Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

F18News: Armenia - "A kind of theatrical farce - I see no progress"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • F18News: Armenia - "A kind of theatrical farce - I see no progress"

    FORUM 18 NEWS SERVICE, Oslo, Norway
    http://www.forum18.org/

    The right to believe, to worship and witness
    The right to change one's belief or religion
    The right to join together and express one's belief

    ===============================================
    Thursday 14 July 2011
    ARMENIA: "A KIND OF THEATRICAL FARCE - I SEE NO PROGRESS"

    Human rights defenders and some religious communities have expressed
    concern over provisions of a proposed new Religion Law and amendments to
    the Law on the State and the Armenian Church, and to the Criminal and
    Administrative Codes. They told Forum 18 News Service of their concerns
    over: the ban on "soul-hunting", defined as "improper proselytism", which
    could be punished by up to two months' imprisonment (up to two years' if
    done by more than one person); compulsory religious registration for
    communities of more than 25 adults; and vague formulations which some
    religious communities fear could be used against them. The Justice Ministry
    published the drafts on 12 July. "These proposed amendments are repressive
    and a lot worse than the previous version," Stepan Danielyan of the
    Collaboration for Democracy Centre told Forum 18. But Russian Orthodox
    priest Fr Arseni Grigoryants welcomed the drafts' "harsh attitude to
    incidents of proselytism" and "attempts to provide [juridical] mechanisms"
    to punish them.

    ARMENIA: "A KIND OF THEATRICAL FARCE - I SEE NO PROGRESS"

    By Felix Corley, Forum 18 News Service

    Human rights defenders and members of some religious minorities have
    reacted critically to drafts of a proposed new Religion Law, as well as
    changes to the Law on Relations between the Republic of Armenia and the
    Armenian Apostolic Church, and to the Criminal and Administrative Codes.
    The draft laws were made public on 12 July. "These proposed amendments are
    repressive and a lot worse than the previous version," Stepan Danielyan of
    the Collaboration for Democracy Centre told Forum 18 News Service from the
    Armenian capital Yerevan on 13 July. "In practice they would be used to
    repress religious organisations." Evangelical Pastor René Leonian is
    equally critical of the drafts and the government's approach. "This is a
    kind of theatrical farce," he told Forum 18 from Yerevan the same day. "I
    see no progress."

    The major proposals Armenian religious communities and human rights
    defenders have so far expressed concern about include: proposed punishments
    for sharing one's faith; compulsory registration for any religious
    community with more than 25 members, with punishments for those who do not
    register; as well as the vague formulation of many provisions. All of these
    are thought likely to leave followers of religious organisations the
    government - or the powerful Armenian Apostolic Church - dislikes
    vulnerable to arbitrary and tight restrictions on their freedom of religion
    or belief.

    Why is Justice Ministry hostile to public discussion?

    The Justice Ministry prepared the draft Amendments, and intended to send
    them to the Council of Europe's Venice Commission without public discussion
    - even though Justice Minister Hrair Tovmasyan had publicly promised that
    they would be publicly discussed before being sent to the Venice Commission
    (see F18News 24 February 2011
    ).

    Karen Hakopyan, Head of the Department of Normative Acts at the Justice
    Ministry, told Forum 18 on 6 July categorically that the draft texts would
    not be made public and would be sent to the Council of Europe's Venice
    Commission without any public discussion. Similarly, Nora Sargsyan, an aide
    to Minister Tovmasyan who played a key role in preparing the new drafts,
    insisted to Forum 18 from Yerevan on 9 July (before the drafts were
    published) that the texts were not being made public and were being
    translated into English to be sent only to the Venice Commission.

    This is the same highly controversial procedure that was followed for the
    previous proposed amendments, which only became known in Armenia when they
    were placed - in English only - on the Venice Commission website (see
    F18News 8 December 2010
    ).

    Hakopyan of the Justice Ministry, as well as another senior official
    involved in the process in the central government apparatus (who asked not
    to be identified because they are not authorised to talk to the media),
    told Forum 18 on 6 July that the Justice Ministry sent the draft texts to
    the central government apparatus on 29 June.

    The senior government official told Forum 18 that the government's
    religious affairs official Vardan Astsatryan of the Department for Ethnic
    Minorities and Religious Affairs was preparing an opinion on the drafts and
    that the government has not yet approved them. Astsatryan's telephone went
    unanswered each time Forum 18 called between 6 and 14 July.

    However, by 11 July the Justice Ministry had changed its position and
    posted the texts on its website on 12 July. "The draft text will be
    published so that we can receive comments from the public," Deputy Justice
    Minister Emil Babayan told Forum 18 the day before they were made public.
    However, the Justice Ministry website posted the texts without any comment
    or invitation for comments from the public. Babayan insisted that comments
    would be sought from the Venice Commission at the same time as comments
    from interested parties within Armenia. "The Venice Commission is one of
    those parties. This is a simultaneous, twin-track process. All comments
    will be taken into account."

    Justice Minister keeping his promises?

    Following strong criticism of earlier drafts, including severe criticisms
    made of them and the existing Religion Law by a December 2010 joint Council
    of Europe Venice Commission / Organisation for Security and Co-operation in
    Europe (OSCE) legal review, Justice Minister Tovmasyan on 17 February 2011
    promised that the proposals would be re-drafted to take account of the
    criticisms. Before a large audience of civil society activists, religious
    communities, local journalists and Venice Commission member Finola
    Flanagan, Tovmasyan specifically highlighted for the re-draft the need to:

    - avoid defining proselytism or soul-hunting, as this may attack the right
    to share beliefs, but defining precisely what actions are prohibited;

    - on the right to legal personality that unregistered religious activity
    should be permitted, that high minimum numbers of members to register a
    community should be avoided;

    - that the actions of some members should not be a reason to liquidate
    entire communities, and that liquidation should be a final resort after
    other warnings and penalties have been exhausted;

    - and that the state must respect the rights of parents to decide on the
    education of children in line with their own religion or beliefs (see
    F18News 24 February 2011
    ).

    However, the latest July proposals appear to have largely ignored
    Tovmasyan's public commitments. It also appears, as the Venice Commission
    itself noted in its December 2010 Opinion, that "the drafters in many
    instances do not appear to have taken into account the recommendations in
    the 2009 Joint Opinion" - or the 2010 Opinion (see F18News 20 January 2011
    ).

    The 2009 Joint Opinion was highly critical of an earlier restrictive set of
    Religion Law amendments, which Parliament passed on first reading in March
    2009 (see F18News 2 July 2009
    ). Although these
    proposed amendments appear to have stalled, Parliament could still revive
    them.

    On 14 July Forum 18 asked the Justice Ministry press office in writing to
    ask Minister Tovmasyan why the specific commitments on the content appear
    largely not to have been met and why the promise to hold a public
    consultation within Armenia before the texts were sent to the Venice
    Commission appears to have been abandoned. Forum 18 had received no reply
    by the end of the working day.

    "Brought into line with Armenia's Constitution and with OSCE standards"

    Human rights defenders and religious communities insist that the latest
    amendments restrict the right to religious freedom. But despite this, Nora
    Sargsyan, Minister Tovmasyan's aide who played a key role in preparing the
    new drafts, claimed to Forum 18 that the amendments have been "brought into
    line with Armenia's Constitution and with OSCE standards". Despite her
    confidence in this, she would not on 9 July give Forum 18 a copy of the
    drafts and said at that time that they would not be made public.

    On 14 July, after the drafts were made public contrary to Sargsyan's
    earlier assurances, she declined to discuss any of the provisions with
    Forum 18.

    Several informed sources have strongly suggested to Forum 18 that the
    Armenian Apostolic Church has been closely involved in the repeated
    restrictive drafts, even to the extent of drafting texts for them. Sargsyan
    insisted though that the Apostolic Church (which has its headquarters at
    Echmiadzin near Yerevan) had nothing to do with preparing the drafts.
    "Echmiadzin is not responsible for legislative policy in Armenia," she told
    Forum 18. "Echmiadzin may be part of public discussion like anyone else."

    What is in the new proposals?

    The latest published amendments are a proposed new Religion Law, as well as
    changes to the Law on Relations between the State and the Armenian
    Apostolic Church, and to the Criminal and Administrative Codes. The new
    proposed Religion Law would entirely replace the current Religion Law first
    adopted in 1991 and amended several times since, notably in 1997 and 2001.

    The main proposals that so far most concern Armenian human rights defenders
    and religious communities are outlined below. As discussion continues in
    Armenia (see below), further concerns may be raised.

    - Freedom of religion or belief dangerous?

    Many provisions of the proposed new Religion Law give the impression that
    allowing freedom of religion or belief is potentially dangerous, and that
    religious communities must be subject to special scrutiny. Religious
    communities are banned from functioning "in secret", using "preaching
    influence on persons holding other religious affiliation or views which is
    not compatible with respect for freedom of conscience, religion or belief",
    or controlling the "private life, health, property and behaviour" of
    adherents. They are required to act in accordance with Armenia's
    Constitution and Laws and respect others' religious or theological
    affiliation.

    - Children's rights

    Preaching to children under 14 without their parents' consent is banned and
    punishable. Forum 18 is not aware that any faiths in Armenia engage in this
    practice with the exception of the Armenian Apostolic Church, whose priests
    sometimes address children in schools without their parents' express
    consent.

    - "Soul-hunting"

    Crucially, "soul-hunting" is banned and punishable under amendments to both
    the Criminal and Administrative Codes. Defined on first mention in Article
    4 of the proposed Religion Law as "improper proselytism", the Article
    identifies this as preaching to people of other faiths "with the aim of
    changing their faith" using or threatening "physical or psychological
    violence"; preaching while providing material or social help; abusing an
    individual's dependency while preaching; arousing hatred of other religions
    or religious organisations; "persecuting" an individual more than once; or
    preaching to children without their parents' consent.

    Successive proposed Religion Law amendments have tried to introduce a
    concept of "soul-hunting" (hogevorsutyun), a derogatory term in Armenian
    for sharing one's faith, and make it a punishable offence.

    Article 4 of the proposed new Religion Law bans "soul-hunting" and
    specifies that it is subject to administrative and criminal punishments. A
    new Article 160.1 would be added to the Criminal Code punishes
    "soul-hunting" with fines of up to 300 times the minimum monthly wage or up
    to two months' imprisonment when done by individuals. If done by a group or
    by officials using their official position, it carries a fine of up to 500
    times the minimum monthly wage or a maximum two years' imprisonment.

    The term "soul-hunting" is used to encourage religious intolerance leading
    to violations of freedom of religion or belief (see reports by the
    Collaboration For Democracy Centre

    and the Helsinki Committee of Armenia
    ).

    - Denial of legal status to small communities, compulsory registration

    Article 5 of the proposed new Religion Law divides communities into groups
    of fewer than 25 adult members, which cannot gain legal status, and
    religious organisations, with more than 25 adult members. Under Article 6,
    organisations must register.

    A new Article 205.3 of the Administrative Code would punish leaders of
    religious organisations which refuse to register with a fine of 100 to 600
    times the minimum monthly wage.

    - Do unregistered communities have rights?

    Article 8 of the proposed Religion Law sets out what rights religious
    organisations have, such as to conduct rituals or teach religion. It states
    that registered religious organisations only receive such rights on
    registration. But the proposed Law does not specifically declare - as the
    human rights standards Armenia has signed state - that everyone has these
    rights without a need for registration. Officials in the former Soviet
    republics often interpret a lack of specific permission to imply that such
    rights do not exist without such permission.

    - Intrusive and unclear information demands

    Under Article 6, communities applying for registration must provide much
    information with its statute, including the "nature of the religious
    organisation" as well as a "description of the religion or belief". The Law
    does not specify whether a brief statement will be enough or whether this
    requires a detailed exposition of a community's entire beliefs.

    It is unclear whether - as in the 2009 proposals - this will lead to
    officials or the Apostolic Church making and enforcing judgments on which
    beliefs or doctrines registered communities will be permitted to hold (see
    F18News 24 March 2009
    ).

    Religious organisations must provide much internal information annually to
    the Justice Ministry and publish it on their own officially recognised
    website. It remains unclear what a community without a website does. The
    required information - whose level of detail is unclear from the text -
    includes: expenditure and income, including "membership fees" (Forum 18 is
    not aware of any religious community in Armenia which charges "membership
    fees"); details of all "programmes" (undefined) the religious organisation
    has undertaken; numbers of "members" and the addresses of leaders and the
    official address.

    Failure to publish such information would be punishable, under the revised
    Administrative Code Article 206, with fines of 300 to 500 times the minimum
    monthly wage.

    - Funding

    Article 9 contains the provision: "Religious organisations cannot be
    financed by foreign governments, individuals and legal entities."
    Violations of this are punishable under the revised Article 206 of the
    Administrative Code with fines of 700 to 1,000 times the minimum monthly
    wage. Forum 18 notes that as the Armenian Apostolic Church, the Armenian
    Catholic Church and many Protestant churches are among religious
    communities which depend heavily on foreign funding, such a provision would
    if impartially applied have a serious impact - notably on the dominant
    Apostolic Church.

    - Data protection and arbitrary registration rejections?

    It remains unclear how the registration authority - the Justice Ministry -
    will handle the information supplied (including the confidentiality of
    information such as private addresses), and whether any safeguards will be
    in place to protect arbitrary rejection of a religious community's
    application.

    - Registration denials and liquidation

    Article 7 provides reasons for the Justice Ministry to deny registration,
    while Article 13 allows for the Justice Ministry to go to court to have a
    religious organisation suspended for six months or, under Article 14,
    liquidated. Religious organisations can be liquidated if they provided
    "false information of significance" when registering, if they promote
    ethnic or religious hatred, or if they fail to remove violations they have
    been warned about or repeat them within a year. Providing "clearly false
    information" is punishable with a fine of 300 to 500 times the minimum
    monthly wage under the revised Article 206 of the Administrative Code.

    Why?

    Sargsyan of the Justice Ministry insisted to Forum 18 that the Religion Law
    and other legal changes were necessary to bring them into line with changes
    in recent years to Armenia's Constitution. The 2005 Constitutional
    amendments recognised "the exclusive historical mission of the Armenian
    Apostolic Holy Church as a national church, in the spiritual life,
    development of the national culture and preservation of the national
    identity of the people of Armenia".

    In February, Justice Minister Tovmasyan noted that respecting the rights of
    the Apostolic Church was not a reason to restrict the rights to religious
    freedom of members of other religious communities (see F18News 24 February
    2011 ).

    The Justification for the legal changes, published together with the draft
    texts on 12 July, also points to the Constitutional changes, as well as to
    Armenia's international commitments as a member of the Council of Europe.
    They did not explain why much of the advice of the Venice Commission review
    has apparently been ignored.

    The Justification notes "shortcomings" in the current Religion Law,
    specifically pointing to the rights given at present only to "citizens",
    which it correctly notes is not in accord with provisions of the European
    Convention on Human Rights. This was one of the numerous problems
    highlighted by the Venice Commission / OSCE reviews. It also notes that the
    current law does not specify the right to change one's religion. It also
    claims the need to "regulate" the religious education of children and to
    protect children from being preached to without their parents' consent.

    The Justification insists that "soul-hunting (proselytism)" needs to be
    dealt with in law, but does not explain why this is needed, how this
    matches Armenia's international human rights obligations, and how this
    deals with the use of the term to encourage intolerance.

    It also fails to explain what concrete specific problems, which have
    happened in Armenia, the restrictive parts of the amendments are designed
    to solve.

    Amendments are "absurd" and "a censorship tool"

    Danielyan of the Collaboration for Democracy Centre noted that the Justice
    Ministry has taken account of several Venice Commission recommendations,
    particularly in extending rights to everyone, not just to citizens. But he
    remains adamant that the current texts are worse than their predecessors.

    He described as "absurd" the Articles covering "soul-hunting" and
    punishments for it, and the procedure for "suspending" religious
    organisations. "The draft Law does not say if, during a suspension of up to
    six months, people will be able to meet and pray," Danielyan complained to
    Forum 18. He also objected to the compulsory registration for communities
    with more than 25 adults. "Why should groups have to register if they don't
    want to?"

    Danielyan also questioned the privileges granted to the Armenian Apostolic
    Church and said it was unclear whether that Church was subject to the same
    provisions as other religious organisations. "If Armenian Apostolic priests
    go into schools, will they have to get the same permission from all parents
    that other communities would have to get?"

    As for the extensive annual reporting by religious organisations to the
    Justice Ministry, Danielyan maintained: "They want everyone to be under
    their control."

    Danielyan also pointed to the provisions banning promotion of "religious
    hatred". "At first glance this looks good," he told Forum 18. "But in
    reality it will be used as a censorship tool - if I speak badly of the
    Catholicos, even about previous Catholicoses in history. This will only be
    used to protect the Armenian Apostolic Church."

    Media coverage in Armenia is often highly intolerant of religious
    minorities, at times accusing them of crimes they have not committed (see
    F18News 12 July 2011 ).

    Pastor Leonian, head of an Evangelical Church which has 45 congregations
    across Armenia, told Forum 18 his communities have the same concerns they
    had with the previous drafts. He believes the reduction of the proposed
    threshold for gaining registration from 500 in the previous draft to 25 is
    in order to ensure state control, pointing out the requirement for annual
    submission of detailed information.

    Pastor Leonian expressed great concern about the provisions over
    "soul-hunting". "At first mention they speak of 'improper soul-hunting',
    but then they just talk about 'soul-hunting'."

    He welcomes the removal of Article 17 of the current Religion Law, which
    grants a monopoly on preaching to the Armenian Apostolic Church, but
    laments that this has now been incorporated instead into the new Article
    12.1 of the 2007 Law on Relations between the Republic of Armenia and the
    Armenian Apostolic Church.

    The Council of Churches Baptists - who refuse to register in principle in
    any of the former Soviet republics where they operate, believing that this
    leads to unwarranted state interference in their internal affairs - have
    several small congregations in Armenia, with the two largest in Yerevan and
    in Armavir, a town west of the capital. Several church members told Forum
    18 on 13 July that even if compulsory registration and punishments for
    those who refuse are introduced, they would continue to meet for worship
    without seeking registration.

    Fr Arseni Grigoryants, priest of Yerevan's Russian Orthodox Church, broadly
    supports the drafts, believing that "more than before they are in accord
    with the demands of contemporary international democratic norms". However,
    the proposed Religion Law should go further in its "harsh attitude to
    incidents of proselytism", he told Forum 18 from Yerevan on 14 July. He
    lamented the current lack of "juridical mechanisms" for punishing spreading
    one's faith, which he claimed causes "deliberate harm to the spiritual
    health of the nation and individuals". He welcomed the drafts' "attempts to
    provide these mechanisms".

    Fr Grigoryants lamented that his Church's suggestions of a three-tier level
    of recognition was not adopted, with the Armenian Apostolic Church in the
    dominant position, followed by "traditional confessions" (which he did not
    identify), and a third category of "other religious organisations". He told
    Forum 18 that this would better protect Armenia from "targeted destructive
    foreign influence".

    Forum 18 tried to reach Fr Vahram Melikyan, spokesperson for the Armenian
    Apostolic Church, between 12 and 14 July, but he was not in the office and
    did not answer his mobile phone. Forum 18 also tried to seek comments from
    a range of other religious communities.

    Discussion begins

    Within hours of the Justice Ministry's publication of the proposed drafts,
    human rights defenders and religious communities began assessing them.

    A group of Protestant churches met in Yerevan on 14 July. Danielyan of the
    Collaboration for Democracy Centre told Forum 18 that several organisations
    - including his own, the Open Society Foundation, and the OSCE - are
    planning public discussions. They hope that political parties which oppose
    the proposals - he named the Heritage Party (which has seven deputies in
    its parliamentary faction) and possibly Prosperous Armenia (which has 26
    deputies) - will also discuss the proposals.

    Proposals for a new Religion Law and other legal changes come as the
    government's proposed amendments to the 2003 Alternative Service Law are in
    Parliament. It remains unclear whether these proposed changes will allow
    for the creation of a genuinely civilian alternative service, which - in
    commitments to the Council of Europe - Armenia should have created by
    January 2004 (see F18News 7 July 2011
    ). (END)

    More coverage of freedom of thought, conscience and belief in Armenia and
    the unrecognised entity of Nagorno-Karabakh is at


    A compilation of Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe
    (OSCE) freedom of religion or belief commitments can be found at
    .

    A printer-friendly map of Armenia is available at
    .
    (END)

    © Forum 18 News Service. All rights reserved. ISSN 1504-2855
    You may reproduce or quote this article provided that credit is given to
    F18News http://www.forum18.org/

    Past and current Forum 18 information can be found at
    http://www.forum18.org/



    From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Working...
X