RULING
March 12, 1999
(Russian)
Golovinskiy Intermunicipal District Court of Moscow
as composed of:
presiding judge Y.I. Prokhorycheva
people’s representatives A.V. Gorelik and Y.G. Rozhkovskaya
with the participation of prosecutor T.I. Kondratyeva
and lawyers G.A. Krylova and N.V. Leontyev
with court secretary L.Y. Moiseyeva
having heard civil case 2-452/99 concerning the application of the prosecutor of the Northern Administrative Circuit of Moscow for the liquidation and ban of the activity of the religious community “Jehovah’s Witnesses” in an open court hearing, the court
FOUND
The prosecutor of the Northern Administrative Circuit of Moscow filed an application for terminating and banning the activity of the religious community “Jehovah’s Witnesses”, registered by the Moscow City Justice Department on December 30, 1993. In accordance with the religious community’s statute, it is a voluntary association of believers that was created with the goal of joint practice and distribution of the faith of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
One of the grounds given by the prosecutor for liquidating the religious organization and banning its activity was incitement of religious discord, with reference to the magazines The Watchtower and Awake!, and other literature and letters issued by this organization and distributed on the territory of Russia. Furthermore, the religious community coerces dissolution of the family, infringes on the individual and the rights and freedoms of citizens, inclines to suicide or refusal to render medical assistance for religious motives.
The representatives of the religious community object to the application, stating that the prosecutor has not proven that any phrase from the publications of Jehovah’s Witnesses incite religious discord. The publications of Jehovah’s Witnesses do not contain calls directed at Russian citizens that consist of incitement to violence or social discrimination against believers of other confessions or atheists. The application itself is of a theological nature and refers only to doctrinal literature.
As can be seen from the evidence in the civil case and three volumes of the criminal case, on April 13, 1998, a fourth decision was rendered by the investigator of the Department of Internal Affairs of the Prosecutor’s Office of the Northern Administrative Circuit of Moscow to terminate the criminal case concerning evidence of illegal activity of the religious organization “Jehovah’s Witnesses” in the city of Moscow due to the fact that there was no specific evidence of a crime in their actions.
The evidence in the criminal case contains an expert study by F.G. Ovsiyenko, doctor of philosophical sciences, professor of the religious studies department at the Russian Academy of Civil Service with the President of the Russian Federation. In his conclusions he found that the literature of the religious organization presented for the expert study contains views and ideas that undermine respect toward other religions, arouse a feeling of hostility toward them and toward citizens that practice Catholicism, Orthodoxy, Protestantism, Buddhism, Islam, and other religions; these views and ideas arouse religious enmity and discord. The views preached by members of the organization can lead to specific negative acts against certain social groups among the population, namely, forming a hostile attitude toward citizens that do not belong to the organization; to incite discord and enmity against individuals of other denominations; to mental violence against believers drawn into the organization, especially youth, and to the formation of an aggressive attitude toward bearers of the traditional national way of life.
There is also an expert opinion of N.S. Gordiyenko, doctor of philosophical sciences, professor of the religious studies department of the Herzen Russian State Pedagogical University. In his conclusions he found that the literature presented by the organization does not contain views and ideas that arouse religious enmity or discord, it does not contain propaganda of inferiority of citizens based on their attitude toward religion or illegal calls [for action] directed against other religions or their representatives. The views preached by the members of the religious organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses exclude any amoral, illegal, and much less, violent acts against any social groups. The publications and expressions of the organization do not contain calls to battle with the existing governmental order.
These experts were questioned as witnesses during the trial. However, these expert studies were carried out in the context of the criminal case and cannot be taken into consideration by the court.
During the course of the trial, which began on February 9, 1999, the court heard the positions of the parties, as well as the third party – the representative of the Moscow City Justice Department, and numerous witnesses were questioned. During the trial the literature and documents of Jehovah’s Witnesses was reviewed, and excerpts from the Bible were read.
The prosecutor made a motion to have a composite psychological/religious studies expert analysis conducted. The representatives of the defendants objected against conducting an expert study and stated during the trial on March 10, 1999 that, in connection with the October 1998 application of the Administrative Center of the Religious Organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses to the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation for re-registration, all information concerning [its] basic teachings and corresponding practice had been sent for a state religious studies expert analysis to the Expert Council for State Religious Studies Analyses with the Ministry of Justice, which was created in execution of the Russian Federation Government’s Order of June 3, 1998, No. 565 “On the procedure for conducting state religious studies analyses”. Thus, the Expert Council will consider the very same questions concerning which the prosecutor is asking for a composite expert study. Therefore, they asked that the conclusion of the Expert Council be requested. The above-mentioned circumstances were confirmed by the answer of the deputy head of the Department of affairs of public and religious associations. The answer also states that on February 25 the first meeting of the Expert Council in this matter was held, at which a representative of Jehovah’s Witnesses was asked to answer to a number of additional questions, after the receipt and analysis of which the corresponding expert conclusion will be made.
However, these circumstances may not serve as grounds for dismissing the prosecutor’s motion for a composite expert study. In accordance with the Statute of the Expert Council for State Religious Studies Analyses with the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation, which was ratified by order of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation on October 8, 1998, No. 140, a state religious studies analysis is held in those instances provided for in Article 11, section 8 of the Federal Law “On the Freedom of Conscience and on Religious Associations” (during re-registration) at the request of the Department for affairs of public and religious associations of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation or territorial justice agencies of the Russian Federation (further referred to as registering agencies).
The representative of the Moscow City Justice Department did not object to holding an expert study.
Thus, the court has come to the conclusion that in order to clarify the issues that have arisen during the course of the case that require special knowledge in the field of religious studies and linguistics, it follows that the court appoint a composite expert study including specialists in religious studies, specialists in linguistics, and a specialist in psychology. In order to conduct the expert study it is necessary to present excerpts from the literature and documents of Jehovah’s Witnesses accompanied by the literature and documents (list and publications attached).
Seven questions for the expert study were put forth by the prosecutor. 13 questions were put forth by Jehovah’s Witnesses, which have the nature of a comparative analysis of Jehovah’s Witnesses with other confessions. However, the questions presented by the parties are insufficiently defined or specified, and therefore the court rejects them.
Having discussed the candidate experts offered by the parties, the court deems acceptable the following candidates for conducting the expert study: V.P. Belyanin, S.A. Nebolsin, M.M. Gromyko – offered by the prosecutor, and D.A. Leontyev and S.I. Ivanenko, offered by the defendant.
On the basis of that which has been set forth, the court, governed by Article 74 and Article 215, section 5, of the RSFSR Civil Procedural Code
HAS RULED
To appoint a composite expert study in the case including specialists in religious studies, specialists in linguistics, and a specialist in psychology.
To assign this expert study to: V.P. Belyanin, S.A. Nebolsin, M.M. Gromyko, D.A. Leontyev, and S.I. Ivanenko. To warn the experts of the criminal accountability noted in Article 307 of the Russian Federation Criminal Code.
To present the following questions for the expert study:
- Does the literature and documents of Jehovah’s Witnesses contains signs of a) incitement of religious discord (undermining respect toward other religions and hostility toward them), b) coercion to destroy the family, c) infringements on the individual, rights and freedoms of citizens (excerpts from texts in the literature and documents are attached)?
- Are the texts of the literature and documents of Jehovah’s Witnesses subject to study an expression that is usually used in religion?
To present the two volumes of evidence in the civil case, the literature and documents of Jehovah’s Witnesses, and the Synodal translation of the Bible for conducting the expert study.
To suspend this case until the expert study is held. This ruling may be appealed to the Moscow City Court within 10 days.
Judge [signature]
People’s representatives [signature] [signature]
[handwritten: copy true to original.]
[Signatures of judge and court secretary; court seal]