Search
Displaying results 1 - 4 of 4
Inventing Extremists: The Impact of Russian Anti-Extremism Policies on Freedom of Religion or Belief
February 12, 2018
Click here to view the report Inventing Extremists: The Impact of Russian Anti-Extremism Policies on Freedom of Religion or BeliefExecutive Summary
The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) commissioned this report to examine Russian anti-extremist legislation, corresponding law enforcement practices, and their effects on freedom of religion or belief from 2011 to 2017. The research is focused on how the very regulations that ostensibly protect people and organizations from religious intolerance are instead used to sanction people and organizations for activity or speech based on their religious belief or lack thereof.
Vague and problematic definitions of “extremism” in Russian law give the authorities wide latitude to interfere in peaceful religious observance and persecute believers. Although many of these legal tools have existed for a decade, the Russian government has only recently begun to wield them in sustained campaigns designed to punish or exclude “non-traditional” religions and religious movements, sometimes in concert with the wishes of the Russian Orthodox Church, which functions as a de facto state church. However, the overly broad laws also give rise to a gamut of absurd and contradictory prohibitions and prosecutions that demonstrate the fundamental ambiguity of the government’s official definition of extremism.
The legal tools include the placement of print and audiovisual media on a federal list of banned materials, the banning of religious communities as extremist, the imposition of fines and short-term detention under the Administrative Code, and multi-year terms of imprisonment under the Criminal Code. Reflecting the arbitrary and opaque nature of the anti-extremism legislation, additions to the banned materials list occur with no input from authors or publishers and are simply based on opinions written by “experts” affiliated with law enforcement agencies. These written opinions are then rubber-stamped by courts. Such measures may be used individually or in concert to build a wider case for delegitimizing an entire community, as in the case of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who were first the subject of literature bans, then fines and raids, and later a Ministry of Justice motion to ban them in their entirety.
The main targets of Russia’s anti-extremism policies have typically been Muslims, ranging from fundamentalist groups like Hizb ut-Tahrir to the missionary movement Tabligh Jamaat to readers of the texts of Turkish theologian Said Nursi. Since a wave of anti-government protests in 2011, however, the Russian government has engaged in a wider ranging crackdown on non-Muslim denominations, including those whom the Russian Orthodox Church has traditionally disapproved of, such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Scientologists, and breakaway Russian Orthodox Autonomous Church.
In addition to targeted campaigns, the open-ended character of the extremism legislation and spin-off prohibitions regarding “missionary activity” and “insulting the feelings of believers” is such that excessive fines and absurd bans have led to backlash. For example, courts have been forced to reverse decisions about the extremist materials list after adding the Bhagavad Gita and collections of Qur’anic verses created an international uproar. In this climate, atheistic statements on an online bulletin board or lectures on yoga have been enough to attract prosecutorial attention, while controversial art exhibitions have been the subject of investigations.
Overall, the policies of the Russian government in the religious sphere are part of a wider process of establishing ideological control over society, reflecting the regime’s fears about unresolved social and economic problems that have accumulated over the last several decades. Insofar as the current Russian government emerged from the security services and wields them to enforce its authority, officials attempt to resolve all issues with new repressive legal regulations and fear-inspiring tactics.
December 01, 2014
Dec 1, 2014
FOR YOUR INFORMATIONDecember 1, 2014 | By Dr. Katrina Lantos Swett and Dr. Robert P. George
The following op-ed appeared in The Moscow Times on November 26, 2014. The op-ed also appeared in the Kyiv Post.
Last Friday, a video deemed offensive to the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church was ruled "extremist" by a city court in Vladimir. While Alexander Soldatov — chief editor of Credo.ru, the website that posted the offending video — now could also be tried for extremism, the real defendants should be Russia's extremism law and the officials who are helping expand its reach and influence across the country.
The charge should be violating religious freedom and related rights of Russia's religious minorities or anyone who offends or competes with Russia's dominant church.
The video, which Soldatov posted last year, shows court bailiffs attempting to seize religious relics from a parish of the independent Russian Orthodox Autonomous Church and includes words that are critical of Moscow Patriarchate representatives. The Autonomous Church had been given these relics when it separated from the Moscow Patriarchate in 1988.
Russia first enacted its extremism law in 2002, partly in response to concerns about terrorism. But the law, which prescribes sanctions on those promoting the "exclusivity, superiority or inferiority of citizens" based on religion, was broadened in 2007 to include even nonviolent actors, thus reaching far beyond any fears of extremism linked to terrorism.
As of the release of this year's annual report of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Russia's list of materials banned as extremist had reached 2,241 items. Merely possessing banned works can trigger fines, while the mass distribution, preparation or storage of such materials can result in a four-year prison term.
Which Russians are most affected by the extremism law? First and foremost, it is the country's Muslims, who often are wrongly labeled security threats — a serious error — which along with various forms of repression can lead to the very radicalization that officials are claiming to combat under the guise of the extremism law.
A court in 2007 banned the Russian translations of 14 Quran commentaries by Turkish theologian Said Nursi, due to his assertion of Islam's exclusivity, not because of any security threats.
Examples of other banned texts are a sermon delivered more than a century ago in 1900 by Metropolitan Sheptytsky, a candidate for Catholic sainthood; and at least 70 Jehovah's Witness texts.
In August 2013, Russia banned the entire international website of the Jehovah's Witnesses because it contained phrases from previously prohibited brochures. Examples of these phrases include "what the Bible teaches," "draw near unto Jehovah" and "come follow me."
In early 2014, a regional court overturned this ruling, ending Russia's embarrassment of being the only nation in the world to ban the pacifist group's website.
Clearly, concerns about terrorism and other security matters don't fully explain either the content of Russia's extremism law or its application. A fuller explanation must include Russia's tendency to target groups that appear to challenge what many officials, including President Vladimir Putin, proclaim is the Moscow Patriarchate's role as sole guardian of Russia's cultural identity. Other religious groups have no place in this cultural identity, and so they are not protected.
This tendency would explain why the law allows officials to target nonviolent citizens who threaten no one. It would explain the prosecution of human rights blogger Maxim Yefimov in the Karelia region after he criticized the Moscow Patriarchate in December 2011. And of course, it would explain why Alexander Soldatov risks being prosecuted today for a video that offended the Russian Orthodox Church.
Partly because of its extremism law and its application, Russia's government remains on the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom's Tier-2 list of serious violators of freedom of religion or belief.
In monitoring religious freedom abuses in various countries, the U.S. commission applies international human rights standards included in such documents as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
We are not alone in our conclusion. Based on these same standards, the European Union reiterated in March of this year its strong opposition to the extremism law. Two years ago, in June 2012, the Council of Europe's Venice Commission reached the same conclusion.
The Venice Commission — composed of independent experts on constitutional law — stated that Russia's extremism law lacked clarity, invited arbitrary application and was overly broad, thus violating international law.
Coupled with the alarming erosion of other human rights in Russia, particularly since Putin's return to the presidency, the extremism law and its chilling application raise a disturbing question.
Do fundamental freedoms, including freedom of religion or belief, have a future in Russia? How Russia ultimately handles people like Soldatov and his website may help provide the answer to this question.
Katrina Lantos Swett is chairwoman of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF). Robert P. George is a USCIRF vice chairman.
To interview a USCIRF Commissioner, please contact USCIRF at media@uscirf.gov or 202-786-0613.
February 11, 2020
Feb 11
WHEN:
Feb 11th 10:30am
U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom Briefing
Freedom of Religion or Belief and Security:
New Policy Guidance from the OSCE
Tuesday, February 11, 2020
10:30 am – 12:00 pm
Senate Visitors Center (SVC) 203-02
Please join the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) for a briefing on the nexus of freedom of religion or belief and security, including findings from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe’s (OSCE) Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights’ (ODIHR) recent publication, Freedom of Religion or Belief and Security: Policy Guidance.
In the OSCE region, freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) is violated by some governments who use the pretext of national security to justify repression. For example, in Russia’s Tatarstan region, cameras are installed in mosques to transmit videos of worshippers during their prayers to state security services. In Uzbekistan, thousands of religious prisoners remain incarcerated for “extremism” or the possession of “extremist” religious literature. In Azerbaijan, authorities continue to deny legal registration to Baptists and Jehovah’s Witnesses residing outside the capital. Although these actions aim to improve security, failure to balance security with freedom of religion or belief can actually undermine it.
Freedom of Religion or Belief: Policy Guidance clarifies the interrelationship between FoRB and security as mutually reinforcing objectives, in line with the OSCE’s comprehensive framework for peace and security. The document includes guiding principles, practical guidance, and recommendations to address pertinent issues at the intersection of the freedom of religion and security, including the registration of religious communities, religious literature deemed “extremist”, the monitoring of places of worship, and restrictions on conversion.
Panelists will present the policy guidance document, discuss its findings and recommendations, further explore the intersection of security and FoRB, and consider tools and strategies for governments and other relevant stakeholders to advance both objectives simultaneously. There will be an interactive question and answer period with audience members after the panelist presentations.
Remarks
- Tony Perkins, Chair, USCIRF Written Remarks
- Gayle Manchin, Vice Chair, USCIRF Written Remarks
- Kishan Manocha, Senior Advisor on Freedom of Religion or Belief, OSCE/ODIHR
- Douglas Padgett, U.S. Department of State, Office of International Religious Freedom
- Elizabeth Clark, Professor of Law, Brigham Young University School of Law
April 21, 2021
Apr 21, 2021
USCIRF Releases 2021 Annual Report with Recommendations for U.S. Policy
No Longer Recommends Three Countries for Special Watch List
Washington, D.C. – The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) today released its 2021 Annual Report documenting developments during 2020, including significant progress in countries such as Sudan. Meanwhile, other nations implemented laws and policies that further target religious communities, and in some cases amount to genocide and crimes against humanity. USCIRF’s 2021 Annual Report provides recommendations to enhance the U.S. government’s promotion of freedom of religion or belief abroad.
In its report, USCIRF also monitored public health measures put in place to prevent the spread of COVID-19, and their impact on freedom of religion or belief. In many cases, these measures complied with international human rights standards, but in some countries, already marginalized religious communities faced official and societal stigmatization, harassment, and discrimination for allegedly causing or spreading the virus.
“This past year was challenging for most nations trying to balance public health concerns alongside the fundamental right to freedom of religion or belief. Though some governments took advantage of the restrictions to target specific religious communities, we were encouraged by the positive steps various countries took. For example, as a result of COVID-19 outbreaks, many prisoners of conscience were furloughed or released, such as in Eritrea,” USCIRF Chair Gayle Manchin said. “USCIRF will continue to monitor how countries respond to and recover from COVID-19, and whether the loosening of restrictions is fair to people of all faiths and nonbelievers.”
USCIRF’s independence and bipartisanship enables it to unflinchingly identify threats to religious freedom around the world. In the 2021 Annual Report, USCIRF recommends 14 countries to the State Department for designation as “countries of particular concern” (CPCs) because their governments engage in or tolerate “systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations.” These include 10 that the State Department designated as CPCs in December 2020—Burma, China, Eritrea, Iran, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan—as well as four others—India, Russia, Syria, and Vietnam. For the first time ever, the State Department designated Nigeria as a CPC in 2020, which USCIRF had been recommending since 2009.
The 2021 Annual Report also recommends 12 countries for placement on the State Department’s Special Watch List (SWL) based on their governments’ perpetration or toleration of severe violations. These include two that the State Department placed on that list in December 2020—Cuba and Nicaragua—as well as 10 others—Afghanistan, Algeria, Azerbaijan, Egypt, Indonesia, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Turkey, and Uzbekistan. In 2021, USCIRF is not recommending SWL placement for Bahrain, the Central African Republic (CAR), and Sudan, which were among its SWL recommendations in its 2020 Annual Report. USCIRF has concluded that, although religious freedom concerns remain in all three countries, conditions last year did not meet the high threshold required to recommend SWL status.
The 2021 Annual Report further recommends to the State Department seven non-state actors for redesignation as “entities of particular concern” (EPCs) for systematic, ongoing, egregious violations. The State Department designated all seven of these groups as EPCs in December 2020—al-Shabaab, Boko Haram, the Houthis, Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), Islamic State in the Greater Sahara (ISGS), Jamaat Nasr al-Islam wal Muslimin (JNIM), and the Taliban.
“In 2020, the Trump administration continued to prioritize international religious freedom. Much progress was made, and our 2021 Annual Report makes recommendations about how Congress and the Executive Branch, now under President Biden, can further advance the U.S. commitment to freedom of religion abroad,” USCIRF Vice Chair Tony Perkins stated. “In order to maintain the crucial momentum of international religious freedom as a U.S. foreign policy priority, USCIRF strongly urges the Biden administration to take a unique action for each country designated as a CPC to provide accountability for religious freedom abuses and to implement the other recommendations contained in our report.”
In addition to chapters with key findings and U.S. policy recommendations for these 26 countries, the annual report describes and assesses U.S. international religious freedom policy overall. The report also highlights important global developments and trends related to religious freedom during 2020, including in countries that do not meet the criteria for CPC or SWL recommendations. These include: COVID-19 and religious freedom; attacks on houses of worship; political unrest leading to religious freedom violations; blasphemy laws; global antisemitism; and China’s international influence on religious freedom and human rights.
“USCIRF’s 2021 Annual Report documents both the deepening of religious divides, and intensified religious persecution and violence during the global pandemics; and the swift and significant progress that can and has been made, as in Sudan, to support and strengthen religious communities of all faiths,” USCIRF Vice Chair Anurima Bhargava added. “We urge the Biden administration and Congress to champion religious freedom and to center the safety and dignity of religious communities as foreign policy priorities. USCIRF recommends that the administration should immediately increase the annual ceiling for refugees; and definitively and publicly conclude that the atrocities committed against the Rohingya people by the Burmese military constitute genocide and take action accordingly; as the State Department recently determined regarding China’s genocide against Uyghur and other Turkic Muslims.”
The report includes two new sections, one highlighting key USCIRF recommendations that the U.S. government has implemented from USCIRF 2020 annual report, and the other addressing human rights violations perpetrated based on the coercive enforcement of interpretations of religion.
###
The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) is an independent, bipartisan federal government entity established by the U.S. Congress to monitor, analyze, and report on religious freedom abroad. USCIRF makes foreign policy recommendations to the President, the Secretary of State and Congress intended to deter religious persecution and promote freedom of religion and belief. To interview a Commissioner, please contact USCIRF at Media@USCIRF.gov or Danielle Ashbahian at dashbahian@uscirf.gov or +1-202-702-2778.