extremists and terrorists. Elections are scheduled for July 28th.

And suffering in Sudan has not abated. You are all familiar with the Darfur situation. More recently, however, our attention has been focused on conflict along Sudan’s southern border and the 230,000 Sudanese refugees who have fled to neighboring South Sudan, Ethiopia, and Kenya over the past two years. PRM has provided over $50 million to meet these emergency needs through UNHCR and its partners.

At the same time, in Eastern Congo, violence has driven new waves of Congolese refugees from their homes … and we will need to continue to work to help them.

Thanks to continued strong support from Congress this fiscal year, PRM will maintain its leadership role in responding to the needs of refugees worldwide, including efforts to assist refugees to return home voluntarily in safety and dignity when conditions permit– like the 70,000 Congolese who were able to go back to the Democratic Republic of the Congo from neighboring Congo-Brazzaville.

When I was in Kenya this past year, I was asked about the possibility for Somalis to return. Even as some voluntary return may be possible, it is vital that refugees continue to find safety in Kenya given the volatile security situation and scarcity of food inside Somalia.

Even as some 80% of Somali refugees indicate on surveys that they are willing to repatriate if peace returns to Somalia, more than 60,000 new Somali refugees have fled to neighboring countries so far this year.

When return home isn’t possible, we also support local integration in host communities. For example, some 160,000 1972-era Burundi refugees were initially offered Tanzanian citizenship in 2009 and accepted. Some political work needs to be done but the initiative on the part of the Tanzanian Government is a model that may provide valuable lessons on local integration that could be applied to other long-term refugee situations around the world.

Let’s now turn our attention back to our own country, the United States. As all of you here today know, the United States is also the world’s leading resettlement country, admitting more refugees each year than all other resettlement countries combined – more than three million since 1975.

And we all know that our own communities have been as enriched by these newcomers as they have been by the opportunities this country has provided them.

Our overall resettlement policy remains the same: we will continue to strive to achieve the President’s refugee admissions ceiling, focusing on the most vulnerable who cannot go home or be integrated in their country of first asylum.

The PRM Bureau has gone to extraordinary lengths in the past year to reach refugees in need of resettlement who were previously inaccessible because of dangerous conditions in the places where they had sought asylum. In Kenya, UNHCR has referred thousands of Somalis in the Dadaab camp for U.S. resettlement. Unfortunately, the Department of Homeland Security was unable to interview them because it was determined to be too risky to send DHS officers to Dadaab.

Last year, we provided additional funding to build a transit center in Kakuma camp, where conditions are safer, and have moved close to 1,000 individuals from Dadaab to Kakuma to continue the process for U.S. resettlement. Another 900 will be moved to Kakuma in the next week. These refugees, many of whom have been living in Dadaab for more than 20 years, will start arriving in the United States this month.

Many of you know by now that UNHCR has announced its intention to refer up to 50,000 Congolese for resettlement over the next five years. Most will likely come to the United States. Given the level of trauma and need among this population, we want to work together with all of you to do this right.

That’s why we’ve formed a working group to bring together partners from all across the spectrum – overseas and domestic, government, International Organizations, and NGOs – to see how we can better prepare the refugees and communities for successful resettlement.

Late last year the Government of Chad contacted UNHCR to say it had changed its policy and would be open to the resettlement to other countries of refugees from Darfur who have been living in Eastern Chad. PRM staff traveled to Chad in February to look into this possibility. My colleagues are cautiously optimistic and we will be reporting more on this to you in the coming weeks and months.

Working closely with the Department of Homeland Security, we re-instated the priority three or “P-3” family reunion program this year with a new DNA requirement to ensure that the program is fulfilling its purpose of reuniting relatives.

I’m pleased to report that we are on track to admit the number of refugees in the Presidential Determination this year. That is 70,000 refugees– a more than 20% increase over last year’s number.

You should also know that we’ve been able to admit these refugees in a much more even pace than in recent years. Just under 50% of the refugees we expect this year were admitted in the first half of the fiscal year.

We recognize that this increase comes at a time of shrinking state and local budgets, cuts in social services, and the challenges of raising private contributions. As you know, PRM has helped deal with economic challenges to the program by doubling the amount of funding provided on a per capita basis to receive and place refugees in 2010. We have provided modest increases since then.

We also are providing “floor funding” to our resettlement agency partners, essentially guaranteeing sufficient funding for services to 60,000 refugees so that program managers can plan and hire staff with the assurance that the funding will be there.

Despite all these improvements, we know that many refugees are still struggling in the early weeks and months of their arrival in the States. This leads me to ask: How can our domestic programs best address the needs of refugees? What more can we do to help refugees effectively integrate into new communities?

Given the overall budget situation in Washington, we all acknowledge the need to widen the circle of domestic “stakeholders” in the refugee resettlement program. We need to ensure a warm reception for the refugees we resettle. We need to find creative ways to expand participation in the program at the local level and support for the program by community leaders.

PRM is increasingly reaching out to state and local elected officials, employers, health clinics, schools, and others, during our domestic trips. We are acutely aware of the importance of early employment for refugees, and therefore of the importance of your developing strong relationships with responsible employers in your communities.

Employers PRM staff and I have met in our travels around the US have been among the strongest advocates for the refugee admissions program. Tyson Foods, which provides English language training to refugees, has created community liaison positions to assist refugees navigate services and builds bridges with the host community. A firm in Ft. Wayne, Indiana was inspired by the challenges refugees have overcome and was impressed by their work ethic. Burmese now make up 10% of the workforce there. A Subway sandwich shop owner in Baltimore who keeps hiring more refugees says they are the best employees he’s ever had.

I know that you all could name dozens, if not hundreds, of companies that are also strong advocates for the program, and they are an essential part of the success of the US Refugee Admissions Program.

ECDC’s affiliated agencies benefit from the volunteer work of thousands of highly motivated and caring community members. We recognize the strong one-on-one relationships developed when an individual agrees to help welcome a refugee to his or her community, and I know this is happening every day at your offices across the country.

Whether it’s preparing an appropriate home-cooked meal for a family upon their arrival, helping to teach them English, or explaining how to navigate the local grocery store or bus system, these relationships are life-affirming and life-changing for both sides. These relationships also help build crucial support among Americans for the refugee resettlement program. I’ll be curious to hear from you what you all are doing to reach out to non-traditional stakeholders in your communities.

In conclusion, I want to thank you for all you do all year long as an essential part of the US Refugee Admissions Program. The work of communities and networks of volunteers helps to turn the promise of America –as a land that welcomes refugees — into a reality. The success of our resettlement program depends on you. Thank you for the part you play in letting refugees turn their stories of tragedy into ones of triumph.

Cross posted at State.gov

Secretary of State John Kerry chaired the annual meeting of the President’s Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons (PITF) at the White House on Friday, May 17, at 9:45 a.m. The annual cabinet-level meeting serves as an opportunity to coordinate government-wide efforts and discuss new initiatives in the struggle to end modern slavery.

This will be the first meeting of the PITF under Secretary Kerry’s tenure as Chair and the fourth of the Obama Administration. Participants will include Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr.; Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius; Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood; Senior Advisor to the President Valerie Jarrett; and other agency heads and senior White House officials.

Before the last meeting of the PITF in March 2012, President Obama directed his cabinet to “find ways to strengthen our current work, and to expand on partnerships with civil society and the private sector, so that we can bring more resources to bear in fighting this horrific injustice.”

During this year’s meeting, senior Administration officials will highlight the unprecedented interagency engagement, coordination, and commitment over the last year, from investing in victim services and law enforcement training, to strengthening government procurement protections, to building partnerships with civil society and the private sector.

In addition, during the meeting, Secretary Kerry will present medals to life-long victim advocate Florrie Burke and the global hospitality and travel company Carlson, the two recipients of the first-ever Presidential Award for Extraordinary Efforts to Combat Trafficking in Persons.

This event will also be available on www.whitehouse.gov/video.

For additional information, contact Mai Shiozaki in the Department of State’s Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons at shiozakim@state.gov.

The United States welcomes the release of the 2014 Program Outline and its Compendium of Executive Summaries, and we wish to thank the Secretary General, the fund managers, and their staff members for the submission.

The Program Outline deserves careful consideration. The United States will read it thoroughly, and we look forward to detailed discussions over the next several weeks with fund managers about the most effective ways to address their mandates in 2014. During these discussions, we will be encouraging fund managers to focus activities on areas where they can have the most impact given the priorities of host governments, participating States, and limited budgetary resources.

As we stated earlier this year, we were disappointed that important U.S. priorities were not reflected in the OSCE’s 2013 Unified Budget. We will be reflecting on the shortcomings of the 2013 budget as we discuss the 2014 Program Outline. For example, the institutions’ budgets have been constrained at unacceptably low levels, impeding their abilities to fulfill the tasks given to them by participating States. We saw this last year when ODIHR cancelled election observation missions due to a funding shortfall. We are not willing to see this happen again, and will support additional resources for the institutions so that their budgets can keep pace with inflation and exchange rate fluctuations. We will also support specific requests that will help the institutions meet the demands of participating States for assistance, such as ODIHR’s call for a contingency fund to address unexpected expenses that arise from election observation activities.

In the first dimension, the 2013 budget also fell short. Despite the security challenges in Central Asia, for example, we were unable to reach consensus on bringing the Border Management Staff College (BMSC) into the OSCE Unified Budget. The BMSC has grown into a key tool, helping participating States, in Central Asia and the wider OSCE region, to secure borders, fight terrorism, impede drug smuggling, combat corruption, and inhibit human trafficking. We expect that the BMSC will be fully funded out of the Unified Budget in 2014.

We will continue to call on all fund managers to assess their programs to ensure they are targeting areas truly in need of assistance, where an impact can be achieved. We commend those fund managers, for example in Southeastern Europe, who have recognized their successes and the achievements of their host governments and as a result are streamlining operations and reducing assistance. This should be the trend in the region. In particular, we continue to believe that the OSCE Mission in Kosovo is too large and must be reduced to foster greater local accountability.

Finally, we encourage the OSCE to take a close look at its structure. The percentage of the budget spent on the Secretariat has increased from 19% five years ago to 23% in 2013 at the expense of field operations. Personnel costs have also increased to 61% of the OSCE Unified Budget despite significant reductions in the number of people working for the Organization. These are trends that we cannot support, and we encourage the Secretariat to find a way to rebalance the operations, placing an emphasis on activities and personnel in the field.

We look forward to working with you, Mr. Secretary General, the incoming Swiss and Serbian Chairmanships, the other 56 participating States, and fund managers as we prepare for 2014. We will need to hear from you the specific details about what is in jeopardy when funding requests are not met. This will help us to prioritize and to balance demands during these lean economic years. In our quest to reach consensus on next year’s budget, we expect that each one of us will need to compromise, but we are confident that working together we will be able to identify core priority activities that advance the goals of the OSCE across all three dimensions.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

In the United States, many NGOs, often youth led, will focus their May 17 efforts on combating homophobic and transphobic bullying in schools and universities, and among societies at large. In recent years, numerous tragic incidents have prompted greater awareness both in the United States and in other OSCE countries about the potential severity of bullying and its devastating impact. As part of a national initiative to prevent bullying, President Obama and other public figures continue to share a message of hope with LGBT youth through the ‘It Gets Better’ campaign. Certainly, we can all agree that children should feel safe when they’re in school. Yet bullying remains a problem in all of our societies, and one which the OSCE should consider as we work on our tolerance initiatives. For that reason, the United States welcomes the relevant opportunity of the Ukrainian Chairmanship’s focus on tolerance and youth and remains committed to combatting “all forms of” intolerance and discrimination in our work at the OSCE.

We commend participating States that have enshrined the protection of the human rights of LGBT persons in their policies and legislation. The United States wishes to highlight that Albania, host of our upcoming High Level Conference on Tolerance and Non-Discrimination, approved two amendments in their parliament on May 4 that further protect members of minority groups, especially those in the LGBT community. The first amendment adds sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of classes specifically protected by Albania’s hate crime bill. Following Prime Minister Sali Berisha’s meeting with LGBT groups, he committed his support for the adoption of the amendments. We urge other participating States to similarly update their hate crimes and discrimination laws specifically to include discrimination against LGBT individuals.

Yet we remain disappointed that numerous OSCE participating States continue to silence the voices of LGBT persons and their allies. We reject the disturbing practice of legislation that infringes the human rights and fundamental freedoms of any person, including LGBT individuals, such as the freedoms of expression, association, assembly, and belief under the guise of banning “gay propaganda.”

People continue to be killed, arrested, and harassed in the OSCE area because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. With the persistence of hate crimes and other forms of prejudice, we urge participating States to implement all of their OSCE commitments and specifically Ministerial Decision No. 9/09 on Combating Hate Crimes.

The urgent need to implement these commitments is illustrated by a horrific hate crime reportedly committed on May 9th against Vladislav Tornovoi, a 23-year old gay man in Volgograd, Russia. According to press reports, police have arrested two men in the case, one of whom has admitted to sodomizing, beating, and burning the victim, and eventually crushing his skull with a rock. Investigators in the case have confirmed that the motive appeared to be homophobia. Anti-LGBT initiatives, like homosexual “propaganda” laws and bans on LGBT assembly, suggest that homophobia is officially sanctioned, and may encourage those who would act violently on such prejudice.

The United States recognizes the broader responsibility we share to promote human rights for all people, especially those who are marginalized, and we take this opportunity to rededicate ourselves to the fight against discrimination and intolerance in all their forms. As President Obama said, “The struggle to end discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons is a global challenge, and one that is central to the United States’ commitment to promoting human rights.”

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The United States warmly welcomes back Special Representative and Coordinator for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings Maria Grazia Giammarinaro to the Permanent Council today. We applaud Dr. Giammarinaro for her tireless efforts to combat modern-day slavery in the OSCE region.

Her endeavors to raise awareness about the challenges in the anti-trafficking movement serve as a call to action for OSCE participating States. We agree with the Special Representative that working for social and global justice is critical to preventing and eradicating this crime.

We support her calls to consider the instances of human trafficking in the contexts of labor migration as well as commercial sexual exploitation, and to consider how discrimination and social exclusion affect the risk factors and victim identification for members of vulnerable groups such as migrants, children on the move, and persons belonging to minorities such as Roma and Sinti. Recognition of these issues is critical to our efforts to provide effective victims’ assistance and to punish the traffickers.

We also appreciate the Special Representative’s coordination with relevant organizations in the international fora. These strong partnerships are critical to advancing the OSCE’s specific contributions and leveraging our resources in the fight against human trafficking. Consequently, we look forward to this year’s Alliance against Trafficking in Persons conference which will address the economic, social, and political costs of human trafficking. Such annual events, which focus on groundbreaking themes in the field of combatting trafficking in human beings, lay the foundations for future cross-dimensional work at the OSCE.

In the three years since the Alliance’s Conference on domestic servitude, the Special Representative has continued to engage OSCE participating States on the issue of domestic servitude, through activities including a series of regional trainings on domestic workers in diplomatic households. The United States sent a delegation to the inaugural workshop last year, which was a formative gathering of diplomatic protocol chiefs tackling a particular area of trafficking. We commend the Ukrainian Chairmanship and the Special Representative for coordinating the regional training to occur immediately after the Chairmanship event in Kyiv, which will facilitate participation by participating States.

The Ukrainian Chairmanship’s focus on combatting trafficking in human beings serves as an important opportunity for participating States and the OSCE to take stock of our efforts. The upcoming Chairmanship Conference should deepen the dialogue on how the OSCE can strengthen its efforts to combat trafficking in human beings. It will be imperative for the United States that any new commitments reflect the OSCE’s cross-dimensional approach to fighting modern day slavery. To ensure a successful outcome, we urge the Ukrainian Chairmanship to initiate work on the anticipated addendum to the Trafficking Action Plan and we look forward to the Special Representative’s insight on specific areas that require particular attention.

In closing, we wish Dr. Giammarinaro all the best in her endeavors and she can count on our continued support.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

As we close out the 2013 OSCE Human Dimension Seminar on Media Freedom Legal Frameworks, I wish to express again the appreciation of my delegation to the Ukrainian Chairmanship for proposing this topic and making the event happen; to the host government of Poland; and to ODIHR and the office of the Representative on Freedom of the Media for their fine work organizing the event and recruiting the excellent speakers and moderators who have enriched our discussions over the past three days.

This Seminar did much to bring attention to challenges to media freedom, and to identify best practices. The seminar is likely to generate several productive recommendations for change. Our discussions also demonstrated that participating States in the OSCE have a long way to go before reaching full implementation of the international framework to protect and promote the fundamental freedom of expression. Unfortunately, certain participating States are not only not advancing the cause of media freedom as a vital pillar of democratic development and accountability in our region, they are routinely flouting existing OSCE commitments at home. This is unacceptable.

As I mentioned in my opening remarks, the struggle to reach agreement on an agenda for this Seminar was instructive, if disheartening. One participating State brought discussions of agenda topics to a standstill due to its unwillingness to acknowledge the sad reality – one that the diligent work of the office Representative on the Freedom of the Media has made all too clear to most of us – that the act of reporting or commenting on the news in several participating States has become markedly more dangerous in recent years. This participating State objected to inclusion of any variant of “safety of journalists,” a term with wide international recognition and acceptance, as a topic of discussion. It then followed up its dilatory approach to the Seminar agenda with limited engagement here in Warsaw.

While the participating States may discuss the performance of OSCE institutions, including the Representative on Freedom of the Media, in carrying out their mandates, there will be no consensus on any proposed restrictions to the current mandate of the RFoM. The effort mentioned by one participating State, we believe, is wrongheaded in its intent to establish the Internet and new connective technologies as a giant and unwarranted exception to the internationally recognized fundamental freedom of expression.

As we discussed, there is a robust international framework to protect freedom of expression, including for members of the media, based on Article 19 of the UDHR and the ICCPR and numerous OSCE Commitments. The rights provided in these instruments – the right to hold opinions, the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers – are key to what journalists do every day. Per Article 19(3) of the ICCPR, any restrictions on freedom of expression must meet a strict test of justification.

Any restrictions on expression in national law must comply with the requirements of Article 19(3); namely, that such restrictions are only such as are provided “by law” and “necessary.” Such restrictions on expression must be prescribed by laws that are accessible, clear, and subject to the scrutiny of an independent judiciary; are necessary (e.g., the measures must be the least restrictive means for protecting the governmental interest and compatible with democratic principles); and should be narrowly tailored to fulfill a legitimate government purpose, such as the protection of national security, public order, public health and morals, and the rights and reputations of others.

As we have also discussed, the United States has an extremely strong Constitutional framework to protect freedom of expression, including by members of the press. In addition, we have strong freedom of information laws to help keep our citizens informed as to what the government is doing. These legal frameworks help facilitate a conducive environment for press freedom.

At the OSCE Summit in Astana, the participating States reaffirmed “the important role played by civil society and free media in helping us to ensure full respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms, democracy, including free and fair elections, and the rule of law.” The extent to which participating States respect freedom of expression, facilitate the freer and wider dissemination of information of all kinds, and strive to ensure the safety of journalists, demonstrates the value they place on a free and independent press, and on a vibrant democracy.

I will conclude by quoting two figures internationally known for their wisdom and foresight: Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1786, “Our liberty cannot be guarded but by the freedom of the press, nor that be limited without danger of losing it.” The great author George Orwell added, “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”

Civil society and the media may not always tell us in government what we want to hear, but they tell us what we need to hear, and they must be able to do so without fear. Democracy is impossible without freedom of expression and an independent media.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

AS DELIVERED

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you Dunja [Mijatovic, OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media] and Helen [Darbishire, Director, Access Info Europe, Spain] for your excellent introductory statements.

The United States appreciates this opportunity to address the important subject of media freedom and the implementation by participating States of our commitments in this field. Underlying these commitments is our obligation under international law and the Helsinki Final Act to respect and protect the fundamental freedom of expression.

As I mentioned in our opening statement, the Freedom House global survey Freedom of the Press 2013 lists three OSCE participating States – Belarus, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan – among the worst press freedom abusers in the world. Turkmenistan is tied with North Korea for last place in the global index. A majority of the citizens in Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia live in media environments rated “Not free” by Freedom House. So it is indeed fitting that we devote a session of this Seminar to the compelling issue of implementation of OSCE commitments. No participating State is perfect and we could all do better in the area of media freedom.

As President Obama stated on World Press Freedom Day, May 3, the universal right of every person “to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers remains in peril in far too many countries.… When journalists are intimidated, attacked, imprisoned, or disappeared, individuals begin to self-censor, fear replaces truth, and all of our societies suffer. A culture of impunity for such actions must not be allowed to persist in any country.”

Everyone, whether a member of the press or an ordinary citizen, has the inherent right to exercise freedom of expression, whether through traditional media or through new technologies. And no one should be persecuted for what they say, print, broadcast, blog, text or Tweet. We strongly support the commitments of the participating States to facilitate the free flow of opinion, ideas and information of all kinds and to improve working conditions for journalists. And we share the acute concerns expressed by the Representative on Freedom of the Media, the participating States of the European Union and others, both here in the OSCE and at the United Nations Human Rights Council, about increased attacks against and killing of journalists and media workers and the need for governments to end impunity in such cases.

According to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), the Russian Federation has had 14 cases of murdered journalists unsolved since 2003. Indeed, ninety percent of murders and violent assaults on journalists during this period have gone unsolved, creating a climate of impunity. There are often clear indications that the violence is specifically linked to the journalists’ work, as in the 2012 killing of TV news anchor Kazbek Gekkiyev in Kabardino-Balkaria and the brutal beating of Mikhail Beketov in 2008, which left him incapacitated. He recently passed away.

In Ukraine, in 2012, there were reports of intimidation and violence against journalists by national and local officials, and unknown perpetrators. Vladimir Goncharenko, editor of the newspaper EKO Bezpeka (Environmental Security), held a press news conference in July 2012 on his investigation that revealed allegations of illegal dumping of 180 tons of dangerous chemical and radioactive industrial waste in the city of Kryviy Rih. The city denied the allegations of illegal dumping. Four days later, unknown assailants beat Goncharenko so severely he was hospitalized and died.

Ukraine’s Foreign Minister, Leonid Kozhara, issued a statement on the eve of World Press Freedom Day that said: “Unfortunately, there are issues of the violations of journalists’ rights and security even in the OSCE zone. Many attacks on journalists remain unresolved, and perpetrators were not punished. This is unacceptable, since all journalists should have an opportunity to do their professional work without fear.” We applaud Foreign Minister Kozhara for his statement and call upon the Ukrainian government and the governments of other OSCE States to conduct thorough investigations of violent attacks against journalists and to prosecute those responsible. And we commend Ukraine for making the safety of journalists a priority issue for its Chairmanship. We hope that the Chair-in-Office will consider putting forward a draft decision this year to reaffirm and advance our commitments to protecting journalists against violence and harassment.

Beyond violent attacks, the persecution of journalists for carrying out their professional activities continues in some participating States. And we see the increasing misuse or abuse of anti-terrorism, anti-extremism, or incitement laws to intimidate, harass, and prosecute journalists and civil society members for exercising their human right of freedom of expression.

In December, the Committee to Protect Journalists reported that 49 journalists were imprisoned in Turkey, more than in any other country. The high number of journalists imprisoned as well as the large number of Kurdish intellectuals and political activists in jail are stark reminders of how anti-terror laws and their implementation can restrict speech on sensitive topics.

On May 6, Aleksandr Yarashevich, a Belarusian journalist for the Poland-based, unaccredited Radio Ratsiya, was sentenced to 12 days’ imprisonment and blogger Dmitry Galko to ten days imprisonment for disobeying the police. The pair was walking from the detention center on Akrestsina Street, where they had met opposition activists recently released from the jail. This is Yarashevich’s second imprisonment in the past two weeks: he served three days on similar charges after covering the April 26 Chernobyl march.

In 2008, Salijon Abdurakhmanov, a journalist in Uzbekistan, was sentenced to 10 years in prison on dubious drug charges. He actively investigated corruption and advocated for farmers’ rights in economically depressed Karakalpakstan, and was back in the news recently because prison authorities allegedly hid him from ICRC monitors who tried to visit him.

In a number of participating States, we see the use of criminal codes to prosecute news organizations and individual journalists for alleged defamation. Russia, which decriminalized defamation as recently as December 2011, recriminalized it in July 2012. Unfortunately, on May 14 Azerbaijan’s Parliament voted to expand the crimes of slander and insult to apply to information posted online. These are already crimes when they occur in public statements or in information transmitted through the media. Last year in Ukraine, a draft to reinstate defamation as a crime carrying a prison term up to five years was thankfully defeated in parliament.

In some OSCE participating States, we see imposition of often crippling civil penalties on individuals and news organizations for insult or opinion. In Kazakhstan, for example, judicial actions against journalists and media outlets, including civil and criminal libel suits filed by government officials, led to the suspension of media outlets and self-censorship.

As Secretary of State John Kerry noted on World Press Freedom Day: “Journalists are increasingly confronted by the failure of governments to protect freedom of expression, and even as technology increases the possibilities for innovative expression online, the space for free media is shrinking.”

Governments within the OSCE region are restricting freedom of expression, as exercised over the Internet and other connective technologies, in a wide variety of ways. Russia’s new Internet law creates a blacklist of websites to be banned for supposedly illegal content without a court order. Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Transport and Communications is taking down sites posting content with which the authorities disagree, and conducting localized shutdowns of Internet and SMS messaging capabilities. Belarus and Russia are accused of targeting independent sites with distributed denial of service attacks. Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan are trying to create so-called national Internets – national barriers in cyberspace — that would prevent their citizens from accessing the global Internet.

Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan are using such terms as “information security” and “Internet management” in an attempt to justify restrictive Internet policies and measures. Belarus is harassing bloggers who criticize the government, targeting social media and stealing identifying information about their own people in order to target them for harassment. According to the Netherlands Helsinki Committee and the International Partnership for Human Rights, among others, Turkmenistan is one of the world’s most hostile countries for Internet users. The International Telecommunications Union reports the Internet is only available to approximately five percent of the population in the country and, when available, it is highly censored by the Ministry of National Security. Authorities monitor citizens’ e-mail and Internet activity, recording all online activities in Internet cafes and blocking access to certain supposedly sensitive websites. The Tajik government also acts as a censor, imposing restrictions on independent media without a court order, controlling access to information and closely monitoring the Internet. Often, the government shuts down websites it deems critical or threatening to the state.

The right to freedom of expression that must be respected when exercised in real space also must be respected when exercised in cyberspace. Fundamental rights do not change with new technologies. That is why we proposed the Declaration on Fundamental Freedoms in the Digital Age, and that is why we and 50 other participating States will continue to pursue consensus on the Declaration within the OSCE until we achieve that goal.

On a positive note, Freedom House reported that the most significant improvements in our region in 2012 occurred in Georgia, where there was “increased political diversity in the television market,” and in Armenia, where “media coverage of the parliamentary elections was generally more balanced than in previous election periods, opposition parties made greater use of online media, harassment and violence against journalists declined compared with the last election year, and there was a dramatic reduction in defamation or slander complaints against journalists.”

We call on all participating States to recognize the vital role of media in advancing democratic principles, to fully implement their commitments related to media freedom, to release all imprisoned journalists and bloggers, and to take other necessary steps to create societies in which independent journalists and others exercising their right to freedom of expression can do so without fear.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

On behalf of the United States, I would like to thank the Ukrainian Chairmanship, ODIHR and the office of the Representative on Freedom of the Media (RFoM) for their tireless efforts to bring this event to fruition under the tightest of time constraints, and of course, thanks to our gracious host government of Poland. I am glad to be back in Warsaw and look forward to a productive exchange of ideas on the subject of media freedom and the implementation by participating States of our commitments in this field. This is a topic that has become increasingly contentious within the OSCE sphere, even as the RFoM has documented the deterioration of the environment in which journalists and bloggers exercise their rights in many participating States.

Underlying our OSCE media freedom commitments is Article 19 of the UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights and our obligations under Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as enshrined in the Helsinki Final Act, to respect the fundamental freedom of expression. This fundamental freedom is the birthright of every human being; it is inherent in the individual and not for governments to dole out or deny as they see fit. Our OSCE commitments require participating States to ensure that their laws will conform to their international legal obligations.

Today, around the globe, and within the OSCE region, the space for media freedom is shrinking. According to Freedom House’s global survey Freedom of the Press 2013, three of the world’s eight worst press freedom abusers are OSCE participating States – Belarus, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. Turkmenistan is tied with North Korea for last place in the global index. Thirty-one percent of the countries in Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia were rated “Not Free.”

That means a majority of people in the region – 56 percent – live in “Not Free” media environments. So, it is indeed fitting that we devote a session of this Seminar to the compelling issue of implementation. The right of freedom of expression that must be respected when exercised in real space also must be respected when exercised in cyberspace. That is why my government and 51 participating States support the Declaration on Fundamental Freedoms in the Digital Age, and we urge all participating States that have not yet done so to also support it.

The United States takes seriously our international law obligations and our OSCE commitments regarding freedom of expression. As you will hear in the discussion of national frameworks, the United States has extremely strong Constitutional protection for freedom of expression, including for members of the media. Very little government regulation of expression is allowed and except for a few narrow categories, permissible restrictions are content neutral – by which I mean that we do not censor, criminalize, or prohibit speech based on its content. While we are second to no nation in deploring hateful speech, including in the media, we remain convinced that the best way to counter the expression of bad ideas and thoughts is the expression of good ones – not putting governments in charge of determining what citizens can and cannot say or write.

Within the OSCE, we have been very disappointed over the past two years that certain states have blocked important initiatives to consolidate and expand media freedom protections, particularly protections to combat acts of violence, intimidation, harassment and arrest and detention of journalists resulting from their work. As the Ukrainian Chair mentioned in his opening presentation, the issue we face is one of accountability: preserving the freedom of expression so journalists, bloggers, and in fact all citizens can hold governments and other institutions of society democratically accountable for their actions; and the accountability of OSCE participating States to prevent the development of an atmosphere of impunity that shelters and encourages those who would wish to interfere with the exercise of free expression rights. Unfortunately, an unwillingness to deal directly with this issue carried over into the negotiations over the agenda for this Human Dimension Seminar, nearly leaving us without an agenda.

I think it is important for participating States to remember that the OSCE is not an association of journalists, and the responsibilities and duties of individual journalists are not a major concern for the organization. This is an organization of governments, and it is the actions of governments that are the subject of our commitments, and should be the focus of this event.

In addition to the Declaration on Fundamental Freedoms in the Digital Age, the United States will press this year for OSCE action to promote a safer working environment for journalists. Far too many journalists have been victimized over the past few years for us to ignore. We believe that consolidating, reaffirming, and finding practical ways to advance OSCE commitments to protect journalists from being singled out for violent attacks and harassment based on their exercise of free expression rights is an important task for this organization. In cooperation with the Representative on Freedom of the Media, who has worked tirelessly to bring such incidents to light, we can make real progress this year to strengthen this vital pillar of democracy. I strongly encourage our partners, including those whose views on media freedom differ from our own, to join us in this effort. I also encourage members of the NGO community to develop and propose ideas for mechanisms to help us meet our commitments to media freedoms and the protection of journalists.

Once again, I thank ODIHR for its organization of this event under difficult circumstances, and I very much look forward to an interesting and stimulating debate on Media Freedom Legal Framework.

Thank you, Madam Chairperson.

The United States is providing nearly $510 million in humanitarian assistance to help those affected by the conflict. In addition, the United States has committed to providing $250 million in transition support to the Syrian Coalition and the opposition’s Supreme Military Council. This transition assistance will help local opposition councils and civil society groups to provide essential services to their communities and extend the rule of law and enhance stability inside liberated areas of Syria. At President Obama’s direction, we are broadening our non-lethal support to the Supreme Military Council beyond the food and medical kits they have already received.

Diplomatic Support

The United States is working with other nations and international organizations to support the Syrian people as they seek to build the peaceful and democratic future that the people of Syria deserve. The goals of U.S. diplomatic efforts are to further isolate the regime, both politically and through comprehensive sanctions; support the Syrian people’s calls for the end of Assad’s rule; and reinforce the Syrian Coalition’s positive vision of a democratic, unified post-Assad Syria that rejects extremism and guarantees the rights, interests, and participation of all Syrians regardless of their religion or ethnicity.

The Geneva Communiqué agreed by the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and key regional and multilateral partners on June 30, 2012 outlined a political solution to the Syria conflict through the establishment of a transitional governing body, including members of both the opposition and acceptable members of the current government, with full executive authority to frame the transition to an elected Syrian leadership. The Syrian Coalition, launched in November 2012 draws its legitimacy from a broad cross section of Syrians and has developed formal structures and plans for a democratic political transition that addresses the aspirations of the Syrian people, preserves the institutions of the state, and rejects violent extremism.

Humanitarian Assistance

The United States, along with the international community, is tirelessly working to provide humanitarian aid to all civilians affected by the brutal conflict in Syria and in the region. On May 9, Secretary Kerry announced that the United States is contributing an additional $100 million in humanitarian assistance, bringing total U.S. humanitarian assistance for those affected by the violence in Syria to nearly $510 million. U.S. assistance is providing emergency medical care and medical supplies, childhood immunizations, food, clean water, and relief supplies to those affected by the crisis.

Within Syria, U.S. humanitarian aid is reaching all 14 of the country’s governorates on the basis of need and regardless of political affiliation. It is often not branded as U.S. assistance in order to ensure the safety of aid recipients and humanitarian aid providers as well as to guard against aid distribution being blocked while en route. The United States is committed to using all channels to reach affected populations throughout the country and is working through the United Nations, non-governmental organizations, and community-based partners, as well as with the opposition Coalition’s Assistance Coordination Unit. The United States is also working closely with host governments in the region who have generously kept their borders open to refugees fleeing Syria. For more details on the United States humanitarian response to the Syria crisis and what U.S. humanitarian assistance is being provided, visit www.usaid.gov/crisis/syria.

Transition Assistance to the Syrian Opposition

The United States is acting in partnership with the international community to assist the Syrian Coalition as it works toward building a post-Assad Syria. After meeting with the Syrian Coalition and other governments in Istanbul on April 20, Secretary Kerry announced the commitment of an additional $123 million in transition assistance for the Syrian Coalition and Syrian Military Council, bringing the total to $250 million.
This transition assistance supports the Syrian Coalition’s ability to both strengthen its operations and to help local councils and communities in liberated areas to procure and expand the delivery of basic goods and essential services. For example, in close collaboration with the Coalition’s Assistance Coordination Unit (ACU), additional transition assistance is being provided to procure pre-identified equipment and supplies for prompt disbursement by the ACU to newly liberated communities. As announced on February 28, the United States is also delivering halal food rations and medical kits from U.S. government stocks to the Syrian Coalition, including the Supreme Military Council. In addition to expanding existing lines of support, the U.S. will consult with the Syrian Coalition and the Supreme Military Command to determine their most urgent transition assistance needs.

U.S. assistance includes training and equipment to build the capacity of a network of ethnically and religiously diverse civilian activists to link Syrian citizens with the Syrian Coalition and local coordinating councils. This support enhances the information security of Syrian activists, human rights organizations, and independent media outlets and empowers women leaders to play a more active role in transition planning.

Through a series of small grants, the Syrian Coalition is beginning to strengthen grass-roots administration — a foundation of democratic governance — as they provide basic services, including emergency power, sanitation, water and educational services. Some of this assistance is being directed to maintain public safety, extend the rule of law and enhance the provision of justice to improve local stability and prevent sectarian violence.

Over 5,000 major pieces of equipment, including communications and computer equipment, as well as generators and medical supplies, have been provided to support civilian Syrian opposition groups, civil society activists, and citizen journalists.

Support to civil society groups and local councils includes efforts to train, equip, and build the capacity of nearly 1,500 grassroots activists, including women and youth, from over 100 opposition councils and organizations from around the country; develop groups’ abilities to mobilize citizens, share information, provide community services, and undertake civic functions; support interreligious and communal dialogues and encourage citizen participation in shaping the Syrian transition; and support human rights documentation and transitional justice efforts while laying the foundation for future accountability efforts.

Support to independent media includes assistance to community radio stations providing information for refugees about available services; training for networks of citizen journalists, bloggers, and cyber-activists to support their documentation, packaging, and dissemination of information on developments in Syria; and technical assistance and equipment to enhance the information and communications security of Syrian activists within Syria.

Assistance in support of the democratic transition includes efforts to link civilian opposition elements inside Syria with global supporters; technical assistance to emerging civil society leaders; and facilitating participation by the business community in the transition processes.

Additional Support for the Syrian People

The United States continues to engage Syrians directly, offering academic advising to young people hoping to study in the United States and opportunities to participate in academic exchanges and other direct outreach programs. The State Department is also working with a range of Syrian, American and international partners to protect Syria’s rich cultural heritage and prevent the looting of archaeological sites, historic buildings, monuments and collections of objects. In addition, the Department is alerting customs officials in the United States and elsewhere to the potential smuggling of looted Syrian cultural property for introduction into international antiquities markets.

The State Department maintains an active dialogue to coordinate policy and assistance for Syria with the Syrian Coalition at its offices in Egypt, Turkey, and in Washington. We are also in close contact with many Americans, including Syrian-Americans, who have organized to provide assistance to Syrians in need.