{"id":6459,"date":"2022-10-14T08:09:25","date_gmt":"2022-10-14T05:09:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/?p=6459"},"modified":"2022-10-14T08:09:25","modified_gmt":"2022-10-14T05:09:25","slug":"tajikistans-ban-of-jehovahs-witnesses-illegal-un-human-rights-committee-says","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/tajikistans-ban-of-jehovahs-witnesses-illegal-un-human-rights-committee-says\/","title":{"rendered":"Tajikistan\u2019s Ban of Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses Illegal, UN Human Rights Committee Says"},"content":{"rendered":"

The United Nations Human Rights Committee (CCPR) is the UN body ruling on violations of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). States that have signed the Optional Protocol to the ICCPR recognize that the Committee has authority to rule on these matters, and undertake to provide effective remedies to correct the violations the CCPR has ascertained.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Imprisoned: Tajik Jehovah\u2019s Witness Shamil Khakimov in a picture taken before his detention. Courtesy of the Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Tajikistan is a signatory to both the ICCPR and the Optional Protocol. The Committee ruled on September 7, 2022, by adopting \u201cViews\u201d on the communication of two Tajik Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses, Vladimir Adrykhayev and Behruz Solikhov, and The Religious Association of Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses in Dushanbe (RAJW). The Committee stated that legal entities as such are not protected by the ICCPR, while their members are, and proceeded to examine the communication of the two Tajik individuals (but not of the RAJW).<\/p>\n

The Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses were duly registered as a religion in Tajikistan in 1994, and re-registered in 1997. However, their registration was suspended in 2002 and cancelled in 2007, the same year in which two cargos of Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses publications sent by co-religionists in Germany had been seized. Their activities were banned in Tajikistan, and several Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses were arrested, beaten, and deported.<\/p>\n

Even gatherings in private homes were raided by National Security. To this very day, Shamil Khakimov, a 71-year old widower and a Jehovah\u2019s Witness, whose health is deteriorating tremendously, is still serving his imprisonment term under a verdict largely based on the 2007 ban decision, despite March 19, 2021 interim measures mandated to release him because of his health problems.<\/p>\n

The Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses then started a long pilgrimage through Tajik military and civil courts, and attempted to submit a new application for registration, but all their legal and administrative requests were rejected. The Tajik authorities and courts also relied, as it often happens in the post-Soviet area, on opinions by \u201cexperts\u201d who declared the Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses a \u201cdangerous and totalitarian sect\u201d (although the Russian word \u201csekta\u201d should rather be translated in English as \u201ccult\u201d), parroting arguments used in Russia.<\/picture><\/p>\n

The Tajik authorities mentioned the refusal of blood transfusions, which they said, without submitting any evidence, had caused \u201cthe death of a large number of the Community\u2019s members,\u201d and the fact that the Tajik public opinion was firmly against the Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses. The Committee dismissed the latter argument as irrelevant, since the protection of human rights operates irrespective of the public opinion\u2019s feelings, and did not discuss specifically the blood transfusion issue, absorbing it into the general observation that damages to public health had not been proved.<\/p>\n

The Committee focused on three main arguments used by Tajik administrative and legal authorities to ban the Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses. The first was that they advocate conscientious objection, and ask Tajikistan to introduce a law allowing conscientious objectors to substitute compulsory military service with alternative civilian service, both activities local laws regard as illegal.<\/p>\n

The Committee observed that \u201calthough the Covenant does not explicitly refer to a right of conscientious objection, such a right derives from article 18 [ICCPR], inasmuch as the obligation to be involved in the use of lethal force may seriously conflict with the freedom of thought, conscience and religion. The right to conscientious objection to military service inheres in the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. It entitles any individual to an exemption from compulsory military service if such service cannot be reconciled with that individual\u2019s religion or beliefs, as is the case with Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses.\u201d<\/p>\n

The second reason supplied by Tajikistan for its ban is that the Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses disturb the public order through their proselyting activities, generating \u201cnumerous complaints\u201d by members of other religions. The Committee first noted that Tajikistan \u201chas not provided any evidence in support of its assertion that there were numerous complaints concerning members of the Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses community, because of the propaganda of their religious teaching and the distribution of religious publications in public places.\u201d<\/p>\n

Referring to the 1993 CCPR\u00a0General Comment no. 22<\/a>\u00a0on article 18 ICCPR, the Committee also observed that \u201creligions and beliefs should not be discriminated against by the State parties on the ground that they are newly established or represent religious minorities that may be the subject of hostility on the part of a predominant religious community.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"
Cover of the CCPR decision.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The Committee noted the argument by the Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses \u201cthat, by banning the RAJW and by refusing to re-register it, they have been denied by the State party a full range of rights enjoyed by members of a registered religious organisation. Namely, the rights to jointly manifest their religious beliefs, including the right to conduct religious meetings and assemblies, to own or use property for religious purposes, to produce and import religious literature, to receive donations, to carry out charitable activity and to invite foreign citizens to participate in religious events.<\/p>\n

Consistent with its general comment No. 22, the Committee considers that these activities form part of the authors\u2019 right to manifest their beliefs. Furthermore, the Committee notes the authors\u2019 uncontested assertion that religious activities of Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses have been perceived as illegal by the Tajik authorities and led to arrests, detentions, interrogations, searches, beatings, seizures of religious materials, as well as a deportation of Jehovah\u2019 Witnesses.\u201d<\/p>\n

The third argument by Tajik authorities, and one obviously \u201cimported\u201d from Russia, is that the Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses are an \u201cextremist\u201d group and a \u201ctotalitarian sect\u201d (cult) because they claim that the teachings of their organization offer \u201cthe truth,\u201d thus implying they are superior to those of other religions. The Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses reasonably objected that all religions claim that they teach \u201cthe truth,\u201d and that they do so without advocating, or inciting to, violence. The Committee accepted this statement. When it does not include violence or incitement to violence, presenting religious doctrines as \u201ctrue\u201d and trying to convert members of other religions are legitimate part of the exercise of religious liberty.<\/p>\n

The Committee concluded that \u201cnone of the reasons put forward by the State party\u2019s [Tajikistan\u2019s] authorities and courts to justify the decision to ban the RAJW and to refuse its re-registration, thus placing limitations on the authors\u2019 right to manifest their religious belief, meets the requirement of article 18 (3) of the Covenant to be necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.<\/p>\n

In light of all the above, and considering the significant consequences of a refusal of re-registration of the RAJW, namely the impossibility of carrying out religious activities, the Committee concludes that the refusal to re-register the RAJW amounts to a limitation of the authors\u2019 right to manifest their religion under article 18 (1) that is unnecessary to achieve a legitimate aim under article 18 (3) of the Covenant. The Committee therefore concludes that the authors\u2019 rights under article 18 (1) of the Covenant have been violated.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Committee \u201cwishes to receive from the State party [Tajikistan], within 180 days, information about the measures taken to give effect to the Committee\u2019s Views. The State party is also requested to publish the present Views and to have them widely disseminated in the official languages of the State party.\u201d<\/p>\n

Whether Tajikistan will comply with the Committee\u2019s Views, as it should as a signatory to the Optional Protocol, remains to be seen. The Views, at any rate, are just another authoritative statement that Russian-style arguments to ban the Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses are factually false, discriminatory, and illegal under international law. Following the\u00a0ECHR judgment in the case of \u201cTaganrog LRO v. Russia,\u201d\u00a0the Committee\u2019s ruling is yet another blow to the tactics Russia is trying to export to hit Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses outside of its territory. Hopefully, the authorities in other regions, such as in Transnitria, where a prosecutor has recently tried to ban some of their publications and their website, will take these decisions into account and dismiss Russian propaganda.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The United Nations Human Rights Committee (CCPR) is the UN body ruling on violations of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). States that have signed the Optional Protocol to the ICCPR recognize…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":6460,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[31],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6459","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-tajikistan"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6459","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6459"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6459\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6461,"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6459\/revisions\/6461"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6460"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6459"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6459"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6459"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}