GOVERNMENT VIEWS BAN OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES POSITIVELY
Russian side files objections on appeal in E.C.H.R.
by Dmitry Marakulin
The government of the Russian Federation sent to the European Court of Human Rights (E.C.H.R.) objections regarding the case of the "Administrative Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia and its head, Vasily Kalin, who late last year appealed against the illegal liquidation of the religious organization and seizure from the Jehovists of a property complex located in an elite district of St. Petersburg with a value of around two billion rubles. In the estimate of the Russian authorities, the liquidation of the Jehovists' organization was "the positive obligation of the state."
Russia considers the Jehovah's Witnesses' appeal to the E.C.H.R. to be unacceptable--because of the abuse by the plaintiffs of their right (article 17 of the European Convention)—and it requests refusing them. "The liquidation of the religious organization 'Administrative Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia' was fashioned on the basis of the provisions of current legislation and the interference in the right of the plaintiff was proportional to the legal goals sought and was necessary in a democratic society," the objections of the Russian government indicated. At the same time, as follows from the document, the liquidation of the Jehovists was not simply the right but the "positive obligation of the state."
The government also calls the attention of the
E.C.H.R. to
the fact that in the decision of the Supreme Court and the
appellate college of
the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation there is no
prohibition or
restriction on professing individually the teaching of the
Jehovah's Witnesses.
In addition, Russia specifies that the plaintiff did not present
in its appeal
information about when and just how its property had been
confiscated in
accordance with the decision of the Supreme Court on liquidation
of the
"Administrative Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia," and it
considers the claims of the plaintiffs about the value of the
property—"tens of millions of euros"—to be "without
foundation" and "abstract."
A representative of the Jehovists, attorney Artur Leontiev, assesses the chances of winning the case in the E.C.H.R. to be "great." "The arguments set forth by the Russian authorities in their objections have already been voiced earlier, in other, similar cases, and the E.C.H.R. evaluated them, making a decision in favor of the plaintiffs and rejecting Russia. For example, the attempt of the Russian authorities to present the situation in such a way that natural persons may continue to profess their faith individually does not bear criticism: there already is a practice of holding people criminally accountable.
"The soviet situation is being repeated, when believers were told: 'the constitution is for foreign countries, but for you there is the Criminal Code,'" Mr. Leontiev stated to Kommersant.
The religious organization "Administrative Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia" and almost 400 of its regional divisions were liquidated in April of last year, by a decision of the Supreme Court, to which the Ministry of Justice had turned with an administrative appeal. In the opinion of the Ministry of Justice, the activity of the Jehovists did not match the goals and tasks declared in charter documents, and it violated federal legislation, specifically, the law "On combating extremism." Thus, around 100 of the materials distributed by Jehovah's Witnesses were ruled by courts to be extremist ("How did life appear?" "We learn in the school of theocratic ministry," and so forth) and they were included in the Federal List of Extremist Materials. Prosecutors of 13 constituent entities of the RF have issued 18 warnings to regional divisions of the religious organization "about the impermissibility of extremist activity and distribution of extremist materials." In addition, several divisions of Jehovists have been liquidated by decisions of courts.
In the Russian Supreme Court, representatives of the defendant denied the accusations advanced against the Jehovists. Moreover, they declared that in the event of the satisfaction of the lawsuit of the Ministry of Justice, provisions of the European Convention guaranteeing freedom of religious confession and the freedom of association will be violated. However the Supreme Court agreed with the arguments of the administrative plaintiff and, in addition to liquidation, ordered that the organization's property be turned to property of the state. In July 2017 the appellate instance of the Supreme Court also ruled this decision to be legal and logical.
In the same year, the Sestroretsk district court of St. Petersburg, on the basis of a petition from the supervisory agency, turned the property complex located in an elite district of the Northern Capital—the settlement of Solnechnoe that belonged to the legal person "Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania," the chief organization of Russian Jehovists—to the ownership of the RF. It consists of two parcels of land and 14 buildings, residential and office, with an assessed value of around 850 million rubles, and a commercial value, in the estimation of Jehovah's Witnesses, of around two billion rubles, including the furnishing in the buildings. This decision was left in force by the appellate instance of the city court of St. Petersburg in early May of this year.
At the same time, as Kommersant was informed in the Joint Press Service of the Courts of St. Petersburg, as of the present, nobody has turned to the Sestroretsk district court for preparation of the text for issuing the executive writ on this case, even though the decision has already taken legal effect.
In the autumn of last year, the "Administrative Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia" and its head, Vasily Kalin, turned to the E.C.H.R., claiming that the actions of the Russian authorities violated provisions of the European Convention: art. 9 (freedom of thought, conscience, and religion), art. 11 (freedom of assembly and association), art. 14 (prohibition of discrimination) and article 1 of Protocol 1 to the European Convention (protection of property). The E.C.H.R. communicated the appeal and asked the government of the RF to respond to questions regarding it. (tr. by PDS, posted 6 June 2018)
Editorial disclaimer: RRN does
not intend to certify the accuracy of information
presented in articles. RRN simply intends to certify the
accuracy of the English translation of the contents of the
articles as they appeared in news media of countries of
the former USSR.
If material is quoted, please give credit to the
publication from which it came. It is not necessary to credit
this Web page. If material is transmitted electronically, please
include reference to the URL,
http://www.stetson.edu/~psteeves/relnews/.