Mexico and the 1981 United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief

Abstract

I. INTRODUCTION Within the realm of human rights, it is extremely difficult to determine the proper scope of the freedoms of conscience, of belief, and of religion and to identify those freedoms' progress and achievements in a general and versatile manner for all nations. The name of this freedom cannot easily be reduced to a single word-for that reason, international textbooks resort to the expression "freedom of conscience, of convictions, and of religion." However, for purposes of brevity we speak simply of "religious freedom," called "freedom of worship" or "freedom of conscience" in days past. Criticisms pointing out the deficiencies of all these terms are pointless. Therefore, we should stop pointing out this enormous difficulty and try to agree on a simple and understandable expression for all. To this end, in 1981, the United Nations ("U.N.") adopted the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief ("1981 Declaration" or "Declaration").1 The U.N.'s effort, which had the purpose of establishing a minimum consensus regarding religious freedom that everyone could understand, is very commendable. This effort, incidentally, was the result of more than two decades of important work,2 which I will not describe here because it is beyond the scope of this article. IMAGE FORMULA5 However, the U.N. fell short of realizing its purpose by failing to formulate a convention that would put into practice the principles of the Declaration. The Declaration does not impose an international legal obligation on the signatory nations. Had the U.N. formulated a corresponding convention, the member states could have bound themselves legally to adequately respect religious freedom under the precise terms of the Declaration. However, the U.N. has not yet fulfilled this task, despite the passage of twenty years since the Declaration was issued. The purpose of this article is to describe the beginnings, progress, and current state of religious freedom in Mexico. Part II describes the attitudes of the Mexican government toward religion during the past century. Part III describes Mexico's attitude and behavior regarding the Declaration, pointing out that Mexico purported, in the international arena, to be much more in favor of religious freedom than it really was (in the domestic arena). Parts IV and V point out that despite several pro-religion reforms that were made to Mexico's Constitution in 1992, much necessary progress remains. II. HISTORY OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN MEXICO Mexico, a country that has for decades proclaimed itself a liberal and democratic state, possesses a very lamentable characteristic: the restriction of religious freedom. This restriction produced a precarious situation in the country between 1917 and 1992. The constitution that was in effect at that time included several provisions that repressed religious freedom. Even so, it would not have been inconsistent for Mexican authorities to approve the Declaration-- even though the Declaration contradicted (and to a certain extent continues to contradict) the express text of the federal constitution of Mexico. Mexican authorities often deviated from the repressive mandates of the constitutional text. A. An Overview For many historical, political, and social reasons, the original text of the 1917 Mexican Constitution contained a series of principles that, de jure, came to limit religious freedom enormously.3 IMAGE FORMULA11 Nevertheless, during the seventy-five years that such principles were in effect (they were radically reformed in 1992), they were rarely enforced, and an attempt to put them into practice caused a civil war from 1926 to 1929.4 I will review some, but not all, of the difficulties Mexico suffered during those seventy-five years due to its enforcement or nonenforcement of constitutional Articles 3, 5, 24, 27, and 130 (the articles that restricted religious freedoms). …