Part II | Outline

Category D | Human Rights

Topic 18 | ICCPR Article 18

Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) guarantees individuals the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. As of 2024, 174 countries have ratified the ICCPR, which means these countries have made a solemn, legally binding commitment to protect the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. This includes the right of individuals to adopt a religion or belief of their choice; to practice a religion or belief in public or private, individually or in a community; and to be free from coercion that would limit the freedom to choose a religion or belief.

Text of Article 18  

• (1) Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.

• (2) No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.

• (3) Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.

• (4) The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.

Key ideas  

• Freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. The rights articulated in Article 18 do not merely extend to traditional religions or religious institutions. Rather, the Article focuses on safeguarding individual autonomy.

• Freedom to change one’s religion. Unlike Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 18 of the ICCPR does not explicitly include the right to change one’s religious beliefs. Since the article was adopted, the Human Rights Committee (HRC) has clarified that “it should be construed as including the right to change one’s beliefs.” However, the failure to include the right expressis verbis conveys some doubt about the right’s nature and scope.

• Non-coercion principle. Article 18 of the ICCPR confers an obligation on state parties to (1) refrain from exercising coercive power and (2) prohibit others from exercising coercive powers that would impair individuals’ religious free exercise.

• Freedom to manifest religious beliefs. Article 18 ensures individuals robust protection to manifest their personal convictions both inwardly and outwardly. This protection, however, is not without limitation. An appropriate balance can be struck by weighing the individual’s right against public safety, order, health, morals, and the fundamental freedoms of others.

• Parental rights. Article 18 recognizes the right of parents to raise and rear their children in accord with their own personal religious and moral convictions.

Compliance mechanisms  

• The UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) is the governing “treaty body” charged with overseeing the implementation and enforcement of the ICCPR.

  • The Committee reviews reports submitted by state parties and offers “concluding observations” on positive human rights developments, obligations with which the state has failed to comply, and recommendations for remedying noncompliance.
  • The HRC issues Views (in response to individual complaints of state violation of ICCPR articles) and General Comments (synthesizing its interpretations of ICCPR articles). Views and General Comments are not binding but are afforded great weight by the international community.

Critiques

• Ambiguity. Critics posit that Article 18 lacks clearly defined terms—specifically in phrases such as public safety, order, and morals. They argue that without precise definitions, the article may be applied inconsistently across different cultural and legal landscapes.

  • Response. This critique ignores the extensive review the HRC engages in while adjudicating and interpreting claims asserted under Article 18. This system of review has resulted in a principled and universal application of the rights articulated therein.