Menu

Ruslands højesteret – referat dag 6

20. april 2017 - Notater, Verdens gang

20. april 2017 (google oversat fra russisk)

13:15
The courtroom of the Supreme Court gradually filled with students. There could hardly contain the excitement. Hand intently preparing for the debate.


13:50 Most of the seats in the hall already occupied.


14:09 Begin hearing. Omelchenko said the short application for admission of the statement of the European Union on the issue of the persecution of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia. In it, the European Union says that “the claim of 15 March, submitted by the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation to the Supreme Court, is the latest undertaken harsh measure against Jehovah’s Witnesses and the further strengthening of the violation of their rights and the prosecution of which they are exposed in Russia, contrary to international standards on freedom of religion or belief. ” Court clarifies how this statement can affect the outcome of today’s hearing. Omelchenko said that this is proof of a violation of Art. 18 of the European Convention. While the European Union is not a Council of Europe body, it is made at a meeting of the Council of Europe. Court denies admission of the document.


14:15 The Court proceeds to debate. Presentation by representative of the Ministry of Justice.


14:16 The Ministry of Justice points out that Russia adheres to the principle of the rule of law. For Freedom of Conscience Act provides a framework. The Ministry of Justice points out that the very name of the CA – “Administrative Center of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia” – indicates that a centralized organization has control over MRW. The Ministry of Justice drew attention to the leading role of the CA in conjunction with the MPO. CA agree on issues related to the appointment of chairmen of MPO, etc. Witnesses Organization represent an entire organism. They are characterized by organizational unity. Links to canonical ties Ministry of Justice considers inconclusive.


14:25 According to the representative of the Ministry of Justice, the fact that the defendant continues to assert planted it indicates that the CA does not repent of extremist activity.


14:28 The representative of the Ministry of Justice: Although many religions have expressed a particular attitude to the secular authorities, the texts of Jehovah’s Witnesses contain unacceptably insulting ways of expressing the truth of their beliefs. Extremist Bible quotes are not recognized, and the interpretation of what is written in the Bible.


14:35 The Ministry of Justice believes that the coverage of court as extremist materials solutions give CAs all possible, do not bring into the country the literature that would fall under the reasoning of courts that considered extremist activity.


14:35 Gross violations of anti-extremist legislation, according to the Ministry of Justice, said the fact that the CA for over 25 years, it imported materials, which were later found to be extremist.


14:38 The Ministry of Justice considers the cynicism of the fact that the literature of Jehovah’s Witnesses word “extremist” (reference to the literature of Jehovah’s Witnesses) is taken in quotation marks – in spite of the fact that the courts’ decisions on the recognition of extremist literature came into force.


14:40 To summarize, a spokesman for the Ministry of Justice, as before, asks the CA to eliminate all the LRO of Jehovah’s Witnesses, to confiscate their property and all that – without waiting for the court decision comes into force.


14:42 The debate begins the representative of the defendant administrative Omelchenko.


14:45 Omelchenko analyzes the illegal nature of generalization made by the Ministry of Justice, the fact that different Jehovah’s Witnesses are supposedly unified organization “with the structural units.”


14:50 Omelchenko leads rules of law on countering extremism. The law does not provide for such extremist actions as “an act in the form of inaction”, “act committed inadvertently, negligently.” Russia’s Supreme Court has repeatedly pointed out that extremism can only be active actions aimed at violent change of the constitutional order.


15:02 The representative plaintiff, according to Omelchenko, gave the debate some his own interpretation of what extremism. However, the defendant reiterates that the legal interpretation of the Supreme Court and give the Constitutional Court. And the courts have ruled that extremism can be regarded as “inciting hatred and propaganda of social, racial, national, religious superiority, the presence of which must be determined by taking into account all relevant circumstances of each case , namely the form and content of activities, or information, their addressees and target orientation , the socio-political context, there is a real threat , caused by including calls to unlawful attacks on constitutionally protected values, justification sludge and justification of their commission. ”

“Restricting by anti-extremist legislation freedom of conscience and religion, freedom of speech and the right to impart information should not take place in respect of any activities or information on the sole ground that they do not fit the generally accepted ideas are not consistent with established traditional views and opinions , conflict with the moral and ethical or religious preferences. Other would mean a departure from the constitutional requirements of necessity, proportionality and fairness restrictions on rights and freedoms of man and citizen. ”


15:13 Omelchenko: Justice Actions do not pursue a legitimate aim, they are all signs of political repression. “Please to meet the administrative requirements of the claimant to deny completely.”

The full text of Anton Omelchenko (PDF, 184 KB)


15:16 The debate speaks little wife’s lawyer. He begins with personal experience in recent days. He was in one of Moscow’s parks and saw that in this park came dozens of Jehovah’s Witnesses. They had posters and they do not come out to protest against the trial, which began in the Supreme Court April 5, 2017. They came out to remove debris that had accumulated over the winter. So who are these people? Extremists or good Christians?


15:20 The Ministry of Justice needs to select all liturgical building of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia, built by the faithful at his own expense. A similar thing happened in Russia only once, and it was a hundred years ago, in 1918. Then the decree of the Council of People’s Commissars of the whole property has been selected, including liturgical building, Russian Orthodox Church.


15:27 Little wife: Ministry of Justice suggested that the Jehovah’s Witnesses in despair saying that the case against them rigged. However, believers do not despair, says little wife. They believe the Bible says that there is nothing hidden that will not become manifest. And everyone will be held responsible before God for their actions. Just the other day, April 17th, 2017 Russian President approved the amendment to Art. 303 of the Criminal Code now provides for criminal liability for falsification of evidence in administrative matters. However, the problem of fraud is to excite not only the President, but first of all executive authorities such as the Ministry of Justice (Justice in Latin means justice).


15:35 In fact there are dozens of letters: gratitude not only for the improvement of the territory, but for a proactive stance, for assistance to victims of natural disasters for the assistance to internally displaced persons from the territory of Ukraine, with the assistance of the child home for landscaping leisure center for children with disabilities, for participated in a marathon “Help the child”, etc. “Is it so happens, that the organization is both useful and dangerous?” – is perplexed little wife.


15:40 Little wife analyzes the testimony of witnesses from both the plaintiff and the defendant.


15:45 The lawyer drew attention to the expert opinions on the literature of Jehovah’s Witnesses. “Why should I stop again in the literature? Because literature deemed extremist – it’s the only complaint about the Jehovah’s Witnesses in extremist activities. ”


15:46 Little wife: “In this hall there were a person who was born in prison. Because his mother is 5 months pregnant was sentenced as an enemy of the people for 8 years in prison only because she was a Jehovah’s Witness. In prison, she gave birth to a child two years spent in prison orphanage. My father could not take him because he was exiled to Siberia. In 1991, the state has recognized the mother of a victim of political repression, apologized to her a pension. And here in the court of the man, who was born in prison, he approached me and asked: “Is the Ministry of Justice wants a repeat of this terrible story?”. And I do not know what to say. I still do not know what moves the representatives of the Ministry of Justice and those who direct the process. ”


15:50 Little wife, “What will be the case if the court granted the request of the Ministry of Justice? Dear court if the will of the state, then the country is successfully acquires currently 170 thousand prisoners of conscience and the corresponding reputation. If the will of the state to comply with the law, the court’s decision can be only one – the Ministry of Justice to refuse to meet the administrative action. ”

The full text of Victor Zhenkova (PDF, 171 KB)


15:52 The debate begins representative Ax defendant. “To accuse Jehovah’s Witnesses of extremism – it is like blaming extremism baby. Only the baby is not able to commit extremist activities due to their age, and Jehovah’s Witnesses – by virtue of their religious outlook. Calls for them to any violence against human beings, violence, enmity and hatred to the people on any grounds – it is a serious sin against God. ”


16:02 Speaking about the autonomy of the MPO, axes refers to the statute of the CA. MPO are endowed with an absolute right without regard to the Administrative Center of will determine the duration of its presence in the said structure, to decide on the Elimination of questions, going to other centralized religious organizations, etc. “UC does not have the right to liquidate the LRO is not their founder … What a structural subdivision?” – asks the ax.


16:12 Concluding his speech, the ax is entirely lead sentence of human rights activist Leonid Alexeev. At the end he says: “You, dear court, that you are here and you can now remove the injustice and unfair to the hundreds of thousands of Russian citizens, to restore their good name, to strengthen the credibility of the law on countering extremism, clearly shows the difference between these extremists and extremists, painted on a paper. We hope that the court has the courage to do it and make fair and impartial decisions based on the law and the gift of God – the human conscience. ”

Full text of the speech Yuriya Toporova (PDF, 190 KB)


16:13 The debate begins representative Nowak. He notes that because of the suspension of the activities of the believers throughout the country were subjected to a massive violation of rights: to worship invaded law enforcement authorities and copied the personal data of citizens who have not committed any offense. Police officers carried out illegal detention brought to the police, a personal search, videotaping individuals. Initiate administrative proceedings, to make warnings about the possibility of criminal liability under Art. 282.


16:16 Referring to the frequent violations of the rights, Novak says: “Moreover, if the Court makes a decision on liquidation, it will generate even more tragic consequences for the entire country. Any Jehovah’s Witness can be considered an extremist with all its consequences – widespread religious violence against the Witnesses from destruction and damage of property and attacks until the infliction of grievous bodily harm and murder of peaceful religious citizens motivated by religious hatred. On any international blame for condoning violence and persecution on trumped-up reasons it will be assigned just to the public authorities in Russia. ”


16:32 Novakov recalled that the representative of the Ministry of Justice in its deliberations accused Jehovah’s Witnesses of cynicism. “I’ll tell you what cynicism,” – says Nowak. When the Ministry of Justice in the first trial of the MPO says that rights are not affected by the CA, and then makes those decisions as the basis for the elimination of CAs. Or when a much more harsh words against Jehovah’s Witnesses Justice Department perceives as “normal criticism”, while calls “extremism” those statements, which are far from extremism. When, contrary to reports from the Ministry of Justice dismisses allegations of rigging, and the result can not be solved as a cause of action cases where tampering is clearly recorded on video. “That’s what cynicism!” – concludes Nowak.

The full text of Maxim Novakova (PDF, 125 KB)


16:40 The debate begins representative Cherepanov. He believes that, if the court will leave the Jehovah’s Witnesses in the legal field, Russia is not only not suffer damage, but rather improve its reputation both domestically and internationally. Decisions against Jehovah’s Witnesses appealed to the ECHR and the Human Rights Committee at the United Nations.


16:45 “We have with the Ministry of Justice for decades been good cooperation, – said Cherepanov. – I think that the Ministry of Justice should feel a sense of our patron, who is also our registered “Addressing the representatives of the Ministry of Justice, Cherepanov said:” Let’s be friends! Do not become a punitive organ. We do not want to plead with you, we ask you to help us, but we were not looking for a reason to close. ”


16:47 Cherepanov said about the problem of blackening the good name of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the media. Attributed to various crimes, such as “weaning apartments.” Proving the falsity of the myth, Cherepanov recalls the biblical commandment, “Do not covet.”


16:50 “The strength of a powerful state just to protect the interests of the minority, because most of the stand up for itself.”

The full text of Sergey Cherepanov (PDF, 105 KB)


16:55 Kalin representative acts of the defendant: “unreasonable and reckless accusation of the Ministry of Justice not only demeans themselves and their functions, but humiliates the entire state in the eyes of the international community. If the distinguished representative of the Ministry of Justice has a personal conviction that Jehovah’s Witnesses – the extremists, I’m sorry. If a representative of the Ministry of Justice has become a victim of circumstances, in which he has fallen, and is forced to perform the role of a prosecutor, I’m sorry, too. But in either case, you have to answer to their own conscience. ”


16:56 Kalin recalls the responsibility before God and said: “On this occasion, I want to caution the Prosecutor General’s Office and Ministry of Justice. Please come to your senses! Please come to your senses! ”

The full text of Vasily Kalin (PDF, 46 KB)


17:00 The sides exchanged remarks.


17:01 The representative of the Ministry of Justice recalled that the essence of the claim is to eliminate legal person, the Ministry of Justice makes no claim to the individuals. The Ministry of Justice reminds the court testimony of one of the plaintiff’s witnesses, who was expelled from the religious community. The Ministry of Justice considers this a violation of the rights of citizens. In response cue little wife recalls that at one time the Russian Orthodox Church excommunicated writer Leo Tolstoy. In our time, the Russian Orthodox Church has refused to revoke the excommunication, despite requests for it. This is an internal matter of the Church. Little wife asked whether the Ministry of Justice did not intend to present a ROC any requirements.


17:09 Court retire to the deliberation room.


17:18 The hall is filled with television journalists.


18:25 The Court continues in the deliberation room. Hall awaits announcement of a judicial act.


18:50 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 the religion.

Believers have already started to prepare a complaint to the court of appeal (a panel of three judges of the Supreme Court), which should be considered within a month.