Over the Moscow area Arbat, where the Supreme Court of Russia is located, dark clouds are walking. A large group of citizens gathered at the entrance to the court building, their number is approaching 150. Those at the beginning of the line came to the entrance at 4 am. Noticeable journalists, armed with shooting equipment. The Moscow police provides public order.

There is a foreign speech in the courtroom: there are quite a few foreign observers, most of them represent organizations of Jehovah’s Witnesses in different countries. Also there are observers who arrived at the courthouse on cars with diplomatic numbers.

 

The place of the administrative plaintiff is still empty. On the part of the administrative defendant – a representative of the religious organization Vasily Mikhailovich Kalin, lawyers Viktor Zhenkov and Anton Omelchenko, lawyer Maxim Novakov.

Silence reigned in the hall, the parties and observers are waiting for the appearance of the judges.

Lawyer Omelchenko continues to intercede for the interrogation of witnesses Pavel Bezhenar and Anatoly Yasinsky.They are recognized victims of political repression as Jehovah’s Witnesses. They know that the prohibition of religious organizations causes severe and unjustified persecution of believers of this religion. Thousands of Jehovah’s Witnesses lost their property in April 1951 and were expelled in freight cars from the western regions of the USSR to an eternal settlement in Siberia, later they were searched, confiscated, discriminated against and imprisoned only because they lived according to the Bible’s commandments.

Bezhenar, for example, is aware of the information that in 1951 he and members of his family were deported from Moldova to the Tomsk region. Later he was twice convicted and spent 8 years in prison because he followed the commandments of Christ: “Return your sword to his place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword”. Due to discrimination, he had to change his place six times. In 1982, he faced a search and confiscation of religious literature.

Recognizing these people as victims of political repression, the state condemned “the long-standing terror unleashed by the Bolshevik party-Soviet regime against priests and believers of all faiths,” and also committed itself to “seek real guarantees of law and human rights.” In fact, the state promised to do so that it did not happen again what they faced.

From the record of the court session it follows that the court of first instance asked the plaintiff clear legal issues that are important for the proper resolution of the case. The court received replies that extremism is the concrete actions enumerated in the law, and that the Management Center and more than 300 local religious organizations did not do such actions. But the court decision in this case the court made somehow the exact opposite – to recognize all 396 organizations as extremist and liquidate them.

“How come, dear court? Exclaims Zhenkov. “Do not you, like a college of judges, have to raise questions?” If there are no extremist actions, then why should they be considered extremist ?! “

Zhenkov gives an example. He says that in the court session we established that in the Crimea Jehovah’s Witnesses peacefully carried out their religious activities for dozens of years. Caught in Russia and carrying out Russian legislation, Jehovah’s Witnesses in Crimea were asked by the Ministry of Justice to register 22 of their local religious organizations. And the Ministry of Justice, recognizing the legality of their existence and the validity of their doctrine, in 2015 registered them. Thus, the state recognized that on the Crimean peninsula one can believe in God Jehovah, and therefore a religion called Jehovah’s Witnesses has the right to exist and act on a lawful basis.

And what’s next? Less than two years later, without the establishment of signs of extremism in their actions, only on the instructions of the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation, the same Ministry of Justice, which registered them, appealed to the court demanding that they be recognized as extremist organizations and take all their property from them. And the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation even without the participation of these legal entities declared them extremist and liquidated, and also allowed them to take away all their property.

“In this regard, questions arise simultaneously and legal, and universal,” says Zhenkov, “for what is the punishment for believers in the Crimea?” For what specific actions? The answers to these questions are not in the court’s decision. But can such a decision be legal? “

Zhenkov quotes an excerpt from the document of the Ministry of Justice: “Recognition of information materials of confessional identity of Jehovah’s Witnesses is extremist … confirms … the fact that there are in them impermissible ways, insulting from the point of view of the legislation of the Russian Federation, to express belief in the truth of their religious beliefs, and in this case not even in the truth of beliefs, But in interpreting the institutions contained in the Bible. “

This characteristic is not true. Zhenkov draws attention to the fact that the overwhelming majority of publications of Jehovah’s Witnesses were recognized as “extremist” 8 years ago. And at that time there was still no ruling No. 11 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court, in which explanations were given that the courts should be understood as inciting hatred or enmity.

Until 2011, some courts mistakenly believed that if the religion of Jehovah’s Witnesses is named in literature as the only true one, then this is a sign of inciting hatred, since this is an insult to other religions. And if in the literature of Jehovah’s Witnesses it is said that the Trinity is not a biblical teaching, then such an interpretation of the Bible, especially in the opinion of some judges, aroused hatred. But this was until 2011, until the Supreme Court explained that criticism of religious associations, religious beliefs, religious customs should not be seen as an act aimed at inciting hatred or enmity. It took years for everyone to finally understand that to consider only their religion as true is not an extremism, but a norm for a believer.

Zhenkov draws attention to the fact that the Management Center was denied participation in court cases on the recognition of printed materials as extremist. In some cases, believers do not even know, and for what reason this or that book is considered extremist, because the court considered that Jehovah’s Witnesses have nothing to do with it. The same position was consistently taken up by the Supreme Court of Russia, as a result of which the Administrative Center had no right to participate in the trial, nor to bring its arguments to the court, nor to appeal against the court’s decisions. And now, for some reason, the court of first instance applied the opposite approach.Now the court considers that on the basis of these decisions the Management Center can be liquidated.

“Dear court,” says Zhenkov, “you have the opportunity to correct this injustice. It is important for the Supreme Court to be consistent, it is a model for all Russian courts. “

The conclusions of the court of first instance contradict all the long-standing judicial practice of considering cases against local religious organizations, Toporov said. As evidence, he cites the definition that the Supreme Court of Russia indicated in its decision of December 8, 2009:

“The management center of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia and the local religious organization” Taganrog “Jehovah’s Witnesses are independent organizations, which is also confirmed by evidence accepted by the court of cassation, including the scheme on the structure of religious organizations of Jehovah’s Witnesses” Taganrog “. The question of the rights and responsibilities of the Administrative Center of the Rostov Regional Court in the consideration of the above statement of the prosecutor of the Rostov region was not allowed, the decision of the Rostov Regional Court of September 11, 2009 was recognized as extremist and the local religious organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses “Taganrog” was liquidated. “

At the same time, this ruling of the court has a prejudicial significance for the present case, since it was rendered by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation with respect to the administrative respondent. It establishes the fact that the liquidation of a local religious association that was part of the structure of the Management Center does not affect the rights and obligations of the latter, since this local religious association and the Management Center are independent organizations. The Court of First Instance ignored this evidence, which led to its incorrect application of substantive law in making the decision.

A 20-minute break is announced.

Lawyer Zhenkov: A lot of people outside the walls of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and millions of citizens around the world are judged today on the entire justice system in modern Russia – about its justice, its impartiality, and its independence from any influential persons and state bodies . Why? Because today organizations belonging to a religion known throughout the world judge today.

This religion is known for the fact that its followers strive to live according to the commandments of Jesus Christ, set forth in the Bible. They under no circumstances take up arms, interfere in politics, do not set the goal of overthrowing state power, try to show love to all people, regardless of their religion, nationality, or social status.They are alien to everything that in the Law on Countering Extremist Activity is called extremism.

Attorney Zhenkov: All civilized countries of the world are struggling with extremism, because they understand the essence of this phenomenon and its danger. But in no other country in the world Jehovah’s Witnesses are equated with extremists. And Jehovah’s Witnesses all over the world practice the same creed based on the Bible. In any country of the world, these Christians worship God Jehovah, in any country of the world, Jesus Christ, who did only good, is an example for imitation. For Jehovah’s Witnesses in any country in the world, the source of wisdom is the same Bible. Therefore, if extremism were manifested in their behavior, words and deeds, then this would be seen on a global scale. But Jehovah’s Witnesses around the world have no reputation for extremism. And in our country they do not have such a reputation.

Speeches in the debate begins representative Toporov.

Representative of Axes: Is it possible in Russia to liquidate a legal entity in court without his participation? That is, without involving this person as a defendant? Is this fair? Is it legal? The court of first instance asserts that it turns out to be possible. That this is fair and quite legal. Yes, not one, but immediately 395 in one fell swoop. And what does the law say? And what does common sense say? And what does your conscience tell you? The law says that liquidation of a legal entity in court is possible only if such person is brought to court as a defendant, since the question of the very existence of this person is being decided. The law says: if the court has resolved this issue without involving the liquidated legal entity in the case, such a decision is subject to unconditional cancellation.Why? It violates the fundamental right to a fair trial, to judicial protection.

Representative of Axes: What does common sense tell us? It is clear that if you are tried, then you have the right to at least participate in this court, to defend yourself by all legal means. And otherwise it turns out as in the Russian folk proverb: “Without me they married me.” Finally, what does your conscience tell you? And the conscience says that any court without involving someone judged and wanting to liquidate is an unfair trial. Jesus Christ judged and condemned the Sanhedrin – the Jewish supreme court. It was an unfair trial. Illegal. But even he did not dare to judge Jesus without his participation. And the court of first instance decided to do so.

Novakov in his speech raises the question of whether the creed of Jehovah’s Witnesses contains signs of extremism listed in the Federal Law “On Counteracting Extremist Activity,” and calls for the implementation of extremist actions? Does the Management Center have as its goal the implementation of extremist activities? What is the purpose of the doctrine of Jehovah’s Witnesses?

Novakov shows that in this case there is not only the subjective aspect of the extremist activity of the Management Center (intent, purpose), but there is not even an objective side (sayings, motives, appeals, concrete actions).

The final speech in the debate advocates Omelchenko.

Lawyer Omelchenko: Dear court! Dear participants of the process! Speaking on this case, I repeatedly turned to authoritative sources of law. Supporting my position, I pointed out that the requirements of the Ministry of Justice of Russia violate the Basic Law of the Russian Federation, the provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

On July 17, 2017, the Supreme Court of Russia missed the last chance to restore law and justice to 175,000 Russian citizens who profess the religion of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Less than an hour of the meeting, it took a panel of three Supreme Court justices to leave unchanged the decision taken earlier by Judge Yuriy Ivanenko to eliminate and ban all registered organizations of this religion without exception.

Since there are no effective domestic remedies, believers will appeal to the European Court of Human Rights and other international organizations.