INTRODUCTION

• Conduct a critical discussion on the relationship between the two key elements of commitment IV and their impact on the principle of non-discrimination. 
• The two key elements that should be discussed are: 1) Supporting and promoting equal treatment in all areas of religion/belief, and denouncing all forms of discriminatory practice, and 2) Preventing the use of  “State religion” or “doctrinal secularism” in justifying discrimination against individuals or groups.
• The facilitator may want to provide an example from case study or local context that illustrates these elements.

DISCUSSION

• Use the following list of potential questions and topics to help guide discussion:

1. Could you provide examples of guaranteeing equal treatment for all individuals and communities in manifesting their religions or beliefs from your home country?
2. Could you provide examples of denying equal treatment for all individuals and communities in manifesting their religions or beliefs from your home country?
3. Do you agree or disagree with the discriminatory risks embodied in the notions of “state religion” and “doctrinal secularism”? Why or why not?
4. Do you believe that there are any elements missing in Commitment IV? 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. 

• 1. Could you provide examples of guaranteeing equal treatment for all individuals and communities in manifesting their religions or beliefs from your home country?
  2. Could you provide examples of denying equal treatment for all individuals and communities in manifesting their religions or beliefs from your home country?
  3. Do you agree or disagree with the discriminatory risks embodied in the notions of “state religion” and “doctrinal secularism”? Why or why not?
  4. Do you believe that there are any elements missing in Commitment IV? What would you add and why?

In the absence of a locally based case study, the following may provide a discussion spring board: 

Case Study A: A case involving blasphemy charges

• 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.

“Then Peter began to speak: ‘I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism.’” (Acts 10:34) ​