Atheist discrimination by country – Criteria counts

The number of times each criterion was matched in the report

This chart is generated from the information in the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) report on state discrimination against atheists, humanists, and the non-religious.

The report uses a number of criteria in five different ‘strands’ to classify each country. This chart tallies up the number of times each criterion was met in a country.

Other formats

This chart is available in the following formats:

SVG
http://indi.frih.net/atheism/freedom-of-thought/2014/general/criteria/criteria.svg
PNG
http://indi.frih.net/atheism/freedom-of-thought/2014/general/criteria/criteria.png

Please download a copy if you wish to use one of these images. Do not hotlink.

Raw data

Strands:

  1. General systemic issues
  2. Freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief; Establishment of religion
  3. Education
  4. Family, community, religious courts and tribunals
  5. Expression, advocacy of humanist values

Levels:

5
Grave violations
4
Severe discrimination
3
Systemic discrimination
2
Mostly satisfactory
1
Free and equal
Incomplete data

Criteria:

Strand Level Criterion Count
1 5 Complete tyranny precludes all freedoms of thought and expression, religion or belief 3
Religious authorities have supreme authority over the state 4
State legislation is largely or entirely derived from religious law or by religious authorities 16
4 Systemic religious privilege results in significant social discrimination 45
State legislation is partly derived from religious law or by religious authorities 20
3 There is systematic religious privilege 59
Preferential treatment is given to a religion or religion in general 66
Discriminatory prominence is given to religious bodies, traditions or leaders 68
Religious groups control some public or social services 32
State-funding of religious institutions or salaries, or discriminatory tax exemptions 76
2 Anomalous discrimination by local or provincial authorities, or overseas territories 24
1 Freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief is upheld 22
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report 21
No conditions hold in this strand 4
2 5 Quasi-divine veneration of a ruling elite is enforced subject to severe punishment 2
‘Apostasy’ or conversion from a specific religion is outlawed and punishable by death 13
The non-religious are barred from holding government office 10
It is illegal or unrecognised to identify as an atheist or as non-religious 14
4 The non-religious are barred from some government offices (including posts reserved for particular religions or sects) 17
‘Apostasy’ is outlawed and punishable with a prison sentence 9
3 There is an established church or state religion 41
Legal or constitutional provisions exclude non-religious views from freedom of belief 14
There is a religious tax or tithing which is compulsory, or which is state-administered and discriminates by precluding non-religious groups 19
2 There is a nominal state church with few privileges or progress is being made toward disestablishment 8
Official symbolic deference to religion 70
1 The state is secular, with separation of religious and political authorities, not discriminating against any religion or belief 23
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report 49
No conditions hold in this strand 7
3 5 Religious indoctrination is utterly pervasive in schools 2
Religious instruction in some schools is of a coercive fundamentalist or extremist variety 2
4 Religious instruction is mandatory in all or most state-funded schools with no secular or humanist alternative 25
3 There is state funding of at least some religious schools 62
Religious schools have powers to discriminate in admissions or employment 25
Religious instruction is mandatory in at least some public schools without secular or humanist alternatives 44
2 State-funded schools offer religious instruction with no secular or humanist alternative, but it is optional 48
Private schools are allowed to religiously instruct children 3
1 No discrimination in education 18
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report 60
No conditions hold in this strand 0
4 5 Expression of non-religious views is severely persecuted, or is rendered almost impossible by severe social stigma, or is highly likely to be met with hatred or violence 3
There is a pattern of impunity or collusion in violence by non-state actors against the nonreligious 6
Government figures or state agencies openly marginalize, harass, or incite hatred or violence against the non-religious 13
It is illegal to register an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization, or such groups are persecuted by authorities 17
4 The non-religious are persecuted socially or there are prohibitive social taboos against atheism, humanism or secularism 6
Government authorities push a socially conservative, religiously inspired agenda, without regard to the rights of those with progressive views 18
Prohibitive interreligious social control (including interreligious marriage bans) 22
Religious control over family law or legislation on moral matters 33
It is made difficult to register or operate an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization 17
3 There is significant social marginalisation of the non-religious or stigma associated with expressing atheism, humanism or secularism 8
Some religious courts rule in civil or family matters on a coercive or discriminatory basis 12
2 Religious courts or tribunals rule directly on some family or ‘moral’ matters; it is legally an opt-in system, but the possibility of social coercion is very clear 14
Localised or infrequent but recurring and widespread social marginalisation or prejudice against the non-religious 1
1 No religious tribunals of concern, secular groups operate freely, individuals are not persecuted by the state 43
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report 89
No conditions hold in this strand 0
5 5 Expression of core Humanist principles on democracy, freedom and human rights is brutally repressed 21
‘Blasphemy’ or criticism of religion is outlawed and punishable by death 7
It is illegal to advocate secularism or church-state separation, or such advocacy is suppressed 17
4 Expression of core humanist principles on democracy, freedom or human rights is severely restricted 37
‘Blasphemy’ is outlawed or criticism of religion is restricted and punishable with a prison sentence 43
3 Expression of core humanist principles on democracy, freedom or human rights is somewhat restricted 43
Criticism of religion is restricted in law or a de facto ‘blasphemy’ law is in effect 30
2 Some concerns about political or media freedoms, not specific to the non-religious 61
Concerns that secular or religious authorities interfere in specifically religious freedoms 51
1 No restrictions on freedom of expression or advocacy or humanist values 18
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report 21
No conditions hold in this strand 0

References