Lessons Learned from Public Policy in Colombia to Identify Violations of Religious Freedom
John Fredy Osorio Cardona
Photo of Cocora Valley, Colombia by Fernanda Fierro on Unsplash.
This article is part of our virtual symposium and essay series, “Masking Religious Freedom Violations.” Read more here.
Preliminary Contributions of Public Policy
Colombia is one of the few countries worldwide with a public policy exclusively dedicated to ensuring the right to religious freedom. This represents significant progress, as most countries have a constitutional article affirming this right but often leave it at that or guarantee it only in a very limited way in practice.
In some countries, for example, they claim to protect the right but monitor teachings within places of worship through cameras and microphones. This surveillance makes religious organizations limit their teachings or teach with caution. In many places, governments provide legal recognition but rarely go further. For example, a religious organization might receive legal status but struggle to establish a place of worship due to urban regulations that create barriers.
The public policy on religious freedom in Colombia has achieved two fundamental goals: 1. Identifying numerous violations that have long been naturally invisible in Colombia, and 2. Establishing legal and participatory mechanisms to address these issues that prevent the full enjoyment of religious freedom.
Let’s illustrate this with examples…
When the public policy was established in 2018 through National Decree 437, three key areas and 33 action lines were created. For instance, action line 2.4.2.4.2.4.4 promotes the creation of interreligious spaces to discuss issues related to the common good. By 2024, this policy has led to the creation of the Committee for Participation and Social Dialogue and Intersectoral of Religious Freedom, established by Ministry of the Interior Resolution 2245, as well as the National Table for the Religious Sector and over 350 religious freedom committees in various departments and cities across Colombia.
While this sounds promising, the first challenge has been achieving harmonious and respectful interreligious dialogue. Numerous interreligious conflicts became apparent, including issues with inclusivity within the committees. For instance, only Christian communities attended initially. A particular observation has also been noted in the role as a policy maker for religious freedom: When other communities (Jewish, Muslim, Eastern, etc.) were asked why they didn’t attend, they expressed feeling excluded as the religious leaders opened meetings with Christian prayers, which did not resonate with them. Thus, the first hurdle was learning to understand, respect, and accept one another without losing individual identities.
A key lesson from this public policy experience is the need to foster interreligious dialogue grounded in solidarity, understanding, and acceptance. Otherwise, religious entities can transition from being victims to being perpetrators of exclusion. Based on the above, it is recommended to identify the ethical values that are common to all Religious Entities and that can be utilized to ensure the development of interreligious dialogue.
Examples have taught us that even interreligious meetings can infringe on religious freedom if not approached sensitively. For instance, a committee meeting scheduled on a Saturday excluded Seventh-day Adventists, who then saw it as a non-inclusive action. Similarly, offering a croissant (typically containing pork in Colombia) as a meeting snack inadvertently excluded Hare Krishna and Muslim communities. Recognizing such details has helped foster an inclusive and respectful interreligious dialogue.
Other Violations
On a global scale, international organizations play a crucial role in identifying religious freedom violations. However, public policy enables the identification of many often-overlooked violations, like those highlighted in interreligious dialogues.
In Colombia, the Anti-Discrimination Seal was created by the Ministry of the Interior. This seal is granted to companies and organizations that meet specific standards for respecting workers’ rights. Some companies have applied for the seal but were denied due to documented violations, such as rejecting job applicants based on religious practices, mocking employees for avoiding traditional practices, or unjustly dismissing religious minorities.
For instance, Colombia’s Israelite Community, a religious community blending Old and New Testament beliefs with origins in Peru, often faces challenges. Members observe an annual week-long religious festival, yet are sometimes fired for taking time off. Public policy measures, like using a magnifying glass to examine a colony of ants, allow us to understand the obstacles to religious freedom in greater detail. By identifying these barriers, Colombia gains a deeper understanding of religious freedom violations.
The Role of Multi-thematic Dialogue
Public policy has fostered a multisectoral, multi-thematic approach. For example, the Committee for Participation and Social Dialogue and Intersectorial of Religious Freedom, created by Ministry of the Interior Resolution 2245, is the first of its kind globally. Its multi-sectoral composition, involving government ministries such as the Ministry of Transport, identified insufficient signage for places of worship, resulting in unsafe conditions for attendees.
Similarly, with input from disability offices, the policy has highlighted inadequate provisions for persons with disabilities attending worship services. For example, deaf individuals might not hear religious teachings, but if interpreters are available, barriers can be reduced. Likewise, some people cannot read their sacred texts due to limited literacy, so this challenge needs a coordinated response from entities like the Ministry of Education.
We share only a few experiences today due to time limitations in this valuable symposium titled “Masking Religious Freedom Violations.” The general message is that we need public policies on religious freedom worldwide to identify and address violations through multi-actor, multi-thematic dialogue and to view this commitment as a shared responsibility.
Place of Worship Laboratory
Finally, this symposium highlights urban issues related to religious freedom violations revealed through public policy efforts. For instance, one Colombian city’s zoning rules prevent constructing places of worship smaller than 1,000 m² (about ¼ acre). While this theoretically permits religious freedom and grants legal status, the city’s zoning regulations are exclusive toward smaller religious entities.
These examples illustrate why we are developing a Place of Worship Laboratory, an academic initiative in collaboration with religious entities, to identify and address violations concerning places of worship. This “microscope” approach helps us closely examine the often-overlooked challenges related to places of worship. Thus, it is stated that to develop effective public policies against violations of the right to religious freedom, it is necessary to understand this right from a deeper and more focused perspective, as proposed by the Center for the Study of Law and Religion, Canopy Forum, and the International Institute for Religious Freedom through the “Masking Religious Freedom Violations” symposium. ♦
John Fredy Osorio Cardona is a PhD Candidate in Development and Territorial Studies at Universidad de la Salle in Colombia. He has served as a public official and state contractor, and worked for three years at the Directorate of Religious Affairs of the Colombian Government. He has also been an international speaker on peace and religious freedom projects, both in-person at events in Chile, Morocco, and South Africa, and virtually at academic events based in the Netherlands, Mexico, and the United States. As an academic initiative, he created the Worship-LAB, a multidimensional perspective laboratory on places of worship.
Recommended Citation
Osorio, John. “Lessons Learned from Public Policy in Colombia to Identify Violations of Religious Freedom.” Canopy Forum, December 18, 2024. https://canopyforum.org/2024/12/18/lessons-learned-from-public-policy-in-colombia-to-identify-violations-of-religious-freedom/.
Recent Posts
