ARMENIA: WILL CRITICAL REVIEW HALT RESTRICTIVE RELIGION LAW?
By Felix Corley
Forum 18
2 July 2009
The Council of Europe and OSCE have given a highly critical review of
proposed amendments which have already been approved by Parliament in
their first reading. The amended Religion Law would ban the sharing of
faith, require 500 adult citizen members before a religious community
could gain legal status, ban non-Trinitarian Christian communities
from gaining legal status, give broad reasons for banning religious
communities, and recognise the "exclusive mission" of the Armenian
Apostolic Church. The new Criminal Code Article 162 would punish
the sharing of beliefs. "The authorities have to take the points
of this review into account, though I don’t know if they will,"
Russian Orthodox priest Fr David Abrahamyan told Forum 18 News
Service. "If they adhered to European standards they wouldn’t have
adopted these amendments in the first reading." The government’s
senior religious affairs official, Vardan Astsatryan, told Forum 18
he had "no knowledge" of the results of the review. But the Jehovah’s
Witnesses told Forum 18 Astsatryan had told them in mid-June that
the proposed amendments have been suspended but not abandoned.
One week after a critical international review of the restrictive
proposed amendments to Armenia’s Religion Law and Criminal Code was
made public, the Armenian government’s senior religious affairs
official, Vardan Astsatryan, told Forum 18 News Service from the
capital Yerevan on 1 July that he had "no knowledge" of the results
of the review. "Parliament has probably not handed the review on to
the government." Astsatryan, who heads the government’s Department on
National Minority and Religious Issues, stressed that the proposed
amendments were the initiative of Parliament. "They’ll discuss them
and only then will the government give its views."
Although the government’s then deputy spokesperson Petros Demirchyan
had told Forum 18 back in March that the government was "satisfied"
with the proposed amendments, Forum 18 has been unable to find out what
its current attitude is, given the critical review. No spokespersons
would discuss the issue by phone on 1 and 2 July. On 1 July Forum 18
submitted written questions on whether the government still supports
the amendments, but had received no reply by the end of the working
day on 2 July.
The highly critical review – conducted jointly by the Council of
Europe’s Venice Commission and the Organisation for Security and
Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Advisory Council on Freedom of Religion
or Belief – was made public on 23 June on the Venice Commission website
( D%282009%29036-e.asp).
The controversial proposed new Religion Law would ban the sharing
of faith ("proselytism"), require 500 adult citizen members before
a religious community could gain legal status, ban non-Trinitarian
Christian communities from gaining legal status, give broad
reasons for banning religious communities, and recognise the
"exclusive mission" of the Armenian Apostolic Church. The proposed
new Article 162 in the Criminal Code would punish the sharing
of beliefs. Both were approved by Parliament in their first
readings on 19 March, despite strong criticism from human rights
defenders and many religious communities (see F18News 24 March 2009
=1272).
Deputies from only one political party, the centrist Heritage Party
led by former Foreign Minister Raffi Hovannisian, voted against the
proposed Laws in the first reading.
The amendments were initiated by Armen Ashotyan, then a parliamentary
deputy of the Republican Party in the government coalition who has
since become Education Minister. The parliamentary committee he headed
– on Science, Education, Culture, Youth and Sport – is now led by
Artak Davtyan. His staff told Forum 18 on 1 July that he is away at an
interparliamentary meeting in Lithuania and unable to be reached. Forum
18 was unable to reach any other deputies on the Committee he heads.
However, an official of the Committee confirmed to Forum 18 that it
had received the Council of Europe/OSCE review. The official added
that as Parliament is on its summer recess, no action will be taken
before September.
Ashotyan insisted to Forum 18 on 1 July that he no longer has any
involvement in the process of adopting the amendments since his
departure from Parliament and appointment as a minister. He said he
had drawn up the original draft Laws working with "several persons"
in the Armenian Apostolic Church, but declined to name any of these
Church figures.
Some are sceptical over Ashotyan’s claims that he is no longer
involved. Stepan Danielyan, Chair of the Yerevan-based Collaboration
for Democracy Centre who is a fierce critic of the amendments,
told Forum 18 that "officially Ashotyan will not be involved, but
unofficially he will".
Review identifies ten "major problems" The Legal Opinion prepared
by the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission and the OSCE Advisory
Council on Freedom of Religion or Belief is highly critical not only
of both draft laws, but of the existing Religion Law as well.
Ten "major problems" in the drafts approved in the first reading are
identified in the Opinion. Among the recommendations are that: – all
religious communities, including those not registered as a religious
organisation, should be able to gain legal status if they want it; –
the proposed registration requirements "require extensive redrafting,"
including deleting the definition of Christianity – described as
"entirely objectionable" – and not increasing the minimum numbers
necessary to register. As the Opinion notes, even the current threshold
of 200 is probably "discriminatory and disproportionate"; – the list
of rights granted to registered groups by the current Religion Law
"must be also guaranteed and accessible for smaller religious groups,
and most of them must also be accessible even for individuals, because
they are normal manifestations of freedom of religion or belief." The
Opinion also stresses that this list should be seen as an illustration
of legal rights, and not as a limitation on carrying out other kinds
of religious activity; – "proselytism" as an offence should be clearly
defined as "improper proselytism." This definition itself should be
"drawn with greater care" and the penalties "should be reconsidered
as they could appear to be unduly harsh." The Opinion discusses
the difficulties of defining "improper proselytism" and notes that
"the right of proselytism must extend to individual members and to
religious groups." The proposed Religion Law devotes much attention
to restricting the right to share beliefs (see F18News 24 March 2009
=1272).
– and the proposed Article 162 of the Criminal Code "should not permit
the imposition of sanctions on a religious organisation such as the
Jehovah’s Witnesses" for stating that its members should refuse to
undertake military service. As of 1 June, Armenia held 76 Jehovah’s
Witness prisoners of conscience in jail for conscientious objection to
military service. The country promised the Council of Europe that it
would introduce a genuinely civilian alternative to military service
by January 2004, but has not done so (see F18News 11 December 2008
=1228).
The review noted that the Venice Commission, the Council of Europe
Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs and the ODIHR
Advisory Council on Freedom of Religion and Belief "stand ready to
continue to assist the Armenian authorities".
International review welcomed Welcoming the Council of Europe/OSCE
review were a number of religious communities Forum 18 spoke to. "They
have done high quality work," Asatur Nahapetyan, General Secretary of
the Baptist Union, told Forum 18 from Yerevan on 2 July. "It is very
clear – if parliament accepts the recommendations from the Council
of Europe and the OSCE it will be very nice for us. I don’t know if
they will though."
Although not as hostile to the proposed amendments as other religious
communities, Nahapetyan said the Baptist Union is concerned over the
requirement to have 500 members to gain legal status and the ease with
which individuals who talk about their faith could be brought to court.
More critical of the proposed amendments is Fr David Abrahamyan of the
Russian Orthodox Church in Yerevan. He complains of the "monopoly"
the proposed Law would give the Armenian Apostolic Church. "This is
against equality and is unjust," he told Forum 18 on 2 July. "Getting
money from abroad – whether from the Moscow Patriarchate or our diocese
in Krasnodar in Russia – would become impossible, while going into
prisons, building churches and preaching would be restricted. Why
are all these limitations being proposed?"
Fr Abrahamyan said the current proposed Laws do not accord with
European standards. "Armenia should take account of international
standards – we aspire to being a European state. The authorities have
to take the points of this review into account, though I don’t know
if they will. If they adhered to European standards they wouldn’t
have adopted these amendments in the first reading."
The priest said the Russian Orthodox Church had written to Prime
Minister Tigran Sargsyan to voice its concerns, but he had responded
that it should write instead to the Speaker of Parliament, Hovik
Abrahamyan (no relation of the priest). "We got no reply from the
Speaker and were never invited to Parliament to give our views – it
is very strange that when the Russian Orthodox Church has concerns
it is not listened to."
Jehovah’s Witness lawyer Lyova Margaryan believes the international
criticism was inevitable, given the restrictive provisions of the
draft Laws. "It would have been impossible for the Council of Europe
and OSCE to have approved these Laws," he told Forum 18 on 1 July.
Other religious communities Forum 18 sought views from – including
the Armenian Apostolic Church, other Protestant communities and
non-Christian faiths – did not respond.
Will Laws be pushed through or abandoned?
Danielyan of the Collaboration for Democracy Centre says the
authorities have "no other choice" than to continue to push the Laws
through, given that they have already been approved in the first
reading. "They can’t abandon them – this would be a sign that they
and the Armenian Apostolic Church had lost," he told Forum 18. "They
could continue with them, amend them or postpone them."
He would like to see a "serious public discussion" of how religion
should be treated in law. "The Council of Europe/OSCE review provides
a good opportunity." He believes the existing Religion Law itself
needs to be discussed and argues that "strange formulations" in it
need to be removed.
Rene Leonian, head of the Evangelical Church of Armenia who also
opposes the proposed amendments, said that now the review has been
delivered, "I have more conviction that the Armenian authorities must
suspend consideration of these Laws". He echoes the call for a public
debate, which he says must involve government bodies, civil society
and religious communities. "We believe there shouldn’t just be a few
changes but a global look at the whole issue involving these three
parties," he told Forum 18 from Yerevan on 2 July.
Leonian said that when he met Speaker Abrahamyan on 31 March to
discuss the proposed Laws, the Speaker promised a discussion once the
Council of Europe/OSCE review was received. "The best time to hold
this discussion is before any further readings are even considered. I
hope the authorities will have the wisdom to call the various parties –
including NGOs and religious communities – for a discussion."
Jehovah’s Witness lawyer Margaryan told Forum 18 he had met government
religious affairs official Astsatryan in mid-June, who had told
him the proposed amendments are now "on hold". When Margaryan
asked if they had been removed entirely Astsatryan said No. (END)
Further coverage of Armenian-related religious freedom issues is at
;r eligion=all&country=21&results=50
A printer-friendly map of Armenia is available at
las/index.html?Parent=asia&Rootmap=armeni.
http://www.venice.coe.int/docs/2009/CDL-A
http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id
http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id
http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id
http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?query=&
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/xpeditions/at