U.S.
Department of State Human Rights Report 1998
The Constitution provides for freedom of religion, and the Government
generally respects this right in practice; however, although the Constitution
also provides for the equality of all religions before the law and
the separation of church and state, in practice the Government does
not always respect the provision for equality of religions.
In December 1990, the Soviet Government adopted a law on religious
freedom designed to put all religions on an equal basis. (After the
breakup of the Soviet Union, this law became part of the Russian Federation's
legal code.) The law forbade government interference in religion and
established simple registration procedures for religious groups. Registration
of religious groups was not required, and some evangelical and other
religious groups have continued to operate while choosing not to register
officially with the Government. However, by registering groups obtained
a number of advantages, for example, the ability to establish official
places of worship or benefit from tax exemptions.
During the early and mid-1990's, the sharp increase in the activities
of well-financed foreign missionaries disturbed many sectors of society,
particularly nationalists and many members of the Russian Orthodox
Church, some of whom advocated limiting the activities of what they
termed "nontraditional" religious groups and what were sometimes
called "dangerous" or "totalitarian" sects.
In October 1997, the Government enacted a new, restrictive, and potentially
discriminatory law on religion, which raised questions about the Government's
commitment to international agreements honoring freedom of religion.
Passage of the law prompted concern in the international community,
because for the first time since the break-up of the Soviet Union,
the Government had adopted legislation that could abridge fundamental
human rights. This law replaced the progressive 1990 religion law
that had helped facilitate a revival of religious activity.
The new law ostensibly targeted so-called "totalitarian sects"
or dangerous religious cults. However, the intent of some of the law's
sponsors appears to have been to discriminate against members of foreign
and less well-established religions by making it difficult for them
to manifest their beliefs through organized religious institutions.
The law is very complex, with many ambiguous and contradictory provisions.
On its face the law creates various categories of religious communities
with differing levels of legal status and privileges. The law draws
distinctions between religious "groups" and "organizations,"
two mutually exclusive registration categories, and creates two categories
of organizations: "regional" and "centralized."
A religious "group" is a congregation of worshipers that
does not have the legal status of a juridical person, meaning that
it cannot open a bank account, own property, issue invitations to
foreign guests, or publish literature, among other things. Groups
are permitted to rent public spaces and hold services. Moreover, the
law does not purport to abridge the rights of individual members of
"groups." For example, a member of a religious group could
buy property for the group's use, invite personal guests to engage
in religious instruction, and import religious material. However,
in this case, the group would not enjoy tax benefits and other privileges
extended to religious organizations, such as proselytizing.
The most controversial provisions are those that limit the rights,
activities, and status of religious groups existing in Russia for
less than 15 years. Groups that have been in existence for 15 years
have the right to obtain the status of "local religious organizations."
Similarly, congregations that existed for 15 years when the new law
was enacted also are eligible for registration as an organization.
Organizations, both local and centralized, are juridical persons,
enjoy tax exemptions, and are permitted to proselytize, establish
religious schools, host foreign religious workers, and publish religious
literature.
Under the the 1997 religion law, representative offices of foreign
religious organizations are required to register with state authorities,
and they are barred from conducting liturgical and other religious
activity unless they have acquired the status of a group or organization.
Although the law officially requires all foreign religious organizations
to register, in practice foreign religious representatives' offices
(those not registered under Russian law) have opened without registering
or have been accredited to a registered Russian religious organization.
However, these representative offices cannot carry out religious activities
or have the status of a religious organization.
A "centralized religious organization" can be founded by
a confession that has three functioning "local organizations"
in different regions. A centralized organization apparently has the
right to establish affiliated local organizations without adhering
to the 15-year rule. In implementing this provision, the Government
has extended this definition to include "a registered centralized
managing center." Centralized organizations also have been accorded
the right to organize affiliated local organizations, which themselves
do not comply with the 15-year rule.
Critics of the law have claimed that it violates the Constitution's
provision of equality before the law of all confessions. In particular,
many religious groups criticized the law's requirement that religious
groups be in existence for 15 years before they can qualify for "organization"
status. Also, many groups feared the consequences of the law's provisions
limiting the actions of foreign religious missionaries. Representatives
of some religions, such as the Mormon Church and some Pentecostal
and Charismatic Christian groups, have said that their activities
in Russia could be halted under the law. Critics of the law have also
expressed concern that local authorities could abuse the new law by
interpreting and implementing it more strictly than intended by the
Federal Government.
Between February 12 and June 3 the Government issued three sets of
regulations governing implementation of the new law. While providing
procedural guidelines for registration, the regulations fail to clarify
many key definitional points in the law.
International and well-funded Russian religious organizations, in
particular, began the reregistration process soon after the publication
of the regulations governing reregistration. Russian Pentecostal groups,
which have a solid and growing network of churches throughout the
country, sought guidance from the Ministry of Justice on reregistration
as early as November 1997. One of the larger organizations, the Russian
Unified Fellowship of Christians of the Evangelical Faith (which traces
its origins back to the early 1900's) reregistered as a centralized
religious organization by late March. It has since incorporated many
smaller, newer Pentecostal groups within its structure. As of the
end of July over 26 confessions had reregistered at the federal level,
including the Apostolic Administration of Latin-rite Catholics, the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons), and the Seventh-Day
Adventists. Some religious groups were reregistering successfully
at the local level by year's end. The delay in reregistration is due
in part to the slow pace at which the federal Ministry of Justice
has disseminated the regulations and guidelines to local authorities.
It also is due to the fact that smaller, minority confessions sometimes
fear the registration process. Many of the 89 regions' laws and decrees
on religion contradict federal law; presumably they would have to
be changed. In the meantime, many local religious organizations continue
to try to seek means of affiliating themselves with centralized organizations
or confessions that can meet the 15-year rule and provide a protective
legal cover. However, some individual local churches, citing their
theological and administrative independence, are reluctant to make
themselves part of a larger organization. Under the new system, such
religious communities face considerable legal disadvantages.
President Yeltsin and other high-ranking Russian officials have stated
consistently that the law would be applied in a liberal, tolerant
manner, thereby preserving religious freedom and the equality of confessions.
They insist that no mainstream religion already operating in Russia
would see its activities curtailed as a result of the new law. Although
the full effect of the law on minority confessions or religions considered
nontraditional may not be clear until the end of 1999, the time before
which organizations registered under the old law are required to obtain
new registration, no religious organization has ceased operations
as a result of the law. However, despite the federal Government's
efforts to implement the law liberally and to provide assurances that
religious freedom would be observed, restrictions continued at the
local level.
The vagueness of the law and regulations, the contradictions between
federal and local law, and varying interpretations furnish regional
officials with a pretext to restrict the activities of religious minorities.
For example, Jehovah's Witnesses report that local authorities are
refusing to register some local Jehovah's Witness organizations, pending
resolution of the case against the Moscow Jehovah's Witnesses, under
Article 14 of the 1997 religion law. Discriminatory practices at the
local level are attributable to the increased decentralization of
power, as well as to government inaction and discriminatory attitudes
that are widely held in society.
Furthermore, since 1994, 22 out of 89 regional governments have passed
restrictive laws and decrees intended to restrict the activities of
religious groups. The Federal Government has not sought to challenge
the constitutionality of these restrictions. There are reports that
some local governments prevented religious groups from using venues,
such as cinemas, suitable for large gatherings. As a result, in some
instances denominations that do not have their own property effectively
have been denied the opportunity to practice their faith in large
groups.
As of year's end, some local executive authorities continued to cite
the new law or local laws to obstruct religious groups' activities
or to rescind their existing local registrations. Reports of harassment
and punishment for religious belief or activity continued. For example,
in January and February, the Khakasiya Lutheran Church, the Khakasiya
Christian Center and the Yaroslavl New Generation Church received
orders from local officials to suspend production and distribution
of religious videos and publications and religious education. Yaroslavl
officials in January refused to register the New Generation Church,
previously an unregistered underground church. Local officials cited
the new law as the basis for their actions. Some members of these
churches reported being fired from their jobs, beaten, and imprisoned
for their religious affiliations. Based on a complaint from the Committee
to Save Youth From Totalitarian Cults, a Moscow municipal procurator
is seeking liquidation of the Moscow Jehovah's Witnesses organization
under the 1997 religion law. This is the first proceeding in the judicial
branch that attempted to suspend the operations of an existing religious
organization at a local level.
The Khakasiya and Yaroslavl cases form the basis of the constitutional
challenge to the law on religion, filed with the Constitutional Court
in May by the Institute of Law and Religion, an NGO. The petition
challenges the constitutionality of the 15-year requirement and the
limitations on the rights and activities of confessions that do not
meet that requirement. Constitutional Court officials say that the
case is under review to determine whether the Court has jurisdiction
to hear the case. The Constitutional Court accepted the case for review
in November, but a court date had not been set by year's end.
Human rights activists contend that only 15 percent of actual violations
of religious freedom are reported. They maintain that most citizens,
especially those living in the regions, are still skeptical about
the protection of religious freedom and are reluctant to make public
complaints due to fear of retaliation. Federal authorities did not
take sufficient action to reverse discriminatory actions taken at
the local level, or to discipline those officials responsible.
Property disputes are some of the most frequent complaints cited by
religious groups. For the most part, synagogues, churches, and mosques
have been returned to communities to be used for religious services.
The Federal Government has met the requirements of the 1993 presidential
decree on communal property restitution, and the decree continues
to guide the ongoing process. However, jurisdiction in most cases
is at the regional level, and there is no centralized source of information
on these cases. Nonetheless, there continue to be reports of religious
property that has not been returned. The Moscow Patriarchate has claimed
and taken possession of properties owned by other branches of Orthodoxy
and, in certain cases, property of other religions. In some property
disputes, religious buildings have been "privatized," and
there are long delays in finding new locations for the current occupants.
Local authorities often refuse to get involved in property disputes,
which they contend are between private organizations. Even where state
or municipal authorities still have undisputed control of properties,
a number of religious communities continue to meet significant obstacles
when they request the return of religious buildings or when they seek
to acquire land and necessary building permits for new religious structures.
Some Protestant faiths have suggested that the Russian Orthodox Church
influences the Government regarding land allocated for churches of
other sects. The Jewish community, which has met with some success
on communal property restitution, faces the same obstacles as other
religious communities and has concerns about the return of Torah scrolls.
In its preamble (which government officials insist has no legal standing),
the Religion Law recognizes the "special contribution of Orthodoxy
to the history of Russia and to the establishment and development
of Russia's spirituality and culture." It accords respect to
Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism, and certain other religions
as an inseparable part of the country's historical heritage. Russian
Orthodoxy is considered in conservative circles as the de facto official
religion of the Russian Federation. Many Russians firmly believe that
at least nominal adherence to the Russian Orthodox Church is at the
heart of what it means to be Russian.
The Russian Orthodox Church was involved actively in the development
of the new Law on Religion and has special arrangements with government
agencies to conduct religious education. These arrangements do not
appear to be available to other religions. The head of the Moscow
Patriarchate, the Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia, participates
in most highlevel official events and appears to have direct access
to and influence with officials of the executive branch. The traditional
view that Russian soil is an exclusively "Orthodox domain"
leads to frequent criticism and intolerance of foreign religious groups
that proselytize in the country. Many Orthodox Church officials condemn
such "sheep stealing" when practiced by other Christian
churches. Even well-established foreign religious organizations have
been characterized by the Orthodox leadership as "dangerous and
destructive sects."
Although Jews and Muslims continue to encounter prejudice and societal
discrimination (see Section 5), they generally have not been inhibited
by the Government in the free practice of their religion. Other religions,
including Buddhism and Shamanism, are practiced in specific localities
where they are rooted in local traditions.
At two public Communist Party rallies in October, Duma Deputy and
retired General Albert Makashov made blatantly anti-Semitic remarks,
threatening to take the Jews "to the next world." In an
October 20 newspaper article he blamed the financial crisis on the
country's Jews. The Duma's Communists blocked a November 4 motion
to censure Makashov.
On December 15, Viktor Ilyukhin, a Communist Party Duma member and
Chairman of the Duma Security Committee, accused President Yeltsin
of "genocide" against the Russian people, "which would
not have been possible if the entourage of Yeltsin and the country's
previous governments had consisted basically of members of the native
peoples rather than only members of the Jewish nation." In a
December 23 statement, Communist Party leader Zyuganov explained his
party's position as "anti-Zionist," not anti-Semitic. Jewish
groups believe that the Communists are using anti-Semitism as a political
tool to build populist support.
The President's administration, the Government, and, in particular,
the Russian media reacted immediately to the Communist Party's expressions
of antiSemitism. Communist Party leaders accused the press of conducting
a smear campaign and threatened retribution (see Section 2.a.). A
December 16 presidential statement delivered to the Duma declared
that "any attempt to insult ethnic groups, to limit the rights
of citizens on the basis of origin, will be stopped in accordance
with the Constitution and the laws of the Russian Federation."
On December 30, Yeltsin ordered cabinet officials responsible for
law-enforcement issues to prepare a comprehensive federal program
against political and religious extremism by March 1, 1999.
Source: Country Reports
on Human Rights Practices for 1998, U.S. Department of State.
* Each
report will open a new window. The 2000 report opens as PDF file.
Use table of contents on the left side of the window to choose the
country you wish to view.
Archives
| 1997
| 1998 | 1999
| 2000
| 2001
|
Religious
Freedom in the Russian Constitution
