Reporting: Supreme Court hearings case banning religion of Jehovah's Witnesses

The large, beautiful courtroom is crowded. More than 200 people attend, including numerous journalists, representatives of public organizations, foreign embassies. Hearing started at 10:30 a.m.

Just under 250 people remained outside to await the results of the hearing. Povarskaya Street in Moscow is filled with cars with transmitting TV antennas. The events are filmed by numerous Camera. Police walkie-talkies periodically broadcast the messages "Everything is calm, without incident." In Representatives of embassies and foreign organizations listen to the translation of the process in headphones.

The case is being heard by Judge Y. Ivanenko. On the defendant's side, "Administrative Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia", represent 6 people, including Vasiliy Kalin from the steering committee and attorneys. Representative Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation — Svetlana Borisova. The defendant's objections were attached to the case, together with annexes in 35 Volumes.

The court allowed photography and video recording only when the final act was announced. However, for audio recording There are no obstacles. About 40 media representatives are present in the hall, they occupy the first rows in the hall.

The court adjourned until April 6, 2017 at 14:00.

The weather in Moscow is warm and sunny. A large queue of people formed near the entrance to the court. Television journalists are working. There is a calm and friendly atmosphere among those present. Increased security measures are noticeable. There is a bus with police officers right at the entrance. A thorough inspection is carried out at the entrance. No liquids are allowed inside the building. The staff of the Supreme Court who organize the hearings carry out their work in a professional and coordinated manner. Despite the large number of listeners, there are no glitches.

The court denies the motion to stay the hearing.

Omelchenko's lawyer requests that materials that may testify to the political motives for the persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses. We are talking about documents of foreign organizations, such as the UN, the OSCE, official statements of human rights organizations, as well as archival Documents.

The court decided to grant the request to admit these materials.

The court reports on the merits of the case and gives the floor to the Ministry of Justice.

In conclusion, the representative of the Ministry of Justice asks the court to liquidate all organizations of Witnesses Jehovah, remove them from the register of legal entities and ban their activities. Asks to be confiscated property and make the court decision immediately enforceable (i.e., do not wait for the entry into the of the decision into legal force).

The judge asks the representative of the Ministry of Justice a counter-question: why does the Ministry of Justice ask at the same time liquidate legal entities and prohibit their activities. The judge is perplexed: how can it be forbidden that no longer exists. He asked whether the Ministry of Justice was demanding that all unregistered groups be banned. The representative of the Ministry of Justice explains that he is not asking to ban them, because Jehovah's Witnesses do not provided the agency with information about unregistered groups.

Lawyers have tried unsuccessfully to find out what kind of human rights violations are meant.

Zhenkov tries to clarify the point "failure to take effective measures to prevent extremist activities." He asked whether the Ministry of Justice was aware of the timely letters sent by the Centre Jehovah's Witnesses to all LROs, on the inclusion of certain materials in the FSEM? The Ministry of Justice is aware. Next Question: What does the ministry think would be an effective measure? The Ministry of Justice does not know the exact answer to the this question. The lawyer asks the representative of the Ministry of Justice whether there is such a criterion for extremist activity as inaction? It is obvious to everyone that there is no such criterion.

Soft rain is drizzling in Moscow. Along the façade of the Supreme Court, there was a long line of those who I came to the trial as a listener. A large A bus full of visibly bored police officers. Such a high-profile trial seems to be an unusual event for court employees. However, the surprising calm that, despite the obvious excitement, is maintained by Hundreds of believers, better than any words, convinces that extremism is not about them.

Kalin tells the circumstances of the repression of this religion in the USSR, which he himself remembers. It shows certificate of a rehabilitated victim of political repression. He asks what Does the Ministry of Justice want to issue a certificate to him and his fellow believers? The actions of the Ministry of Justice throw the country back into the past.

Full Speech by Vasily Kalina

Extremism is being fought throughout the civilized world. However, it is only in Russia that this is prosecuted Jehovah's Witnesses, whose services are attended by about 20 million people in the world. Chasing Them in Russia means to challenge all those countries where Jehovah's Witnesses freely practice their faith. At this point, Cherepanov concludes his speech and asks that the theses of his speech be attached to the case.

Full text Sergey Cherepanov's explanations (PDF, 226 KB)

Toporov wonders why the overwhelming majority, more than 380 LROs of Russia, who have never received no claims from the state, should be liquidated, even without any Warnings and opportunities to change something? There are hundreds and hundreds of results of inspections in the case various agencies that did not reveal any violations in the activities of all these LROs. 22 LRO of Crimea, registered under Russian law and have not committed a single violation, They are perplexed why they should be recognized as extremist, and their property confiscated? Why A Moscow LRO registered under the ECHR order and has not committed a single offense must to be subjected to such a severe sanction?

Full text of Yuriy Toporov's speech

The court adjourns until April 12, 2017 at 10:00 a.m.

Audio recordings of speeches:

Moscow, Povarskaya Street. An invigorating morning. Stiff fingers. There are more than 200 people at the entrance. Those Who Stand At the beginning of the queue, we arrived at the court in a taxi by 5:30, but they were not the first: in parked cars Believers who had come to the court hearing, in which freedom of religion in Russia is being decided, were already warming up.

"I ask everyone to stand up!" The court announces the continuation of the court session and for the purpose of giving explanations gives the floor to attorney Anton Omelchenko. Omelchenko says his explanations will be concerning how the claim of the Ministry of Justice violates the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and international treaties.

Lawyer Zhenkov asks for an explanation about the court's decision, which is several days old The Ministry of Justice presented to the court as "an example of violation of the rights of citizens by religious organization" (the story of a patient who, of two alternatives, chose medication rather than blood transfusion).

The lawyer, firstly, is perplexed as to why the Ministry of Justice did not explain where they got the document. containing medical confidentiality.

Secondly, Zhenkov says that in case of refusal of transfusion, we are not only not talking about a violation of somebody's rights, but, on the contrary, that the rights of the citizen were guaranteed, the right to voluntary Informed treatment. If a patient were denied treatment only on religious grounds, it would be would be a violation of rights. Zhenkov reads out excerpts from the Order of the Ministry of Health, concerning the dangers of transfusion of blood components, as well as the need to receive Written consent from the patient to perform this operation. Zhenkov notes that there is no reservations to the effect that members of certain religions are allowed to exercise the right to an informed consent, and others are not allowed.

The judge begins to ask questions of the defendant's representatives.

The first question is: Does the Jehovah's Witnesses Training Center provide Bible interpretation to local organizations? The answer is no, interpretation of sacred texts is provided by the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses (international management).

A new question is: in what sense does the CA ensure the "coordination of activities" of the LRO (according to the Charter). Answer: LROs are separate legal entities, but the CA provides them with recommendations. For example, if there is a question of constructing a worship building, the CA can refer to the Bible recommend the construction of a modest, unpompous building. However, the ultimate decision on how to there will be a new building, takes LRO.

Another question of the court is whether the CA approved the charters of those 8 LROs that were liquidated by court decisions. Representative Toporov explains to the court that the founders of the new LRO apply to the CA with a request to entering the CA structure in order to speed up the registration procedure. In this case, the CA will certainly coordinates their statutes to ensure that the founders are Jehovah's Witnesses and that their The goals of the task coincide with the doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses.

The court is interested in the question of whether the CA is the founder of non-profit, public organizations or LROs, after all, such a possibility is spelled out in the Charter. Lawyers explain to the court that the possibility in the Charter It was prescribed "just in case", but it was not implemented. The founders of all LROs were local Citizens. For example, the charter also provides for the possibility of importing literature, but this possibility It is also not implemented due to objective circumstances.

The Court is interested in the question of whether the chairpersons of the LRO are members of the steering committee of the CA. Kalin explains, that members of the LRO are never members of the steering committee of the CA.

Are there CA decisions that are mandatory for LROs? Kalin explains that when LROs request material assistance from the CA (in the form of a donation), the center is interested in the question of how the funds are spent. For example, The TC provides a design for a modest worship building, and the LRO coordinates this project with the local Authorities. Or if a natural disaster occurs, the TC donates funds to help believers and cooperates with the LRO to help affected Jehovah's Witnesses, as well as their relatives.

The court asks whether the funds were spent on the production of printed products. Defendants They explain that they don't.

Court: Did the Training Center import literature that was later recognized as extremist? Defendants explain that the function of the CA is purely logistic: it collects orders from individuals directly A foreign publishing house, and it also sends them literature. The CA is not engaged in "dissemination" Literature.

The Court: One of the books was imported into Russia shortly before it was recognized as extremist, However, when was it common among believers? Lawyers pay attention to the a letter in which the CA immediately informs all LROs about the entry of this book into the FSEM, and asks not to use it anymore. Naturally, after that, the TC could not distribute this book.

Court: What is the fate of printed products that are recognized as extremist? It is withdrawn by the center believers? Destroyed? Lawyers explain that the TC cannot dictate to believers what to do with literature that is in their possession. However, may pay attention to the provisions of the of the law, and does so.

It is the plaintiff's turn to ask questions. What is the role of CAs in approving the charters of LROs and their members? Omelchenko gives the following example. The role of the CA in approving the charters of the LRO is similar to the role of the LRO itself. Ministry of Justice: The Ministry of Justice checks the statutes for compliance with the law, and the CA checks the statutes for canonical correspondence.

New questions of the representative of the Ministry of Justice are devoted to finding out how independent LROs are in their the extent of the CA's influence on the LRO, including the approval of governing bodies and charters of LROs.

The court asks the representative of the Ministry of Justice a counter-clarifying question: "From the point of view of legality, how is this affects the legal capacity and legal personality of legal entities?" The question turns into a rhetorical one. DOJ: Who are traveling ministers? Who are special preachers? Defendant's Representatives explain that these ministers cooperate with religious groups, not with LROs.

The court (addressing the representative of the Ministry of Justice): Does the plaintiff have evidence that the traveling Ministers and special preachers have something to do with the decisions of the competent ones that have come into force. bodies to find individuals or LROs guilty of extremist activity? No, the Ministry of Justice There are no such facts.

The Court (addressing the representative of the Ministry of Justice): Does the Ministry of Justice still believe that judicial acts against Do individuals and LROs have prejudicial force for our case? Yes, the Ministry of Justice still thinks so, as the CA was aware of these cases. The Court urges the representative of the Ministry of Justice to make a clear statement in the future indicate which provisions of the law the agency refers to, since the court is tasked with checking legality of the claims of the Ministry of Justice.

When questioning witness Koretskaya, the court drew attention to the fact that she uses personal notes when giving Readings. Omelchenko's lawyer asked how to explain the similarity of the wording from her notes with the texts from the website of a well-known anti-sectarian center. The court decided to get acquainted with Koretskaya's notes later.

The interrogation of witnesses of the Ministry of Justice continues. Testimony is given by former Jehovah's Witness Pavel Zverev.

Questioning witness Zverev, the court asks: "If you have been harmed, have you applied to the The witness did not apply. Zverev said that under the influence of literature of Jehovah's Witnesses, he personally felt hatred for the clergy of the Orthodox religion. The witness denies that he is a member of anti-cultist organizations, although he has also met He was photographed with the most famous "sectologist".

Witness of the Ministry of Justice Petrov, former Jehovah's Witness. In 1983, after becoming one of Jehovah's Witnesses, she left work related to the propaganda of military heroism, because it is not in accordance with the doctrine Jehovah's Witnesses. In 2009, she left the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses. As an example, extremist activities of the Administrative Center, a witness cites the fact that Jehovah's Witnesses exclude from their ranks those who commit sins. (The court asked a representative of the Ministry of Justice whether What are the arguments of the Ministry of Justice cited in the lawsuit supported by the testimony of this witness? The Ministry of Justice is again talking about a possible threat to an indefinite circle of people.) When asked by the court whether she had seen witness Petrov, for someone to distribute extremist literature, the witness replies that he does not Saw.

The court invites the last witness of the Ministry of Justice, V.V. Koretsky.

In 2009, Koretsky left the ranks of Jehovah's Witnesses. The judge asked whether 2009 was limited to the year his knowledge of Jehovah's Witnesses. Witness: Yes. The Ministry of Justice asks the witness to explain what he knows about the attitude of Jehovah's Witnesses to higher education and state symbols. The Court Asks representative of the Ministry of Justice: "If you do not indicate these points in the grounds of the claim, why do we need it Representative of the Ministry of Justice: "The question has been withdrawn." When asked by the court whether Koretsky was interested in the outcome He answers curtly, "Yes."

The court adjourns until April 19, 2017 at 10:00 a.m.

The front of the Supreme Court building is more crowded than ever. The queue began to form at night. Many specially came from different cities of Russia. Since the weather in Moscow is cold, most are dressed in winter. From time to time, someone would bring coffee and pies for those standing in line. Staff The police work professionally and coherently, ensuring the safety of those involved in the trial.

Zhenkov filed a motion to attach fresh documents. He reports that in March-April In 2017, law enforcement agencies across Russia, citing an ongoing trial, invaded the worship buildings, demand that they be stopped, interrogate believers, and rewrite passport data. Prosecutor's warnings about criminal liability for extremism are issued in connection with Holding Bible study meetings. The Ministry of Justice objects to the introduction. The Court shall determine join.

The court announced a 10-minute technical break.

A representative of the Ministry of Justice draws attention to the fact that, according to one of the documents, under the leadership of There are more than 2,000 unregistered groups operating in CAs. Lawyers explain that this is an internal spiritual structure.

The court asks the representative of the Ministry of Justice for what purpose they attached to the case the trial balance Statements. A representative of the Ministry of Justice explains that the statements indicate that "monetary The funds may have been used to finance extremist activities." The Court asks It can be seen that the money was spent on extremist activities, and not on the usual statutory Goal. The Ministry of Justice does not have exact data. Representative Toporov draws attention to the fact that as part of the inspection The Ministry of Justice was provided with all agreements for targeted donations to the CA, in which the purpose was deciphered of all financial transfers. A natural question from the representative: "Why didn't the Ministry of Justice submit these documents to the court?"

The court adjourns until 2:30 p.m.

The court returns to the resolution of the motions filed earlier, but postponed. Representative of the Ministry of Justice asked to attach to the case 12 court decisions giving doctors the right to use donor blood in treatment of minors. Representatives of the defendant believe that these decisions do not apply to Case.

First, refusal of blood transfusion has nothing to do with the concept of "extremism" (no others) There are no grounds other than extremist activity for the Ministry of Justice to ban Jehovah's Witnesses in the lawsuit leads).

Secondly, the CA was not a party to those court cases and is not even mentioned in any of the decisions.

Thirdly, the inclusion of these decisions affects medical confidentiality. To evaluate them, you will need to Ask for patients' consent as well as their medical records. In all solutions without exception It is said that the parents wanted to treat their children and turned to medical institutions. About the Waiver There was no question of treatment.

Lawyer Zhenkov draws attention to the fact that in the ECHR ruling, which gives a legal interpretation refusal of blood transfusion, examples of prohibitions in Islam and Orthodoxy that may be potentially hazardous to health. "However, the Ministry of Justice does not come up with a lawsuit to liquidate centralized organizations of these religions," Zhenkov said.

A short technical break has been announced.

The courtroom of the Supreme Court is gradually filling up with listeners. It feels hard to feel pent-up excitement. The parties are intently preparing to speak in the debate.

The plaintiff's representative, according to Omelchenko, gave his own interpretation of the fact that This is extremism. However, the defendant recalls that the legal interpretation is given by the Supreme Court and Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. And these courts ruled that extremism can be considered "incitement to hatred and hatred propaganda of social, racial, national, religious superiority, the presence of which should be be determined taking into account all the relevant circumstances of each particular case, namely the form and the content of the activity or information, its addressees and purpose, socio-political context, the presence of a real threat, including calls for unlawful encroachments on constitutionally protected values, justification or justification of their commission."

"Restricting freedom of conscience and religion by means of anti-extremist legislation, freedom of expression and the right to impart information shall not apply to any activity or information on the sole grounds that it does not fit into the generally accepted perceptions that do not conform to established traditional views and opinions, enter into conflict with moral or religious preferences. To do otherwise would be retreat the constitutional requirement of the necessity, proportionality and fairness of restrictions on rights and freedoms of man and citizen".

Omelchenko: The actions of the Ministry of Justice do not pursue a legitimate goal, they bear all the signs of political Repression. "I ask you to dismiss the claims of the administrative plaintiff in full."

Full text Anton Omelchenko's speeches (PDF, 184 KB)

Zhenkov: "There was a man in this room who was born in prison. 'Cause his mom is 5 months pregnant pregnancy was sentenced as an enemy of the people to 8 years in prison just for being Jehovah's Witness. She gave birth in prison, and the child spent two years in the prison orphanage. The father did not could have taken him away because he had been exiled to Siberia. In 1991, the State recognized the mother as a victim political repressions, apologized to her, assigned a pension. And here in court, this man, He was born in prison and asked me: "Does the Ministry of Justice really want to repeat this terrible war? history?" And I didn't know what to say. Even now I don't know what motivates the representatives of the Ministry justice and those who direct this process."

Zhenkov: "What will happen if the court grants the request of the Ministry of Justice? Dear Court, if it is the will state, then the country successfully acquires 170,000 prisoners of conscience and the corresponding Reputation. If it is the will of the state that the law should be observed, then the decision of the court can only be one is to dismiss the administrative claim of the Ministry of Justice."

Full text of Viktor Zhenkov's speech (PDF, 174 KB)

At the end of his speech, Toporov quotes the statement in full human rights defender Lyudmila Alekseyeva. At the end, he says: "You, dear court, are you, here and today You can eliminate injustice and dishonesty towards hundreds of thousands of Russian citizens, restore their good name, strengthen the credibility of the law on countering extremism, clearly showing The difference between real extremists and extremists drawn on paper. We hope that you will be able to the Court will have the courage to do so and to make a fair and impartial decision, guided by the law and the gift of God, the conscience of man."

Full text of Yuri Toporov's speech

Novakov recalls that the representative of the Ministry of Justice in his debate accused Jehovah's Witnesses of cynicism. "I I will tell you what cynicism is," Novakov said. When the Ministry of Justice in the trial of the LRO first says that it is right The CA is not affected, and then these decisions are presented as the basis for the liquidation of the CA. Or when Much harsher statements against Jehovah's Witnesses are perceived by the Ministry of Justice as "ordinary At the same time, he calls "extremism" those statements that are far from extremism. When Contrary to the available data, the Ministry of Justice dismisses reports of falsification, while hesitating to cite as a basis for action those cases where the falsification is clearly recorded on video. "Here's what is cynicism!" concludes Novakov.

Full text of Maxim Novakov's speech (PDF, 125 KB)

"The strength of a powerful state is precisely to protect the interests of the minority, because the majority will stand up for themselves."

Full text of Sergey Cherepanov's speech

Kalin reminds us of our responsibility before God and says: "I would like to take this opportunity to endure warning to the Prosecutor General's Office and the Ministry of Justice. Please come to your senses! Please come to your senses!"

Full text of Vasily Kalin's speech (PDF, 46 KB)

The Supreme Court Decided to Liquidate the Centralized Religious Organization of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia, as well as all 395 local religious organizations of this religion.

The believers have already begun to prepare a complaint to the appellate instance (a panel consisting of three judges Supreme Court), which should be considered within a month.