Innlegg på Bali Democracy Forum og Bali Media Forum

In several of his interventions the Minister emphasized the following points
(must be checked against delivery)

• Inspiring to hear that so many Asian countries emphasising that democracy is important. How can we share experiences and work together to make our democracies even stronger? How can we build bridges between nations, cultures and religions in order to ensure the protection of human rights for all?

• Indonesia and Norway share a long track record of investing in dialogue. This year our bilateral human rights dialogue celebrates its 11th year.

• In 2006 the President of the Republic of Indonesia, His Excellency Dr Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, took the initiative to launch the Global Inter-Media Dialogue, following controversy over the publication of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed. We are seeing similar controversies again today. Together we invited 100 journalists from all over the world to discuss tolerance, ethical journalism and freedom of expression.

***

• International human rights law protects individuals, not abstract concepts such as religion, belief systems or institutions.

• We are concerned that the proposal to create a new international instrument to ban blasphemy could create new divisions and conflicts between communities. Our priority is the protection of individuals, religious or ethnic minorities, women or sexual minorities who experience discrimination. Fundamental freedoms such as freedom of religion and belief and freedom of expression are of crucial importance in this context.

***

• A key human rights principle is “participation”. Recognition of the need for participation enables the authorities to better identify all relevant parties, including marginalized minorities, and involve them in decisions that affect their daily life.

• Democracy strengthens human rights: Human rights tend to be further strengthened when democracy has taken root, when robust institutions that promote broad participation, free speech and the rule of law have been established.

• Broad participation means that the government has to respond to the needs of its citizens. If it doesn’t, it will find itself out of power. Therefore it is in the interests of democratic governments to protect human rights.

• It is important to underline what a democracy actually is. There is a common “misconception” that democracy is the same as majority rule. Democracy is more than majority rule. In fact, the real test for a successful democracy is its ability to protect and respect its minorities.

• A more precise definition would be that democracy is a system of government in which each individual citizen has an equal right to political participation. This means human rights. You cannot have a working definition of democracy without taking human rights into account. Thus, democracy is inclusion.

***

• Earlier this week, on my way to Bali, I visited Myanmar (for the third time during the last 18 months) together with Norway’s Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg. The democratic developments taking place in Myanmar are momentous and would not have been possible without the leadership shown by a number of key individuals.

• President Thein Sein has opened the door to a free and democratic Myanmar. ("The train has left the station and there is no way back"). He has chosen democracy over dictatorship. Aung San Suu Kyi has chosen to talk to the very people who held her in confinement for so many years. I think we could all learn a lesson from these undoubtedly difficult choices.

• We should take note of the positive developments in Myanmar. It is important to maintain international support for Myanmar’s own efforts. Lots of good will, but lack of capacity. Myanmar now faces many difficult choices. The release of political prisoners, legislative reforms and greater media and press freedom are important steps. It is also crucial that the government coordinates donors effectively, to enable the country to take full advantage of the engagement and interest of the international community

***

• International research: Democracy promotes peace. Democratic states are less inclined to start wars against each other. Democratic states have various tools at their disposal that enable them to resolve conflicts before they become violent.

• This is also why international arenas like the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the European Union, the European Council, the Nordic Council – and the Bali Democracy Forum are so important. Promotes integration. At global and regional meeting places like these, all nations can express and explain their views. We can maintain a dialogue with those we do not agree with, we can try to build consensus or seek compromise. In Asian regional organization: The importance of sharing views and challenges in a region marked by a high degree of optimism. 

***

• The global financial crisis. Imbalance. Countries spent money they don't have. High unemployment rate. Social unrest. Only global solutions to global problems.

• Need for reform of global institutions, but also glad that we today have organizations like the EU, the IMF, the World Bank. etc. – not the cause of today's problems – but will contribute to solving them. "Informal networks", like the G20 important, strong and growing economies meet, but decisions must be taken in formal forums.

• The Millennium Development Goals, the MDGs, have for more than a decade inspired national social development, and not least given a boost to the mobilization of international development assistance funds. Now, important to focus on post 2015 – goals.

• There is a link between global governance and local or national governance. Extreme differences locally are a global problem. Ensuring equitable distribution of wealth and opportunities is very important.

• At the turn of the 19th century, Norway was probably the poorest country in Europe. At this period of time the main union was established and social security was introduced. The first Norwegian welfare programs, for example, were developed as early as 1905 – two generations before the development of our oil-based economy, at a time when Norway was still a very poor country, one of the poorest in Europe. The Norwegian/Nordic experience – the Nordic model – shows the important role that strong, accountable organizations for dialogue between the social partners, with their focus on labor rights and decent work, have played in the development of our democracies.

• One could argue that democracy and economic development are two sides of the same coin and creating jobs must be at the core of any strategy for fair and sustainable economic growth. Programs to create decent work, when they are carefully planned and executed, enhance competitiveness. Such policies are important tools for ensuring the equitable distribution of wealth and opportunities. The development of a welfare state – introduced in the Nordic countries when they were much poorer than now – makes economic sense even for poor countries.

• So: A human rights based democracy is not just morally right, it also pays off. The promotion of women’s rights is the best example of this. The economic participation of women in Norway is considered to have been more important for our current standard of living than our oil revenues. In other words, women’s rights are not just important for women (and for men); they are important for society as a whole.

• A human rights based democracy is also the best guarantee of social and political stability in the long run. Short-term stability can be achieved by suppressing opposition, but in the long run it polarizes and destabilizes society. Human rights based democracy delivers.

***

• No real democracy without free press. No legitimate, free elections without free press. Democracy cannot thrive without open and critical debate.

• Freedom of speech sometimes leads to provocative words, insulting messages, controversial statements, racism, sexism, fascism and other extreme points of view that most of us do not like or agree with. Should they be prohibited by law? I believe the threshold should be very high. Our primary answer must be to meet such statements with counter arguments and critical debate.

• But there are limits. Incitement to violence is one area where limits to freedom of expression are defined by international law. (There has been a worrying increase in the number of expressions of hate, incitement to violence and discrimination, according to a report by the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression to the United Nations this autumn).

• These are difficult times for freedom of speech. This autumn, freedom of expression, and what are perceived as insults to Islam, has once again led to polarization, conflict and violence. Muslims worldwide have protested. We have seen demonstrations from Indonesia to London and Oslo. In some places demonstrations turned violent. A picture, a film, a visual image – and dialogue breaks down, violence erupts. At the same time, even more people stand up and protest against the violence, like in Pakistan and Libya.

***

• Hate speech is often cross-regional and transnational, which means that national legal systems are often unable to provide adequate responses and remedies. So what can we do? Non-legal measures are often the most important way of tackling the root causes of hatred and intolerance, often caused by economic decline, poverty and youth unemployment. Interfaith and intercultural dialogue can sometimes be the best antidote to hate and intolerance.

• Hate speech is often directed towards minorities, and we see a clear pattern of minorities being more exposed in periods of political and social turmoil. We see this for example in the Middle East, where some of the world’s most important religions originated.

• The Arab Spring seems to have made it more difficult to belong to a religious minority in the Middle East and North Africa. The picture is complex. In some countries, churches have been burned, synagogues attacked, people killed. Many have emigrated. In other countries, Muslims are attacking other Muslims, as in Syria and Iraq. Similarly, we see that Muslims and other minorities are experiencing discrimination in Europe, and that intolerance is on the march.

• At the same time, new democracies are being built, new constitutions are being written. Questions about the role of women, the state and religion are being discussed. This is a golden opportunity to lay the foundations for real democracies that respect different viewpoints and the human rights of all. Tolerance and inclusiveness are among the most important criteria for a democratic society.

• As you are aware, some Islamic countries have called for laws against blasphemy and for a global instrument to ban blasphemy. I do not think this is a good idea. This does not mean that I am insensitive to religious sentiments or in favor of religious intolerance.

• Religious intolerance was a theme when the General Assembly of the United Nations opened in September. The Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called the recent anti-Muslim film “a disgraceful act of great insensitivity” that “has led to unjustifiable violence”. While endorsing freedom of speech as a fundamental right, he said it should not be used as a license to incite or commit violence. “Too many people are tolerant of intolerance,” he said.

• I agree with this statement. (The international community has taken a common stand on this issue: Last year, UN Human Rights Council resolution 16/18 on combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization, and discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons based on religion or belief was adopted by consensus).

• This does not mean that we should accept the notion of “defamation of religion”. International human rights law protects individuals, not abstract concepts such as religion, belief systems or institutions. Blasphemy laws tend to protect one religion – as we have seen for example in Pakistan. They do not extend the same protection to other beliefs, including ideas based on a secular view of the world.

• A global instrument to ban blasphemy is therefore not a solution. It runs counter to international human rights law. It will undermine the critical debate that we need in democratic societies. What we do need is intensified dialogue to broaden understanding among different religions and cultures, in order to find common ground. We need debate on how to promote tolerance, pluralism and the right of individuals and communities to practice their faith.

***

• The right of journalists to decide how best to communicate information and ideas to the public should be respected, also when reporting on intolerance, hate and similar incidents. But if the media are to fulfill their role of providing society with accurate facts, a return to ethical journalism is required. Norway supports the Ethical Journalism Network, which seeks to promote tolerance and knowledge.

• Voluntary ethical codes and standards that do not allow hate speech are important. There is a need to improve media practice, to ensure accuracy, context and balance in reporting religious affairs, and to prevent sensationalism and the promotion of religious stereotypes. Journalists must be alert to the risk of manipulation by political or religious extremists and should seek to be balanced and accurate in their reporting.

• Independent and self-regulatory bodies, like the Press Complaints Commission (PFU) in Norway, can also play an important role. (The PFU is completely independent, and plays an important role in our country. We have seen this recently in relation to the media coverage of the massacre in Norway on 22 July 2011, and the following trial this year).

• The Indonesian Press Council has done a very important job, including supporting journalists in Myanmar and other ASEAN countries. This is how a network should function. In the Asian region there is a move towards sustainable self-regulation, and an urgent need to create a well-functioning united global body of independent press councils. We are happy to be able to support this important work.

• I am glad that the Bali Media Forum this year is focusing on Citizen Media: Giving People a Voice in Support of Democracy – how press councils, media owners, journalists and teachers in  journalism can work together at regional and global level to mediate conflict and promote a higher standard of media debate – ethical journalism, in other words. I very much look forward to hearing the main elements of your discussions. Thank you.