INTRODUCTION

• This is a critical discussion activity. You may want to divide a large group into smaller groups for this discussion activity. 
• The facilitator should give participants an opportunity to think critically by asking them to reflect on their own definition of “minorities”. 
• An additional entry point for this discussion could be to ask participants to consider the statement by Pope Francis and the Grand Imam of Al-azhar asserting the following:  “the discriminatory use of the term minorities which engenders feelings of isolation and inferiority.” (See Resources for link)

DISCUSSION

• Choose from the following questions and topics in order to start discussion.
• Alternatively, a facilitatory may provide their own questions based on local context. 

1. Do the participants agree with the term “minorities”? Why or why not?
2. Pope Francis and the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar issued a joint statement in which they both rejected “the discriminatory use of the term minorities which engenders feelings of isolation and inferiority.” Do the participants agree or disagree with this quote? Why?
3. Should the protection of “minorities” be replaced with the concept of equal and full citizenship rights? What would be the implications for non-citizens, such as refugees, asylum seekers, migrant workers and stateless persons?
4. Do you feel that using the term “minorities” obstructs the objective of inclusion?
5. Do you think there is a better term than “minorities” to use? Why or why not?
6. If all individuals and communities enjoy equal rights, does it matter what title we give them, “minorities” or otherwise?
7. Would you add any additional elements to  Commitment VI? What would you add and why?

CONCLUSION

Participants should record some of their thoughts in writing and determine ways that they can individually counter discrimination in their own sphere of influence. 

• Do you agree with the term “minorities”? Why or why not?
• Pope Francis and the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar issued a joint statement in which they both rejected “the discriminatory use of the term minorities which engenders feelings of isolation and inferiority.” Do the participants agree or disagree with this quote? Why? Why not?
• Should the protection of “minorities” be replaced with the concept of equal and full citizenship rights? What would be the implications for non-citizens, such as refugees, asylum seekers, migrant workers and stateless persons?
• Do you feel that using the term “minorities” obstructs the objective of inclusion?
• Do you think there is a better term than “minorities” to use? Why or why not?
• If all individuals and communities enjoy equal rights, does it matter what title we give them, “minorities” or otherwise?
• Would you add any additional elements to  Commitment VI? What would you add and why?

Abu Dhabi joint statement by Pope Francis and the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar

The International Protection of Freedom of Religion or Belief, pp. 65-66.

• The #Faith4Rights modules are flexible and require adaptation by the facilitators before their use. Case studies related to peer-to-peer exercises in the 18 modules need to be selected by the facilitators from within the environment where the learning takes place. The #Faith4Rights toolkit is a prototype methodology that requires contextualization, based on the text of the 18 commitments, context and additional supporting documents.
• Not all issues raised need to be resolved. This would be an impossible and even a counterproductive target. The aim is rather to enhance critical thinking and communication skills, admitting that some questions could receive many answers, depending on numerous factors.
• Tensions may occur during discussions related to “faith” and “rights”. Most of these tensions are due to human interpretations. Learning sessions are spaces for constructive dialogue in a dynamic process where tensions can be reduced with the help of clear methodologies, including pre-emptive situation analysis and evidence of positive results in areas of intersectionality between faith and rights.
• When preparing the sessions, facilitators need to factor in the profile, age and backgrounds of participants. Focused attention on the learning objectives can transform tensions into constructive exploration of new ideas.
• Meaningful engagement requires democratically pre-established rules. Facilitators should dedicate time with participants to elaborate these rules together at the outset and acting all along the training as their custodians.
• The time frames suggested in this #Faith4Rights toolkit are merely indicative. Facilitators may adapt them freely to suit the needs of their group of participants. The key balance is between respecting the overall timeframe while not cutting short a positive exchange momentum.
• To ensure optimal and sustainable benefit, facilitators may create a “training notebook” for participants during their peer-to-peer learning sessions. It would contain a compilation of templates to help participants keep track of what they have learned throughout the programme and eventually use this notebook as their personalised follow-up tool.
• When technically feasible, facilitators are also advised to project the module under discussion on screen in order to alternate between discussions thereon and showing the audio-visual materials listed in each module or any other items selected by the facilitator themselves.

• “Be a lamp, or a lifeboat, or a ladder. Help someone’s soul heal. Walk out of your house like a shepherd.” (Rumi)
• “Your true character ismost accurately measured by how you treat those who can do ‘Nothin’for you.” (Mother Theresa)