An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 2
CONTENTS
Paragraphs Page
Introduction 1 — 2 3
SUMMARY OF CASES TRANSMTTTED AND 3
REPLIES RECEIVED
Annenia 3-11 3
Azerbaijan 12-26 5
Bangladesh 27- 42 8
Belarus 43—52 10
Belgique 53- 73 14
China 74- 109 17
Denmark 110- 116 28
Egypt 117- 121 30
Eritrea 122- 135 31
Greece 136- 139 34
India 140- 150 37
Indonesia 151- 169 39
Iran (Islamic Republic of) 170— 210 43
Iraq 211-215 49
Jordan 216-223 50
Kazakhstan 224- 240 52
Kuwait 241-245 55
Malaysia 246- 250 56
Maldives 251- 262 57
Netherlands 263- 265 59
New Zealand 266- 273 60
Pakistan 274- 291 61
Republic of Korea 292- 305 64
Romania 306-312 66
Russian Federation 313- 326 67
Saudi Arabia 327- 335 70
Serbia and Montenegro 336- 340 72
SriLanka 341-347 73
Thailand 348-354 75
Turkey 355-364 76
Turkmenistan 365-389 78
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 390- 404 82
United States of America 405- 415 85
Uzbekistan 416-447 87
VietNam 448-487 94
Yemen 488-493 101
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 3
Introduction
1. This addendum to the report of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion
or belief gives an account of communications transmitted by the Special Rapporteur
between 12 November 2004 and 30 November 2005. It also contains the replies
received from Governments to her communications by 30 January 2006, as well as
observations of the Special Rapporteur where considered appropriate.
2. Owing to restrictions on the length of documents, the Special Rapporteur has
been obliged to slightly reduce details of communications sent and received. As a
result, replies from Governments could not be published in theft entirety.
SUMMARY OF CASES TRANSMITTED AND REPLIES RECEIVED
Armenia
Communication sent on 9 June 2005
3. The Special Rapporteur had received information according to which, on 21
June 2004, Jehovah's Witness conscientious objector Mr. Armen Grigoryan, who
refhsed military service after being called up, was summoned to the military
recruitment office in Yerevan. Within 24 hours, he was taken out of Armenia against
his will and transferred to a military unit across the border in Nagorno-Karabakh. He
was beaten at a base in Martuni region of eastern Karabakh upon his refusal to swear
the military oath and to sing the national anthem. He was later stripped and forced to
stand in his underwear in front of about 1,800 soldiers and to tell them why he refused
to do military service. He escaped from his unit and fled back to Armenia in August
2004. On 28 April 2005, he decided to give himself in and went with his lawyer to the
police station in Yerevan. He was immediately arrested and taken to Stepanakert in
Nagorno-Karabakh, where he was held in solitary confinement in an investigation cell
at the time of the communication.
4. The Special Rapporteur was fhrther informed that nineteen Jehovah's
Witnesses were still in prison for refhsing military service on grounds of conscience.
5. In addition, of the 24 young men who opted for the alternative labour service
in 2004, 22 were Jehovah's Witnesses who believed assurances by officials that the
service was of civil character. Marry expressed concern about the terms of the service.
For instance, Mr. Vahe Grigoryan, Mr. Garazat Azatyan, Mr. Hayk Khachatryan
and Mr. Garik Melkonyan, who were assigned to the Vardenis psychiatric hospital,
had to wear military-style uniforms, carry idettity cards marked “Armed Forces of the
Republic of Armenia”, and were treated as soldiers. They were regularly visited by
the military police and were given degrading work. Some have abandoned this
alternative service and are therefore at risk of prosecution. On 6 May 2005, Mr.
Narek Alaverdyan and Mr. Arsen Sevoyan were immediately arrested by the
military police after they refhsed to continue their alternative service.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 4
Response from Government dated 6 September 2005
6. The Government informed the Special Rapporteur that the issues related to
and terms of the alternative service in Armenia are regulated by the Law “on
Alternative Service”, which entered into force on 1 July 2004.
Article 3 of the Law provides that an alternative service is allowed for those
citizens whose religion or religious belief is incompatible with performing
regular military services in military units as well as holding or use of
weapons.
According to the above-mentioned Law, there are two types of alternative
services:
1. Alternative military service (although not taking place in military
training premises and without requirement to hold and use weapons and
military equipment;
2 Alternative labor service (outside military forces).
Article 4 of the Law stipulates that a citizen is sent to serve the alternative
military service if he applies to the military recruitment office of his district
no later than 1 March or 1 September before the next regular call-up—-and if
the district military office takes the correspondent decision to this end.
Article 8 of the Law stipulates that the district military recruitment
commission discusses the application for an alternative service in its separate
session. The applicant has to be informed about the date and time of the
session before the session takes place. The recruitment commission takes a
separate decision on each application.
Additional response dated 26 September 2005
7. The Government informed that the information about the 22 Jehovah's
Witnesses was false. These Jehovah's Witnesses engaged in alternative service
voluntarily, having first been familiarized with the Law and its individual provisions.
The men have never worn military uniforms and the dress which persons who perform
alternative service are requfted to wear is quite different from military uniform. On
receipt of their clothing, the men wore it for four months and did not express any
objection. They have never been treated as military personnel. They performed theft
service in civilian establishments, medical institutions and residential homes.
8. After parents of the Jehovah's witnesses submitted a complaint to the
Government expressing theft dissatisfaction with the place and nature of the
alternative service on 14 March 2005, several Government officials visited Seva n
psychiatric hospital, Vardenis residential home and Gyumri psychiatric health center
where the Jehovah's witnesses undertook their alternative service. In all institutions
the Government officials found that the alternative service the Jehovah's witness
were required to do was not arduous or degrading or in conflict with the labour
organization and that theft treatment was normal and humane. In the fftst months of
their service the Jehovah's Witnesses had performed theft services as was required
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 5
and held good relations with the general staff. Their living conditions were normal,
their accommodation comfortable and their food requirements were met.
9. Towards the end of March and the beginning of April the Jehovah's
Witnesses' attitude suddenly changed and they abandoned their service. Because the
Government officials could not find a due cause for them to leave, the Jehovah's
Witnesses must bear responsibility for the abandonment of service under the existing
Alternative Service Act.
Observations
10. The Special Rapporteur is grateful for the Government's response. She
would like to draw the Government's attention to Paragraph 5 of Resolution 1998/77
of the Commission on Human Rights, which emphasizes that States should take the
necessary measures to refrain from subjecting conscientious objectors to
imprisonment.
11. Moreover, she notes that the Human Rights Committee has encouraged
States to ensure that the length of alternative service does not have a punitive
character, in comparison to the duration of regilar military service. (See inter alia
CCPRICO/83/GRC, paragraph 15). Noting Armenia's commitment regarding
alternative service further to its accession to the Council of Europe, she encourages
the Government to initiate a review the law from the perspeclive of its compliance
with international standards and best practices.
Azerbaij an
Communication sent on 17 March 2005
12. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government
information she had received according to which, on 4 February 2005, the Supreme
Court failed to protect the right of Mr. Mahir Bagirov to perform alternative service
despite a provision in the constitution guaranteeing this right for those unable to serve
in the army on grounds of conscience. Mr. Bagirov is a Jehovah's Witness on whose
behalf a communication was sent on 27 October 2004(See E/CN.4/2005/6 1/Add. 1 at
par. 18). The court reportedly argued that the lack of a law on alternative service
meant that this right did not exist. Fears had been expressed that Mr. Bagirov would
soon be arrested by the military police and brought to a military barracks where, as an
alleged deserter, he could be at risk of being subjected to brutal treatment. Concerns
had been expressed that Azerbaij an's army was not yet ready to allow young men to
do alternative service.
13. The Special Rapporteur was also informed that Azerbaijan's senior religious
affairs official in February 2005 had expressed accusations against the Protestant
church in the local media. Rafik Aliev, head of the State Committee for Work with
Religious Organisations, has accused the Seventh-day Adventist and Greater Grace
Protestant churches of working illegally and threatened they could be shut down. In
the latest of numerous unfounded allegations that Mr. Aliev has made in local media,
he accused the Adventist and Greater Grace Protestant churches of, inter alia,
conducting “illegal religious propaganda” and of disturbing “citizens residing near
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 6
places where prayers are held.” It was reported that Mr. Aliev's committee was taking
“tough measures in order to close the churches.” Mr. Aliev used a similar approach in
2002 in order to close down Baku's Azeri- language Baptist church. According to the
head of the Adventist Church in Azerbaijan, Pastor Yahya Zavrichko, the last time
that Mr. Aliev complained about the Church in the media he confirmed that he had no
facts of any violations committed. Concerns have been expressed that Rafik Aliev
frequently makes such allegations against named religious communities which are
never backed up with evidence.
14. The local media allegedly is frequently used to conduct campaigns against
religious minorities. For instance, one Baku-based Protestant observed that repeated
allegations in the media that Protestants and Jehovah's Witnesses were conducting
illegal activity and would be shut down have created a climate of hostility in society.
Response from the Government dated 25 March 2005
15. The Government indicated that Mr. Mahir Baghirov filed a complaint with the
Khatai District Court concerning the actions of the military official. He requested to
consider call-up paper No. 1328 dated 27 May 2004 illegal and proposed to adopt a
resolution to acknowledge his right to change military service to alternative service.
This resolution would serve as a precedence since Mr. Baghirov had been called up
according to the decision of the recruitment commission of the Khatai District
Military Commissariat even though he had been the member of the religious
community “Jehovah Witnesses” and was forced to serve despite his religious
obligations barring any military activity.
16. Mr. Baghirov had passed the military training course of the Azerbaijan Medical
University, swore to serve, and received the military rank of medical service
lieutenant. He did not submit evidence that he had requested relevant bodies to relieve
him of his military rank. Moreover, Mr. Baghirov received the call-up paper No. 1328
from the Khatai District Military Commissariat of the Ministry of Defence on 1 June
2004, obliging him to arrive at the military unit No. 161. The call-up paper was based
on a Decree of the Minister of Defence of Azerbaijan No. 0305 date d 23 May 2004.
17. According to Article 76 of the Constitution, the defence of the native land is
the duty of every citizen. The citizens must perform military service in accordance
with the rules determined by the Law. If doing military service contradicts the
convictions of citizens, it is possible to substitute military service for alternative
service only in those cases determined by the Law. Furthermore, according to Article
2 of the Regulations for alternative service, those male citizens aged 18 to 25 who
cannot do military service because of their confession must do alternative service
instead in compliance with Article 9 of the Law on Armed Forces of the Republic of
Azerbaijan. According to these Regulations, the only persons exempt from military
service are those who have a professional relationship with the religious orders, such
as priests and students in religious schools.
18. Moreover, according the same Regulations, the citizens who cannot do military
service because of their confession should submit a written request to the call-up
commission at least 2 months prior to the call-up for active service. Mr. Z. Baghirov
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 7
was called up for military service on 27 May 2004, whereas he submitted a written
request on 29 April 2004.
19. In accordance with Article 78 of the Civil Procedure Code, evidence should be
submitted by the concerned persom to court of first instance. Mr. Baghirov had not
submitted any evidence of his cleric activities since 2002 to the first instance court.
During the examination of the case in the court of appeal, MT. Z. Baghirov and his
representative could not explain the reasons why they had not submitted this evidence
to the first instance court.
20. The panel of judges noticed that the head of the “Jehovah Witnesses”
community, L.A. Moroz, described Mr. Z. Baghirov, in the application No. 20 dated
29 May 2004, as a member of the community and not as a cleric. Thus, the allegation
that Mr. Baghirov was a cleric was neither in the application of 29 May 2004 nor in
that of 9 September 2004
21. Accordingly, the Court considered that there were unsubstantial grounds to
prove that Mr. Baghirov was an active cleric of the “Jehovah Witnesses” community
since 2002. The decision was confirmed by the Supreme Court of Azerbaijan.
Additional response from the Government dated 19 April 2005
22. The Government informed the Special Rapporteur that the Officials of the
State Committee for Work with Religious Organizations periodically give interviews
to mass media on the religious situation in the country, that the data provided by the
Chairman of the State Committee was based on concrete facts and guided by the
relevant legislation of Azerbaijan and that, at the same time, this information serves
the right of citizens to receive information.
23. The Government indicated that “The Seventh Day Adventists” and the
Jehovah Witnesses had been warned not to distribute illegal religious propaganda and
that this warning did not contradict the relevant national legislation. The local
religious communities including “The Seventh Day Adventists” accepted the
complaints expressed to them and notified that they would try not to commit any
violations. This issue had been discussed with Victor Vitko, Secretary General of the
Eurasia section of the International Association of Religious Minorities.
24. The registration of the Grace Church was eliminated in 2002 in accordance
with the relevant court verdict. Representatives of the OSCE, UN and Council of
Europe participating at the court hearings did not have any objections concerning this
case because there was sufficient evidence to eliminate registration. In its work, the
State Committee for Work with Religious Organizations acts in compliance with the
existing legislation of the Republic of Azerbaijan.
Observations
25. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the detailed response regarding Mr.
Mahir Baghirov. However, she would like to refer the Government's attention to
Article 1 of Resolution 1998/77 of the Commission on Human Rights, which draws
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 8
attention to the right of everyone to have conscientious objections to military service.
This right is not, and should not be, limited to clerics and students of religious
schools. She encourages the Government to review its legislation on alternative
service, in accordance with international standards and best practices.
26. She will address the question of conscientious objection as well as other
situations raised by the above communication in the report that will be submitted
fhrther to the visit that she carried out in Azerbaijan from 26 February to 5 March
2006 at the invitation of the Government
Bangladesh
Urgent appeal sent on 10 March 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on the
promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
27. The Special Rapporteurs were informed that, on Friday 11 March 2005, the
leaders of Islamist groups had threatened to attack the members of the Ahmadiyya
Muslim Jamaat religious community, in the city of Bogra. Concerns had been
expressed that this attack was an attempt by Islamist groups to pressure the
government to declare Bangladesh's Ahmadis “non-Muslims”. This attack would
reportedly be the result of a hate campaign led by the Islamists in Bogra and the
nearby regions of Rajshahi, Natore and Gaibandha over the previous week. Concern
was fhrther expressed that this planned attack followed a pattern of similar attacks on
Ahmadi places of worship in the districts of Chittagong, Patuakhali, Narayangonj,
Brahmabaria, Nakhalpara and Dhaka over the year.
28. The Special Rapporteurs recalled that previous communications in relation to
this issue had been sent to the Government on 15 March 2004, on 27 August 2004 and
10 November 2004 to which the Government had responded by letters dated 24 May
2004 and 16 November 2004 (See E/CN.4/2005/6 1/Add. 1 at par. 20-27).
29. In this regard, although the local authorities had reportedly taken measures to
ensure the safety of the Ahmadis in the past, the Special Rapporteurs requested to be
informed about the measures that had been taken by the Government in order to
prevent fhrther violations of the rights of the Ahma diyya community.
Response from the Government dated 27 May 2005
30. The Government provided additional information to a communication of 10
November 2004 (see E/CN.4/2005/61/add.1, para. 26).
31. On 29 October 2004 at about 130pm, the members of Ahmadiyya
Community performed their Juma prayer in the new mosque in Bhadughar area of
Brahmanbaria town. Sunni Muslims, including teachers and students of local
Madrasa and other Muslims of that area reacted by throwing brickbats to the
members of Ahmadiyya community and broke the windows of 4 to S houses
belonging to Ahmadiyya. About 10 to 12 members of Ahmadiyya community were
injured in that incident. The Police rushed to the place and a criminal procedure
under section (u/s) 143/448/323/324/427 of Bangladesh Penal Code was engaged
against 110 unidentified persons. Members of both communities also held talks but
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 9
there prevailed religious tensions between them. Although the local Police Station
has been ordered to remain alert and vigilant, the situation is now peacefhl.
32. Regarding Narayangonj, the organization “A vIRA Dhaka Bashi (we are
residents of Dhaka)” demanded that the Ahmadiyya Mosque be opened to all for
performing prayer. The Ahmadiyya community rejected their demand and sought
for security for the mosque and for them. Narayangonj district police administration
deployed more than 200 Armed Police personnel including Bangladesh Rifles
(BDR) to ensure security of the Ahmadiyya Mosque and Community.
33. Regarding Nakhal Para, on 21 November 2003, Sunni Muslims organized
a procession from Rahim Metal Mosque, Nakhalpara, Tejgaon, Dhaka after juma
prayer, against so-called anti-Islamic activities of the Ahmadiyya community. The
police did not allow the members of the procession to proceed towards Ahmadiyya
Mosque and dispersed them, including with tear gas shells. The police initiated
case No. 79 under section (u/s) 147/148/149/186/332/333/3531427/109
Bangladesh Penal Code (BPC) and case No.80 section (u/s)
147/148/149/186/332/333/353/427/109 Bangladesh Penal Code against the
demonstrators including Moulana Mahmudul Hassan Mumtazi.
Communication sent on 5 July 2005
34. On 24 June 2005, about two dozen bombs exploded at East Kandipara, an
Ahmadiyya- inhabited area in Brahmanbaria. Simultaneously two Ahmadiyya
mosques, one in the same area and one at Bhadughar, were set on fire. Two members
of Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat sustained injuries and were treated at Brahmanbaria
Sadar Hospital. At the time of the communication, the police had not arrested anyone
involved in the attacks.
35. The Special Rapporteur recalled that previous communications in relation to
this issue had been sent to the Government on 15 March 2004, on 27 August 2004, on
10 November 2004 and on 10 March 2005 to which the Government had responded
by letters dated 24 May 2004 and 16 November 2004.
Responses from the Government dated 11 July 2005 and 3 January2006
36. By letter of 11 July 2005, the Government acknowledged receipt of the
above communication.
37. By letter of 3 January 2006, it informed that the matter had been fhlly
investigated. On 24 June 2005 unidentified individuals set fire to the Ahmadiyya
place of worship at Kanderpara. The fire caused damage to a portion of the place of
worship. Subsequently a number of crackers went off in the neighbouring residential
area of the Ahmadiyya. Two members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamat sustained
minor injuries and were treated at Brahmanbaria District Hospital. On the same night,
unidentified individuals set off four more crackers in the Ahmadiyya community area
in Bhadughar.
38. The police have arrested eight suspects on suspicion of involvement in the
events and have produced them before the court. The local police were initially in
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 10
charge of the investigations. However, in view of the seriousness the Government
attaches to the matters, responsibility for the investigation and the prosecution has
been transferred to Criminal Investigation Department (CID) of the police department.
Communication sent on 3 November 2005
39. On 18 October 2005, a number of unidentified persons broke into a Kali
Mandir (Hindu Temple) in the Chagarachi District. They kidnapped the Priest, Shri
Gopal Chandra Barman. They also stole a number of idols from the Kali Mandir,
including a Visnu idol and a Gopal idol. On 21 October 3J05, Shri Gopal Chandra
Barman's body was found, bound with rope, in the nearby Haridhoa River. The Priest
had been stabbed to death.
Response from the Government dated 11 November 2005
40. The Government acknowledged receipt of the above communication.
Observations
41. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the Government's response to the
communications sent on SJuly 2005. However, taking into account the serious
character of the situation faced by the Ahmadiyya community in Bangladesh, she
regrets that she has still not received a reply to her previous communication dated 10
March 2005.
42. The Special Rapporteur therefore urges the Government to take concrete
measures to eliminate acts of religious intolerance towards the Ahmadiyya
community in accordance with article 8(a) of the 2005/40 Resolution of the
Commission on Human Rights and would like to receive detailed information about
the content of these measures as soon as possible.
Belarus
Communication sent on 17 March 2005
43. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government
information she had received according to which, on 16 February 2005, Pastor
Vyacheslav Goncharenko of the Minsk-based New Life Church was facing
prosecution again for organizing worship without state permission. Indeed, following
their inspection of Sunday worship on 23 January 2005, local police announced the
charges on 25 January, and an initial district court hearing took place on 10 February
2005. A second hearing was reportedly set for 1 March 2005. It was reported that
identical charges were brought against the pastor in late 2004. Fears had been
expressed that the latest charges could have been part of official moves to close down
the church under Belarusian law. Reports fhrther indicated that New Life
administrator Vasily Yurevich was fined 3,200,000 Belarusian roubles on 28
December 2004 for similarly organizing “illegal” worship. Mr. Yurevich lodged a
formal protest when the public procuracy refhsed to take up an appeal against the fine.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 11
44. The Special Rapporteur was also informed that following the deadline for
compulsory state re-registration on 16 November 2004, under the law on religions, it
was uncertain what would happen to a number of religious communities who were
either still in the process of re-registering or who had been refhsed re-registration.
Without state re-registration, it was reportedly legally impossible for religious
communities to meet for worship, or to engage in other religious activities. It was
fhrther reported that the State monitors, restricts and prevents the activity of religious
communities in several other ways. Registered religious organizations could not, for
instance, engage in activities outside the place where they were registered and
violations of the law could result in a religious community being formally liquidated.
45. The following situations were also brought to the attention of the Special
Rapporteur:
- The 40-strong Word of Truth Church was the second member of the Full
Gospel Association to be denied re-registration under the 2002 Belarusian
law on religion. The Church was meeting unhindered at private homes in
Dzerzhinsk (Minsk region) as no court order had been issued for its
liquidation. According to the church's pastor Nikolai Kozel, Word of Truth
fried to re-register at an alternative address after being expelled from its
rented premises. In addition to the absence of approved premises, the church
was reportedly subsequently denied re-registration on the grounds that its
application was late, even though it was alleged that they had submitted it
before the 16 November 2004 deadline.
- The third Full Gospel Association congregation to be refhsed re-
registration was the 35-strong Church of Jesus Christ in Kozenki village
which was hoping to register as a new religious organization. After
simultaneously submitting documents to the Mozyr district executive
committee in which the same address was stipulated for re-registration of
the church and the adoption of two children, officials reportedly responded
that the children could not be placed at an address where there would be
church services. As the deadline for re-registration expired during these
deliberations, the authorities then suggested that the church disband and
register anew at a different address, while the issue of adoption was
“practically resolved.”
- On 24 January 2005, the Belarusian Supreme Court upheld a 21 December
2004 ruling by the Minsk City Court, stating that the Minsk Society for
Krishna Consciousness had rightly been refused re-registration under the
2002 law. Similar to the New Life Church mentioned above, the Minsk
Krishna Consciousness Society did not have the State approval required by
the 2002 religion law to use its own premises for worship, and was refhsed
re-registration as a result. On 3 November 2004, the N'linsk's Central
District Court also issued an official warning after a police officer observed
Krishna devotees praying at their temple without state permission.
- Two other Krishna Consciousness communities in Bobruisk (Mogilev
region) and Mogilev could not re-register and register respectively. The
state authorities allegedly kept changing the reasons for not re-registering
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 12
the Bobruisk group, first having claimed that the legal address was not in
order, then the charter, and fmally that the application was submitted too
late. The authorities also insisted that the Mogilev group seeking initial
registration must first pass an expert analysis and would not accept
confirmation from the Minsk Society that it belonged to the same religious
confession. The Bobruisk community could apply for registration as a new
religious organization Since the applicants had described themselves as
“Vaishnavis” rather than Krishna devotees, the Mogilev group was
reportedly deemed to be liable for e qert analysis, although the 2002
religion law stipulates that this is the case only for religious confessions
new to Belarus. These terms are allegedly synonymous.
-The authorities in Brest had returned re-registration applications to six
autonomous Baptist churches in the region. Moreover, the banks where two
of the six had accounts closed these accounts at the request of the
authorities. The six congregations had refhsed to accept a provision in the
2002 religion law stipulating that a religious organization may fhnction only
within the borders of the territory upon which it is registered. This was
reportedly confirmed by Vasili Marchenko, the Brest regional religious
affairs official. Maintaining that a similar restriction exists for all legal
personalities in Belarus, Mr. Marchenko specified that the territory in
question constituted the limits of a town or city if that was where an
organization was registered or the several neighbouring small settlements or
villages where founding members live.
Response from the Government dated 18 July 2005
46. The Government stressed that eight Full Gospel Christian communities have
been re-registered to date. The Government informed that it was decided not to re-
register the Full Gospel New Life Church because it did not have a legal address. In
the application, the legal address was cited as a farm building. A Commission
inspected the building and found it to be in a poor state of repair. Furthermore, many
of the provisions of the religious community's charter did not conform to current
legislation; for this reason two of the organizers of the religious meetings held at the
aforementioned address were fined under administrative law. With a view to
resolving the issue, the organizer of the New Life Church was invited on two
occasions to re-register the community using a new legal address. To date, the State
authorities are unaware that the religious community has taken any such decision.
47. The Government informed that Full Gospel Word of Truth Church in
Dzerzhinsk is the only one of 11 Full Gospel churches that has not completed official
re-registration formalities. This is because it lacks a legal address. Article 17 of the
Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations Act provides that a religious
community must submit an application accompanied by a document confirming the
organization's right to occupy the premises cited in the Charter. In this case the
application did not contain such a document and it also lacked required reports by
official bodies authorized to conduct public heath and town planning inspections.
Accordingly, the application could not be forwarded to the Minsk Provincial
Executive Committee for re-registration.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 13
48. The Government informed that the Full Gospel Church of Jesus Christ in
Kozenki also does not have a legal address. The declared address for re-registration is
a family home to five children. As such, the agency of tutorship and guardianship
refhsed permission for the premises to be used as the legal address of the religious
community, considering that it would be detrimental to the children's living
conditions. The organizers have not filed another application for re-registration with
the authorities, specifying another legal address.
49. The Brobuisk Krishna Consciousness Socèty has, according to the local
authorities, essentially ceased its activities. The International Society for Krishna
Consciousness applied for re-registration. The membership of this community
includes none of the leaders or organizers of the previously registered religious
community and its title and legal address have changed. These changes were not made
in accordance with the correct procedure and re-registration was therefore denied for
lack of legal continuity. The way out of the impasse was to wind q the former legal
entity that had ceased its activities and register a new community under the proper
procedure. The Mogilev Society for Krishna Consciousness was denied registration
for procedural shortcomings during the application process. The Minsk So iety for
Krishna Consciousness was denied re-registration because the address it submitted as
its legal address was a residential address, which is not allowed. The Minsk Society
for Krishna Consciousness appealed the initial decision but the initial judgment of the
authorities was upheld in appeal. Because this society continued to hold religious
services nonetheless administrative proceedings were brought against them.
50. With regard to the re-registration of evangelical Baptist churches, six Baptist
communities in the cities of Brest, Kamenets and Bereza and the villages of
Chernavchitsy and Ostromechevo in Brest district have been re-registered after they
complied with registration procedures.
Observations
51. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the Government's response and draws
its attention to Resolution 2005/40 of the Commission on Human Rights, in which
the Commission urged States, ‘ lt]o review, whenever relevant, existing registration
practices in order to ensure the right of all persons to manifest their religion or belief,
alone or in community with others and in public or in private” (Paragraph 4(c)). In
this regard, the Special Rapporteur wishes to emphasize that the right to freedom of
religion is not limited to members of registered religious communities. As she noted
in her previous report to the Commission on Human Rights, referring to the
OSCE/ODIHR Guidelines for Review of Legislation pertaining to Religion or Belief,
“registration should not be compulsory, i.e. it should not be a precindition for
practicing one's religion, but only for the acquisition of a legal personality and related
benefits” (E/CN.4/2005/6 1, para. 58).
52. Moreover, the Special Rapporteur takes this opportunity to remind the
Government of the views of the Human Rights Committee of 23 August 2005 on
communication No. 1207/2003 (Malakhovsky and Pikul v. Belarus,
CCPR/C/84/D/1207/2003) in which the Committee found a violation of Article 18 of
the International Covenant on Civil and PoliticalRights, following the refusal to
register Minsk Vaishnava community as a religious association. In its decision the
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 14
Human Rights Committee made a distinction between the requirement for suitable
premises for the purpose of canying out religious rituals on the one hand and as a
precondition for registration on the other hand (paragraphs 7.5 and 7.6). The
Committee noted “that the State party has not advanced any argument as to why it is
necessary for the purposes of article 18, paragraph 3 [ ICCPR], for a religious
association, in order to be registered, to have an approved legal address which not
only meets the standards required for the administrative seat of the association but
also those necessary for premises used for purposes of religious ceremonies, rituals,
and other group undertakings. Appropriate premises for such use could be obtained
subsequent to registration. [ 1 Also taking into account the consequences of refhsal
of registration, namely the impossibility of canying out such activities as establishing
educational institutions and inviting foreign religious dignitaries to visit the country,
the Committee concludes that the refhsal to register amounts to a limitation of the
authors' right to manifest theft religion under article 18, paragraph 1 that is
disproportionate and so does not meet the requirements of article 18, paragraph 3. The
authors' rights under article 18, paragraph 1 have therefore been violated”.
Belgique
Communication envoyée le l8juillet 2005
53. La Rapporteuse speciale a attire l'attention du Gouvernement belge sur
l'information selon laquelle, en Mars 2005, l'Observatoire federal des sectes aurait
livre un état des lieux du <> a la Chambre des Représentants dans le
cadre des reunions du groupe parlementaire sur les sectes, dont le mandat serait de
defmir les nouvelles politiques a adopter en cc qui concerne les sectes.
54. Au cours des cinq derniêres années, en réponse aux demandes du public,
l'Observatoire aurait etudie un total de 533 groupements dont une large majorité, soit
439 groupements, n'était toutefois pas mentionnée dans la liste des 189 mouvements
sectaires etablie par la Commission parlementaire d'enquete sur les sectes, et publie
en 1997. Le precedent Rapporteur special avait transmis une communication au
Gouvernement a cc sujet et une réponse avait ete reçue (Rapport du Rapporteur
special sur l'intolerance religieuse, E/CN.4/1999/58, 11 janvier 1999, par. 41 a 43).
55. Des craintes ont ete exprimées par rapport aux methodes d'enquete utilisees
par l'Observatoire qui n'auraient pas changees depuis 1996. Entre autres, les reunions
ne seraient pas public, les témoins entendus resteraient dans l'anonymat et les groupes
consideres comme suspect ne seraient pas entendus. D c plus, il existerait toujours une
conibsion entre <>, <> et << mouvements sectaires
nuisibles>>.
56. Des craintes ont egalement ete exprimees face aux risques d'une telle
stigmatisation de certains groupes religieux qui pourrait encourager l'intolerance
religieuse au sein du public.
57. La Rapporteuse speciale a demande au Gouvernement Belge de lui indiquer
si ces faits étaient exacts, siles groupes visés pouvaient faire appel contre la
“catégorisation” dont il faisait l'objet et s'il y avait eu de telles plaintes. La
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 15
Rapporteuse a également demandé au Gouvernement de lui transmettre l'information
pertinente concernant les méthodes utilisées par l'Observatoire ainsi que les critéres
scion iesqueis un groupement sous étude est considéré comme <>,
<> ou bien <>. Finaiement, cue a
demandé des informations sur ies consequences d'une catégorisation comme
<>.
Réponse datée du 14 septembre 2005
58. Le Gouvernement Beige a répondu que ia iiste pubiiée par ie pariement ne
consiste pas en une “iiste de mouvements sectaires” mais piutot en un tabieau
synoptique reprenant ies appeiiations des mouvements cites iors de ia Commission
pariementaire d'enquete.
59. Le tabieau synoptique contient un avant-propos aux termes desqueis “Le
present tabieau resuite des informations recueiiiies par ia commission, tout au iong de
ses travaux. Les noms qui y sont repris ont été fournis sous ieur seuie responsabihte
soit par des services officieis (gendarmerie, pohce judiciaire, Süreté de i'Etat, Service
générai du renseignement et de ia sécurité, parquets) interrogés en cc sens, soit par des
témoins directs ou indirects, entendus sous serment >>.
60. Cette énumération ne constitue donc ni une prise de position, ni un jugenent
de vaieur de ia part de ia Commission. Ainsi, ie fait pour un mouvement d'y figurer,
même si c'est a i'initiative dune instance officieiie, ne signifie pas que pour ia
Commission, ii soit une secte, et a fortiori qu'ii soit dangereux. Comme ie tabieau ie
montre, ia Commission n'a pas pu proceder a une verification de i'ensembie des
informations recueiiiies ni en controier i'exactitude. Pour ies mêmes raisons, dans ia
mesure oü cc tabieau nest pas exhaustif, ie fait de ne pas y figurer ne constitue pas
davantage une appreciation sur i'innocuite d'un mouvement. L'examen de ces
mouvements doit être approfondi et ie tabieau doit être actuaiise en permanence.
61. Pour cc qui est de i'anaiyse du present tabieau, ie iecteur se referera utiiement
a ia partie du rapport consacrée aux defmitions, ainsi qu'aux eiements de témoignages,
pubiics ou a huis cios.
62. Le Gouvernement a souiigné egaiement que ie Centre d'Information et d'Avis
sur ies Organisations Sectaires Nuisibies (CIAOSN) nest pas un service d'enquete,
mais un centre d'information et d'avis. Ii a pour vocation de fournir au pubiic de
i'information sur ie phenoméne des organisations sectaires nuisibies et d'emettre des
avis et recommandations aux autorités pubiiques en ia matiêre. La documentation du
CIAOSN est exciusivement composée de sources pubhques. Eiie est hbrement
accessibie a tous, personnes comme organisations. Cette documentation se compose
dune bibiiothêque speciaiisee d'environ 4000 ouvrages et revues scientifiques, de
revues de presse, de i'ensembie des rapports d'autorités pubhques disponibies, des
statuts des associations ainsi que de ia jurisprudence disponibie en ia matiêre. Lors de
ia procedure d'avis, ies groupes concernés sont entendus, dans ia mesure oü us
disposent dune representation en Beigique.
63. Si ies reunions du CIAOSN ne sont pas pubiiques, ies avis et
recommandations ie sont, sauf si une objection a ia pubiicite est motivée par i'autorité
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 16
a qui l'avis ou la recommandation est adressée. Le CIAOSN n'entend pas de témoins
mais reçoit des demandes d'information émanant de particuliers ou d'organisations
relativement a la problématique sectaire. Le CIAOSN ne demande jamais, en guise de
préalable aux traitements des demandes, que les demandeurs s'identifient
formellement. Lorsque les demandeurs s'identifient, leur anonymat est préservé afm
de garantir leur droit constitutionnel au respect de leur vie privée.
64. En réponse aux demandes d'information, le CIAOSN s'en tient strictement f t
la diffusion des informations de sources ouvertes en sa possession. Ii invite les
demandeurs a se forger leur propre opinion sur cette base et a lui faire part des
éventuelles erreurs factuelles qui lui auraient échappé. Lorsque des controverses
existent par rapport a un mouvement, cues sont exposées. Lorsque des risques sont
attestés par les sources disponibles, ces risques sont également mentionnés.
65. En réponse a la question de la Rapporteuse en cc qui a trait a un appel
possible contre la <> des groupes visés, le Gouvernement a indiqué
que toute personne physique ou morale ayant subit un dommage du fait des activités
menées par le CIAOSN dans l'accomplissement de ses missions peut en obtenir
reparation devant les tribunaux de l'ordre judiciaire par une action en responsabilité
civile contre l'Etat belge. A cc jour aucune action semblable n'a été intentée.
66. Concernant les méthodes utilisées par l'Observatoire ainsi que les critéres
selon lesquels un groupement sous étude sera considéré comme “secte “,
“mouvements sectaire” ou bien “mouvement sectaire nuisible”, le Gouvernement a
informé la Rapporteuse spéciale que le CIAOSN rassemble toute l'information
publique disponible sur le phénoméne des organisations sectaires nuisibles. Sur cette
base, il rédige des notes de synthése permettant au public de s'orienter dans la
documentation. Ces notes sont toujours référencées.
67. La défmition de l'organisation sectaire nuisible est contenue a l'article 2 de la
loi du 2 juin 1998 portant creation d'un Centre d'Information et d'Avis sur les
organisations sectaire nuisibles et dine Cellule administrative de Coordination de la
lutte contre les organisations sectaires nuisibles
“Art. 2. Pour l'application de la présente loi, on entend par organisation sectaire
nuisible, tout groupement a vocation philosophique ou religieuse, ou s e prétendant tel,
qui, dans son organisation ou sa pratique, se livre a des activités illégales
dommageables, nuit aux individus ou a la société ou porte atteinte a la dignité
humaine.
68. Le caractére nuisible d'un groupement sectaire est examine sur base des
principes contenus dans la Constitution, les lois, décrets et ordonnances et les
conventions internationales de sauvegarde des droits de l'homme ratifiées par la
Belgique.
69. Le Gouvernement a précisé que la mission du CIAOSN nest pas de
catégoriser des mouvements mais est definie a l'article 6 § ter de la même loi, qui
dispose
“Art. 6. § ter. Le Centre est chargé des missions suivantes
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 17
1) étudier le phénoméne des organisations sectaires nuisibles en
(Belgique ainsi que leurs liens internationaux);
2) organiser un Centre de Documentation accessible au public;
3) assurer l'accueil et l'information du public et informer toute personne
qui en fait la demande sur ses droits et obligations et sur les moyens de faire
valoir ses droits;
4) formuler soit d'initiative, soit a la demande de toute autorité publique
des avis et des recommandations sur le phénoméne des organisations
sectaires nuisibles et en particulier sur la politique en matiére de lutte contre
ces organisations.”
70. A cejour, une seule demande davis dune autorité publique a pose
explicitement la question de savoir si un mouvement correspondait a la definition
d'organisation sectaire nuisible. La réponse du CIAOSN flit negative.
71. Quant aux consequences dune catégorisation éventuelle, le Gouvernen nt a
fait remarquer que les avis du CIAOSN ne sont pas contraignants. Aussi, dans
l'hypothêse oü, suite a une demande davis émanant dune autorité publique, le
CIAOSN devait confirmer qu'un mouvement rencontre la definition de l'organisation
sectaire nu ible, l'autorité publique récipiendaire de l'avis ne serait pas liée par l'avis
du CIAOSN et conserverait l'intégralité de son pouvoir d'appréciation.
72. Le CIAOSN ne se prononce pas sur la question de savoir si un mouvement
est une secte ou un mouvement sectaire. Ii invite a cet égard les demandeurs a se
forger leur propre opinion sur base des informations reçues (avec références), de la
consultation des sources dont il dispose en bibliothéque ou en dossiers (consultables).
Observations
73. La Rapporteuse spé ciale remercie le Gouvernement belge pour cette réponse
détaillée. Elle note également qu'en date du 28 juin 2005, la Cour d'Appel de
Bruxelles a condamné l'Etat Belge relativement au rapport de la <> parce que cette derniêre aurait manqué a son devoir de
prudence dans la redaction dudit rapport. La Rapporteuse spéciale souhaiterait être
informée prCcisCment sur les suites qui seront réservées a cette affaire et notamment
sur les résultats du pourvoi en cassation dont cette decision semble avoir fait l'objet.
China
Response from the Government dated 31 December 2004 to a communication
sent on 15 October 2004 with the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary
or arbitrary executions, the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges
and lawyers, the Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression, the Special
Rapporteur on torture, the Special Rapporteur on the right to health and the
Special Rapporteur on violence against women. (See E/CN.4/2005/61/Add.1 at
para. 59 to 65)
74. The Government informed that in view of the fact that Falun Gong has
carried out many illegal activities, it has in accordance with national legislation,
sought to protect the basic human rights and freedoms of the population by banning
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 18
the Falun Gong. The Chinese Government shows great concern and care for the vast
majority of Falun Gong practitioners It recognizes that they have been duped and
that they are victims. Its policy towards them has been one of unity, education and
assistance. As for the extremely small number of Falun Gong diehards who engage in
illegal acts, China's judicial authorities will punish them, in accordance with the law,
not because they practise Falun Gong, but because they engage in illegal criminal
acts.
Response from the Government dated 31 December 2004 to a communication
sent on 19 October 2004 with the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary
or arbitrary executions, the Special Rapporteur on the independence ofjudges
and lawyers and the Special Rapporte ur on torture. (See E/CN.4/2005/61/Add.1
at para. 66)
75. The Government informed that on 2 December 2002 the Intermediate
People's Court of the Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture of Kardze sentenced Tenzin
Deleg Rinpoche to death, deferred for two years, and deprived him of his political
rights for life for the crime of causing explosions. He was also sentenced to 14 years'
imprisonment and 3 years deprivation of political rights for the crime of inciting
separatism. On 23 January 2003, the Sichuan Province Supreme People's Court
upheld the verdict and the sentence. The deferral of the death sentence was due to
expire on 23 January 2005. Article 50 of the Constitution provides that if a person
sentenced to death with a suspension of the execution does not intentionally commit a
crime during the period of suspension, his sentence shall be reduced to life
imprisonment. The Government informed that the trial was carried out in accordance
with fair trial standards. It fhrther informed that he has been treated faily while in
prison and that the allegations of torture are groundless.
Response from the Government dated 8 July 2005 to a communication sent on 3
November 2004 (See E/CN.4/2005/61/Add.1 at para. 67 to 71)
76. The Government informed that the rules and regulations displayed at Mosque
No.2 in Burqun county town have been drawn up in accordance with relevant state
law and fully respect freedom of religion. They are displayedin a prominent position
in the area where religious activities take place, wih a view to ensuring that the
religious congregation is fhlly aware of the rules and regulations set down for places
of worship to ensure that they conduct their religious activities in accordance with the
law, while at the same time ensuring that the geteral public can monitor
implementation of the rules governing places of worship. The allegations in the
communication that the authorities have been interfering excessively in religious
affairs have found no foundation in fact.
77. The Government fhrther informed that following an investigation it had been
ascertained that there had been no blocking of religious websites. A website for the
reporting of offences has not been established.
Communication sent on 26 November 2004 with the Special Rapporteur on
extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and the Special Rapporteur on
torture
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 19
78. The Special Rapporteurs brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Ms. Jiang Zongxiu, aged 34, who was beaten to death during
interrogation on 18 June 2004 at the Public Security Bureau of Tongzi County,
Guizhou province. She was reportedly arrested on 17 June while she and her mother-
in-law were distributing Christian tracts and Bibles in the market place in Tongzi
County, Guizhou province. Both of them were sentenced to 15 days administrative
detention for theft suspected activities of “spreading rumors and disturbing social
order”. Ms. Jiang was found dead during interrogation time at about 2p.m. on 18 June
2004. No steps had been undertaken to investigate the case. The first autopsy result
issued by the local government claimed Ms. Jiang died of heart failure.
Responses from the Government dated 6 April 2005 and 16 June 2005
79. On 17 June 2004, the villagers Jiang Zongxiu and her mother-in-law Tan
Dewei from Baishi village in Ganshui township, Qijiang county, Chongqing city,
were conducting activities in the hawkers' market in Tongzi county, Zunyi city,
Guizhou province, which seriously disrupted commercial operations in the market.
Acting in accordance with the provisions of article 19, paragraph 2, of the Rules on
Penalties for Offences against Law and Order and pursuant to the law, the public
security authorities held Tan and Jiang in public order detention for 15 days.
80. On 18 June at 2 p.m. Jiang suddenly fell ill while in the administrative
detention facility of the Tongzi county public security bureau and was promptly
transferred to a nearby hospital where efforts to save her life failed and she died. On
27 June, the Tongzi county public security bureau, together with members of Jiang
Zongxiu's family, entrusted the Forensic Science Centre of Zunyi Medical School in
Guizhou province to cany out a forensic enquiry into the causes of Jiang's death, to
be conducted in the presence of members of the deceased's family. The conclusions
of the forensic enquiry ruled out the possibility of mechanical asphyxia, mechanically
induced death or poisoning, and clearly established that the deceased suffered sudden
death due to lipocardiac causes (because d' the excessive build-up of fat in her heart, a
condition which at any time can cause sudden death).
81. Following careful investigation it was verified that, at all times throughout
the period of Jiang's administrative detention, the public security authorities had acted
in strict compliance with the law, had duly respected all Jiang's lawfhl rights, and had
never applied any form of torture or other inhuman treatment against her. When Jiang
fell ill, she received prompt attention to save her life. The allegations that Jiang was
beaten to death in the public security bureau during her interrogation are not
consistent with the facts.
82. The Chinese Constitution and Chinese law clearly establish that citizens shall
enjoy the freedom of religious belief Article 36 of the Chinese Constitution stipulates
that citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy the freedom of religious belief
The measures taken by Chinese judicial authorities against Jiang were consistent with
the law and were applied because the latter had conducted activities which seriously
disrupted commercial operations in the market and had nothing to do with any issue
of freedom of religious belief
Communication sent on 29 November 2004
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 20
83. The Special Rapporteur brought the following reports to the attention of the
Government:
Zeng Guangbo, 36 years old, a Chinese house church leader from Nanyang
city, Henan province was arrested on 1 March 2004 for the second time that
year while trying to pass the Inner-Mongolia border to Russia for a house
church ministry there. According to an eyewitness, Zeng was taken away by
Nanyang Public Security Bureau after he was detained at the border with
Russia.
Pastor Cal Zhuohua, 32 years old, a house church leader ministering at six
house churches in Beijing wa allegedly arrested by three officers believed
to be from the Department of State Security on 11 September 2004 after
attending a Bible study session that morning. On 27 September Cai's wife,
Xiao Yunfei, and her brother, Xiao Gaowen, and sister-in-law, Hu Jinyun,
were also arrested in Hengshan county, Hunan province. All four arrested
were reportedly being held at Qinghe Detention Center, Haidian District,
Beijing.
On 6 August 2004, more than 100 house church leaders were allegedly
arrested in Tongxu Cwnty, Kaifeng City, Henan Province. The group was
beginning a two week retreat when more than 200 military police, Public
Security Bureau and other officers surrounded the venue. No arrest warrants
or official identification papers were shown during the arrest. Among those
arrested were the leaders Zhang Wanshun of Sanmenxia City, Mr. Zhang
Tianyun of Nanyang City and Mr. Yu Guoying of Tongxu County. The
raided meeting of the 100 house church leaders was held at the home of Ms.
Xiang Zi, the wife of one of the retreat organizers. She was arrested along
with their three children, aged between eight and eleven years. The retreat
was sponsored by the non-denominational house church network, Henan
House Church.
On 6 August 2004, Liu Fenggang, Dr. Xu Yonghai anT Zhang Shengqi were
reportedly sentenced to terms of imprisonment of three years, two years and
one year respectively by the Intermediate People's Court of Hangzhou City
in Zhejiang Province. The three were convicted under Article 111 of the
Chinese Crimiial Law. The crime they were to have committed was
“illegally soliciting and providing national intelligence to overseas
organizations”. They were alleged to have committed the crime by
providing public court information about the trial of a house church
Christian, Ms Li Baozhi, to an overseas magazine.
On 6 August 2004, eight underground Roman Catholic priests and two
underground Roman Catholic seminarians were arrested in Sujiazhuang
Village in Quyang County, Hebei Province, during a religious retreat. Nine
of the ten arrested belonged to the Baoding Diocese. Amongst those
detained were Huo Junlong, the administrator of the Baoding Diocese in
Hebei, Zhang Zhenquian of Baoding and Huang of Sujiazhuang.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 21
On 12 July 2004, over a hundred leaders were reportedly arrested at a
retreat in Xinjiang Autonomous Region. At the time of the communication,
five of those arrested, namely Mr. Zhao Xinlan, 50, Ms. Li Cuiling, 44, Mr.
Wang Chaoyi, 39, Mr. Yang Tian Lu, 39, and Ms. Gao Rui'er, 28, were still
being detained in A Ke Su prefecture near the provincial capital of Urumqi.
The retreat in Xinjiang was organised by the Anhui-based house church
network, Ying Shang Church. One of the leaders of the group, businessman
Luo Bing Yin, had been transferred from the local detention centre to Funan
Prison in Anhui Province. It was reported that no court hearing had taken
place and that charges against him were not known.
84. Response from the Government dated 16 June 2005
Zeng Guangbo
On 6 August 2004, , without obtaining the relevant permit, Zeng and some 70
other persons held an unlawfhl gathering in Muxianzhang village, Lizhuang
township, Tongxu county, Henan province, which seriously disrupted public
order in that area. That same day, the Henan province public security
authorities, acting in accordance with the Rules on Administrative Penalties
of the People's Republic of China imposed administrative penalties and
delivered an educational reprimand against the persons involved. None of
these persons was taken into custody, however.
Cal Zhuohua and others
Since 2003, Cai, together with his associates Xiao Yunfei and the three other
persons, without obtaining industrial, commercial or tax registration, have
unlawfhlly printed and sold some 1 million publications, swiftly amassing
immense profits totaling some 500,000 yuan and, in view of the large
quantity of publications, have breached article 225 of the Chinese Criminal
Code, on unlawfhl business operations. On 27 September 2004, the Beijing
city public security authoritës, acting in accordance with the Chinese
Criminal Code and the Chinese Code of Criminal Procedure, took Cai and
the four other persons into criminal custody; on 20 October 2004, following
approval by the procurator's office, they were arrested. Procedural
investigations are currently being conducted.
Liu Fenggang, Xu Yonghai, Zhang Shengqi and others
In early October 2001, Liu and Xu conspired together and, with fhnds
provided by Xu, Liu moved to Anshan city in Liaoning province for the
purpose of gathering State intelligence. After this, Liu set out the intelligence
which he had gathered in documentary form and with Xu's assistance,
transmitted it abroad. On 25 July 2003, Liu received instructions from
persons outside the country that he was to proceed to Dongtou county in
Wenzhou city, Zhejiang province, and to Xiaoshan district, Xihu district and
other districts of Hangzhou city to gather State intelligence. After this, Liu
set out the intelligence which he had gathered in documentary form and on S
August of that same year instructed Zhang to transmit the materials by email
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 22
to persons outside the country. On 17 August 2003, in Dachengzi township,
in the Miyun district of Beijing, he was taken in and questioned by the police
for participating in an unlawful activity. On that same day, Liu gathered
together relevant information about the event and set it out in documentary
form and, with Zhang's help, transmitted it by email to persons outside the
country. Following appraisal by the State secrets office, the materials referred
to above were deemed to be State intelligence.
The Hangzhou city people's intermediate court determined that the conduct
of the three persons in question constituted the offence of espionage for a
foreign power and the divulging of State intelligence and, on 6 August 2004,
passed verdict at first instance, sentencing Liu to three years' fixed term
imprisonment and stripping him of his political rights for three years;
sentencing Xu to two years' fixed term imprisonment and stripping him of
his political rights for two years; and sentencing Zhang to one years' fixed
term imprisonment and stripping him of his political rights for one year.
After judgement was passed, Liu and Xu both filed appeals. Zhang accepted
the judgement and did not file an appeal. He was released on 7 February
2005 on completion of his sentence.
After hearing the case at second instance, the Zhejiang high court found that
the original judgement had been based on clear facts, the legal provisions
applied were correct, the sentence was commensurate with the offence and
the trial proceedings had been in accordance with due process and, on 13
September 2004, the court ruled that the appeal brought by Liu and Xu
should be dismissed and that the original judgement should stand.
Huo Junlong, Zhang Zhenqian and others
On 6 August 2004, Huo held a training session for underground priests in
Quyang county and, after he and the others had been duly admonished by
officials of the religious affairs bureau, they were orderedto disperse
voluntarily. The public security authorities did not intervene in this matter,
nor were any restrictive measures taken against him.
Luo Bin gym and others
Since 2003, without obtaining industrial, commercial or tax registration, Luo
has unlawfhlly printed some 20,000 copies of publications, reproduced many
thousands of leaflets and marketed these among the general public, swiftly
amassing immense profits. In view of the large quantities involved, he
breached the provisions of article 225 of the Chinese Criminal Code, on
unlawfhl business operations. On 2 September 2004, the Fuyang city public
security authorities, acting in accordance with the Chinese Criminal Code
and the Chinese Code of Criminal Procedure, took Luo into criminal
detention; on 1 October, following approval by the procurator's office, Luo
was arrested; on 29 November the case was referred to the prosecution
service for the institution of legal proceedings. According to our
understanding, the Xinjiang public security authoritës have not taken any
restrictive measures against Zhao Xinliang and the five other persons.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 23
The action taken by the public security authorities in adopting mandatory
measures against the above -mentioned persons was fully consistent with their
status as offenders against Chinese law and had nothing to do with issues
relating to the freedom of expression or opinion or the freedom of religious
belief Throughout the entire course of the legal proceedings referred to
above, the Chinese judicial authorities acted in strict compliance with the
legal stipulations of the Chinese Criminal Code, the Chinese Code of
Criminal Procedure, Regulations on Penalties for Offences against the
Administration of Law and Order and other instruments.
Urgent Appeal sent on 16 December 2004 with the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right
to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special Rapporteur of the Commission
on Human Rights on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest
attainable standard of physical and mental health
85. The Special Rapporteurs were informed that Zhang Rongliang, an
underground church leader, was detained by police on 1 December 2004 in Xuzhai
village, where he lived, in Zhengzhou city, Henan Province. It was alleged that he was
at risk of being tortured. Moreover, since he was diabetic, concern was expressed that
he would not have access to the medication or treatment he needed. It was reported
that his wife and child were in hiding.
86. According to witnesses, police searched every household in the above
mentioned village and confiscated Christian DVDs, other materials and photos
revealing Zhang's connections with foreigners.
87. Reports indicated that Zhang Rongliang was the leader of the China for
Christ Church and of the Protestant Fangcheng Mother Church. He was the co-author
of House Churches of China — Confession of Faith and Declaration. Zhang Rongliang
had already been imprisoned five times for his beliefs, for a total of 12 years, during
which time he was allegedly tortured.
Response from the Government dated 12 May 2005
88. At the time this report was finalized, the Special Rapporteur was not in a
position to reflect the content of the reply from the Government of China as she had
not received the translation of its content from the relevant services.
Urgent appeal sent on 27 April 2005 with the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right
to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special Rapporteur on torture
89. The Special Rapporteur were informed that, on 31 March 2005, Ms. Liu
Yawei aged 56, was arrested by the police when she was seen distributing Falun
Gong Video-CDs in Beijing. She was held at the Xuanwu District Detention Centre.
After she was detained, police officers searched her home for other Falun Gong
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 24
materials. She was denied visits by her family and it was not known whether she had
been charged with any offence.
90. In view of her alleged detention incommunicado, concern was expressed that
she could have been at risk of torture or other forms of ill-treatment.
Response from the Government dated 22 July 2005
91. On 31 March 2005, the Beijing public security authorities, while conducting
patrol duties, arrested Ms. Liu in the process of conducting unlawfhl activities of the
Falun Gong sect. The public security authorities took Liu into custody for the
purposes of investigation, conducted a search of her residence and notified her family
in accordance with due process. On 30 April, the labour re-education committee of the
Beijing city government, acting in accordance with the law, ordered Liu Yawen to
serve a term of two years' re-education through labour.
92. The decision to order Liu Yawen to serve a two-year term of labour re-
education was taken because sit had conducted activities which violated Chinese law,
and throughout the handling of this case the Chinese law enforcement authorities
acted in strict compliance with the law and carried out theft law enforcement duties in
a civil manner.
Communication sent on 9 June 2005
93. The Special Rapporteur sent this communication to underline the tenth
anniversary of the disappearance of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, 16 years.
94. Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, then aged 6, disappeared together with his parents
from Lhari, theft home village in Tibet on 17 May 1995, three days after having been
recognized as the eleventh reincarnation of the Panchen Lama by the Dalai Lama.
Theft whereabouts were not known.
95. The Special Rapporteur wished to express her concern about the grave
interference with the freedom of belief of the Tibetan Buddhists who have the right to
determine their clergy in accordance with their own rites and who have been deprived
of their religious leader.
Response from Government dated 7 September 2005
96. The Government informed that Gedhun Choekyi Nyima is not the “Panchen
Lama” but merely an ordinary Tibetan child. At the current time, Nyima is in good
health and, just like other children, is leading a normal, happy life and receiving a
good cultural education. According to our understanding, he is already at secondary
school and his school results are good. He and his family are not willing to let this
interfere with theft normal routine.
97. China respects and upholds citizens' freedom of religious belief and provides
legal guarantees of such freedom. Article 36 of the Chinese Constitution stipulates
that citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy the freedom of religious belief
In addition to the Constitution, the Chinese Criminal Code, the Ethnic Minorities
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 25
(Regional Autonomy) Act, the Compulsory Education Act, the Labour Code and other
laws all contain legal provisions upholding citizens' freedom of religious belief and
prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of a person's religious beliefs or lack of
religious beliefs. The (Tibetan Buddhist ed.) religious community is protected under
the Constitution and the law and enjoys fhll freedom to conduct normal religious
activities. At the current time, there are some 120,000 lamas and nuns, 1,700 living
Buddhas and 3,000 lamaseries in the Tibetan Buddhist community in China.
98. The notion of the reincarnation of the living Buddha is a special tradition of
Tibetan Buddhism, and over the last few hundred years a fairly comprehensive
method and procedure have been develope d for the reincarnation of the living Buddha:
where the issue of the reincarnation of the major living Buddhas is concerned the
central Government fhlly respects the traditional Tibetan Buddhist ritual. In
accordance with religious ritual and historical precept, following the drawing of lots
from a golden urn, due endorsement by the Chinese central Government, the fhlly
satisfactory performance of the enthronement ritual and the so-called “sitting-on-the-
bed” ceremony, the eleventh Panchen Lama has been re erentially accepted by the
wide community of Tibetan Buddhist lamas and by the Buddhist congregation.
Communication sent on 13 September 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on
violence against women, its causes and consequences
99. The Special Rapporteurs brought the two following cases to the attention of the
Government:
On 21 May 2002, police officers from the Zhonggong police station arrested
Ms. Ren Shujie, 42, living in the Tiexi District, Shengyang City, Liaoning
Province, for practicing Falun Gong. She was later sentenced to three years
of forced labour and was detained at the Longshan Labour Camp. No charges
were brought against her and she was provided no hearing before a court of
law. She went on hunger strike for 64 days, during which time she was
subjected to torture and harsh labour for fifteen hours daily. After bringing an
end to her hunger strike she continued to be tortured by the prison guards,
including Tang Yubao, who subjected her to electric shocks. On 22 March
2004, she was transferred to Masanjia Labour Camp where she was forced to
sleep on cement floors for three months. She was released on 24 December
2004, due to her extremely weak conditions, weighing less than 40 kg,
whereas at the time of her arrest she weighed 80 kg. The several complaints
that Ren Shujie made to the prison guards, who were the only authorities she
had access to, provided no response or amelioration to her conditions of
detention.
On 21 January 2000, Ms. Liu Yunxiang, aged 32, living in Yangjiazhuang
village in Junbukou Township was arrested by police officers belonging to
the Junbukou Township of Weifang City in Shandong province, for practicing
Falun Gong. No charges were brought against her and she was provided no
hearing before a court of law. She was subjected to severe beatings, and the
men who were also arrested with her were forced to beat her and the other
arrested women on their hips. During her detention, she was forced to curse
the founder of Falun Gong, drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes, which is
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 26
against Falun Gong principles. As a result of this treatment, Ms. Liu
Yunxiang miscarried. She was released on 20 January 2000 after having paid
for her release. In the Summer of 2001, she was arrested again for practicing
Falun Gong and was once again subjected to torture including electric
shocks, as a result of which she miscarried a second time. After twenty days
of torture, she was sent to a detention centre for another month, after which
she was released.
Response from Government dated 12 December 2005
100. At the time this report was fmalized, this reply was still in the process of
being translated.
Communication sent on 14 October 2005
101. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Son am, a monk from the Potala Palace in Lhasa, capital of the Tibet
Autonomous Region, who was arrested on or around 21 August 2005 at the rear-
vehicle entrance of the Potala Palace, which became the winter home of the Dalai
Lama in 1648. This entrance normally is used by tourist groups and not by Tibetan
visitors.
102. According to witnesses, Sonam was lured to the rear entrance by a message
saying that someone was waiting for him. When he arrived there, he was quietly taken
away in an unmarked vehicle. No one had seen Sonam since the incident. It was
assumed that security forces carried out the arrest in the mn-up to the festivities of 1
September 2005, when China celebrated the 40th anniversary of the founding of the
Tibet Autonomous Region.
Communication sent on 19 October 2005
103. The Special Rapporteur was informed that, in July 2005; the Chinese
authorities had expelled some 40 Buddhist nuns (out of a total number of 50) from
Gyarak monastery. They had been forced to participate in a state led re-education
campaign, part of which is to sign written statements condemning the Dalai Lama,
Tibet's exiled religious leader. In order to register for this, they were asked to have
photos taken, which most of them refhsed. Similar pressure has been exerted on nuns
and monks in other monasteries, such as Tsuklakhang Temple.
104. Furthermore reports indicated that authorities were issuing certificates to new
monks, who thereby were bypassing the lengthy process of preparing for monastic
life. They were equipped with mobile phones and required to inform officials, if any
kind of activity or prayer was performed with a reference to the Dalai Lama. There
were cases when Chinese officials raided monasteries even before the conclusion of
prayers if there had been some reference to Dalai Lama.
Communication sent on 23 Novem ber 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on
torture
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 27
105. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government
additional information received on the situation of Pastor Cal Zhuohua, a house
church leader in Beijing, who, on 8 November 2005, was sentenced to three years
imprisonment on charges relating to illegal business practices. The sentence was
handed down by the People's Court of Haidian District, Beijing. According to the
information received, the charges were made following the discwery of 200,000
copies of the bible and other Christian literature in his possession. Pastor Cai
Zhuohua's wife, Xiao Yunfei, brother in law, Xiao Gaowen, and sister in law, Hu
Jinyun, were also found guilty at the same proceedings. On 11 September 2004,
Pastor Cai Zhuohua was arrested by three plain-clothed State Security officers. There
were concerns that Pastor Cai Zhuohua was subjected to electric shocks whilst he was
in we-trial detention.
106. Pastor Cai Zhuohua was the subject of a previous letter sent by the Special
Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief on 29 November 2004.
Observations
107. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the Government's responses. She
would like to take this opportunity to remind the Government of the concluding
observations adopted by the Committee on the Rights of the Child on 24 November
2005 fhrther to the second periodic report submitted by China (CRC/C/CHIN/CO/2).
In ragraph 44, the Committee stated that, “ [ w]hile noting the adoption of the
Regional Ethnic Autonomy Act in 2001, which guarantees freedom of religion for
ethnic minorities in mainland China, [ it] is concerned about reports that children, in
particular Tibetan Buddhist, Uighur and Hui children, have been restricted in studying
and practising theft religion, and in some cases have been detained for participating in
religious activities. It is also concerned at reports that children of families practising
theft religion, notably the Falun Gong, are subject to harassment, threats and other
negative actions, including re-education through labour. The Committee notes the
information provided about the Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, but remains concerned that it
has not yet been possible to have this information confirmed by an independent
expert.” In relation to this observation the Committee in paragraph 45 recommends
that “the State party take all necessary measures to ensure the fhll implementation of
the Regional Ethnic Autonomy Act. In particular, the Committee recommends that
the State party:
(a) Enact legislation explicitly guaranteeing freedom of religion for those
under 18 that is not tied to a limited number of recognized faiths, and which
respects the rights and duties of parents to give guidance to theft children in
the exercise of theft rights in this rega rd in a manner consistent with the
evolving capacities of the child;
(b)Repeal any ban instituted by local authorities on children of any age from
participating in Tibetan religious festivals or receiving religious education;
(c)Repeal any ban instituted by local authorities on children of any age from
attending mosques or receiving religious education throughout the
mainland;
(d) Take all necessary measures to ensure that children may choose whether
to participate in classes on religion or atheism;
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 29
Following publication several threats were made against the cartoonists, some of
which are still under investigation. The cartoons prompted several private associations
to file a complaint under the sections 140 and 266b of the Danish Criminal Code with
the police. According to section 140 of the Criminal Code, any person, who, in public,
ridicules or insults the dogmas of worship of any lawfully existing religious
community in Denmark shall be liable to imprisonment for any term not exceeding
four months, or, in mitigating circumstances, to a fine. Section 266b of the Criminal
Code criminalizes the dissemination of statements or other information by which a
group of people are threatened, insulted or degraded in account of e.g. their religion.
114. The complaint was taken up by the Regional Public Prosecutor in Vilborg
who decided that cartoons fall within the scope of sections 266b and 140. However,
on 6 January 2006 the Prosecutor decided to discontinue the investigation for lack of a
reasonable suspicion that a criminal offence indictable by the state has been
committed. The Prosecutor stated that when assessing what constitutes an offence the
freedom of speech must also be taken into consideration. The freedom of speech must
be exercised with the necessary respect for other human rights, including the right to
protection against discrimination, insult and degradation. In finding that there was no
reasonable suspicion that a criminal offence indictable by the state had been
committed, the Prosecutor attached importance to the fact that the article in question
concerns a matter of public interest, which means that there is an extended access to
make statements without tirse statements constituting a criminal offence.
Furthermore according to Danish case law journalists have extended editorial freedom
when it comes to subjects of public interest. These reasons led to the conclusion that
in this case no criminal offence under section 140 or 266b of the Criminal Code had
been committed. A complaint against the Prosecutor's decision can be lodged with the
office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
115. In general the Danish Government strongly focuses on ensuring an inclusive,
multicultural society characterized by mutual respect and shared democratic values. In
his New Year's address of 2006 the Danish Prime Minister stressed the important and
absolute nature of the freedom of speech and that it was necessary to exercise that
freedom in a civilized respectfhl manner so as not to cause fragmentation within
Danish society. Other members of cabinet have put forward similar views.
Furthermore the Danish Government is continuing its dialogue with representatives of
minorities and leaders of religious communities in order to achieve mutual respect and
understanding as well as stronger community participation, active citizenship,
freedom and equality, better opportunities for the young and prevention of
radicalization.
Observations
116. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the Government's response and
encourages the Government to continue its efforts to increase mutual understanding
and religious tolerance, in accordance with article 10 of Resolution 2005/40 of the
Commission on Human Rights. She would like to reiterate the words from her joint
press statement with the Special Rapporteur for contemporary forms of racism, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and the Special Rapporteur for the
promotion and protction of the right to freedom of opinion and expression on 8
February 2006. In this statement the Special Rapporteurs expressed their concern at
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 30
the grave offence caused by the cartoons and at the violent response the cartoons had
provoked and they made a special call for tolerance and dialogue. The Special
Rapporteurs acknowledged that while both freedom of religion and freedom of
expression should be equally respected, the exercise of the right to freedom of
expression carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It requires good
judgment, tolerance and a sense of responsibility. Furthermore the Special
Rapporteurs feel that peacefhl expression of opinions and ideas, either orally, through
the press or other media, should always be tolerated. The press must enjoy large
editorial freedom to promote a free flow of news and information, within and across
national borders, thus providing an arena for debate and dialogue. Nevertheless, the
use of stereotypes and labeling that insult deep-rooted religious feelings do not
contribute to the creation of an environment conducive to constructive and peaceful
dialogue among different communities.
Egypt
Communication sent on 26 May 2005
117. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government
additional reports related to the requirement to mention one's belief on identity cards
and other documents. It had been alleged that the forms currently contain three
religious affiliations to choose from: Islam, Christianity and Judaism and that it was
impossible for members of other religious groups or non-believers to indicate theft
religion or leave the space blank. In its reply dated June 2004 the Government of
Egypt had indicated that the concerned persons had committed a criminal act by
forging theft identity cards. However, several persons of different fates alleged that
they were forced to forge the identity card forms, because otherwise they would have
to lie about their religious affiliation in order to obtain a card. There were further
reports that some persons had been refhsed marriage on the basis of the religion
indicated on their identity cards. This issue has also been the subject of an earlier
communication, sent on 15 April 2004.
Communication sent on 12 July2005
118. The Special Rapporteur has brought the following situation to the attention of
the Government:
In 1977, Manqateen's Coptic community in El-Minya, Upper Egypt, applied
to the authorities for a permit to build a church to cany the name of Anba
Antonious. At the time of the communication, no approval had been issued.
Egyptian legislation requires a prior approval by the State Security Agency
for building or operating a Christian establishment, contrary to Islamic
establishments or mosques which can be opened anywhere and operate
fr ly.
When, in 1978, the Copts of Manqateen started building the church despite
not having been authorised, the construction site was attacked on several
occasions by groups of Muslims. Subsequently police ordered to halt
construction. In 1999, following a request by the villages' Copts, Ministry of
Interior officials conducted an inspection. In theft conclusions adopted in
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 31
2003, the Secretary of State for the Interior referred to security reasons and
prohibited the completion and resumption of the use of the church.
Tensions between the religious communities persisted. When, on 3 December
2004 the Coptic community obtained the permission to use a hall for their
religious ceremonies from the Social N'linistry, angry villagers attacked it and
Coptic shops, ±armacies, houses and cars.
Communication sent on 1 November 2005
119. The Special Rapporteur was informed that, since May 2005, Ms. Lavinia
Mihaela Zah, of Romanian origin, was denied entry to the Egyptian territory
although she had received citizenship on 3 November 2003 following her marriage
with an Egyptian citizen (marriage in Romania on 12 August 2000, Egyptian marriage
certificate on 6 February 2001). When she returned to Egypt on 11 May 2005 after
having given birth in Romania, she and her baby were held at the airport of Cairo on
the orders of the State Security Police for 27 hours before being put on a plane to
Romania without having had access to her husband. According to information
received, the reason behind entry denial could be related to the position of her
husband as fhll time minister with the Maadi Community Church, registered under the
Protestant Synod.
Observations
120. The Special Rapporteur is concerned that she has not received a reply from the
Government concerning the above mentioned allegations. The Special Rapporteur
urges the Government to ensure compliance with paragraph 4(c) of Resolution
2005/40 of the Commission on Human Rights,which provides that States will review,
whenever relevant, existing registration practices in order to ensure the right of all
persons to manifest theft religion or belief She would also like to draw attention to
paragraph 10 of the same Resolution, in which the Commission on Human Rights
emphasized the importance of a continued and strengthened dialogue among and
within religions or beliefs, encompassed by the dialogue among civilizations, to
promote greater tolerance, respect and mutual understanding.
121. The Special Rapporteur would also like to take this opportunity to remind that
she has still not received a reply from the Government fhrther to her letter asking for
an invitation to visit Egypt to assess the situation of freedom of religion or belief
Eritrea
Urgent appeal sent on 13 April 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on torture
122. The Special Rapporteurs were informed that, on 13 March 2005, Pastor
Kid ane Weldu, of the Mulu Wengel (“Full Gospel”) Evangelical Church was
arrested in Asmara, and continued to be held incommunicado in the Td Police Station.
It was believed that he was arrested solely because of his religious beliefs. In view of
his alleged detention incommunicado, concern was expressed that he might have been
at risk of torture or other forms of ill-treatment, particularly in order to abandon his
faith.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 32
123. The Special Rapporteurs had also received information concerning 16
members of the Kale Hiwot (“Word of Life”) Evangelical Church in a small town
near Asmara. According to the allegations, they were arrested on the same day for
watching a Christian video in a church member's home. Although they were neither
charged nor brought to court, two elderly women among them were freed after
admitting to some offence and paying a fme equivalent to US$12. None of the
detainees have been brought before a court within 48 hours, as required by law, nor
charged with any offence. Several senior members of the same church had reportedly
been detained without charge or trial since April 2004.
124. Previous communications on similar cases had been sent to the Government
(e.g. E/CN.4/2005/62/Add. 1, paras. 661, 662, 663 and 664 and
E/CN.4/2005/61/Add.1, paras 94 and 96).
Urgent appeal sent on 3 June 2005 with the Working Group on Arbitrary
detention and the Special Rapporteur on Torture
125. The Special Rapporteurs and the Working Group brought to the attention of
the Government the situation of Mr. Demoze Afewerki, aged 67, head of the
inspection department of the Housing and Commerce Bank of Eritrea and chair of the
Gideons (Bible) International branch in Eritrea who was believed to have been
arrested at the same time as Pastor Kidane Weldu, on behalf of which a
communication was sent on 13 April 2005, by the Special Rapporteur on freedom of
religion or belief and the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture. According to
the allegations received, Mr. Afewerki was also being held in incommunicado
detention and without charge in the special security section (Wenjel Mirmera) of the
2 nd police station in Asmara.
126. Pastor Kidane Weldu was one of the 16 fhll-time pastors of various
evangelical churches detained without charge in military, security and police prisons
in Eritrea on account of their religious beliefs. Concern was expressed that they were
prisoners of conscience, detained solely for the peacefhl exercise of the right to
freedom of religion.
127. It was fhrther alleged that up to 900 members of these banned churches,
worshipping clandestinely, were also held in detention. Amongst this group, it was
believed that there were approximately 150 women, including well-known
evangelical singer Helen Berhane.
128. Concernwas heightened by reports that those detained were being held in
harsh conditions, in shipping containers, secret cells or underground prisons, and that
some might be subjected to torture in order to extract signed renunciations of theft
faith. They were reportedly detained in a number of military prisons (with over 230 in
Sawa military conscription and training centres, near the Sudanese border), Mai
Serwa army camp near Asmara, and police and security prisons in Asmara, Keren
town in the north and the Red Sea port of Assab.
Urgent appeal sent on 3 June 2005 with the Working Group on Arbitrary
detention and the Special Rapporteur on Torture
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 33
129. The Special Rapporteurs and the Working Group were informed that, on 28
May 2005, the security forces arrested a wedding party of over 200, including the
bride, whose name was not known and the groom, Binyam Gezay, in Asmara. The
only other name available was that of a gospel singer, Essey Stefanos. All those
arrested were members of the banned Meseret Christos churchin Eritrea. They were
held in a police station in the Expo district of Asmara. Several detainees were released
without charge on 29 May, but the majority remained in custody. According to
Eritrean law they should have been brought before a court within 48 hours of arrest,
but this had not been done.
130. Fear was expressed that the detainees were at risk of being tortured in an
attempt to force them to renounce theft faith.
Communication sent on 14 October 2005 with the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention
131. The Special Rapporteur and the Working Group brought to the attention of the
Government the situation of: Ukbay(m), Yergalem Afewerki(f)), Abraham (m), Berhane
(m), Eden(f), EIsa(f), Freweyni(f), Gebremichael(m), Hamelmal (f), Pastor Simon (m),
Tekiemariam (m), Sirak Gebremichael(m), all members of the Kale Hiwot (Baptist)
Church and Akberet Nigussie (f), Rema Church office administrator, who along with over
200 members of evangelical churches had been arrested on 30 September and 3 October 2005
at the Kale Hiwot Church's Development Project, and were detained following a crackdown
by the authorities in the capital, Asmara, which also resulted in the closing of the Church
Project's office. Office equipment and documents were seized from the premises of both
churches, which had been under continuous surveillance by the security forces for some days.
132. It was fhrther reported that none of them had been charged with any offence and that
they had not been brou&ht before a court within 48 hours, as required bylaw. They were held
without charge at the 5 Police Station in Asmara. They were believed to be at risk of torture.
Response from Government dated 8 December 2005
133. The Government responded that the persons whose names were listed in the
communication were not detained because of their religious beliefs but because they
attempted to leave the country to evade participation in the mandatory National Service
Program, endangered National Security in the name of religion and engaged in other crimes
against tir State. The competent authorities are determined to take similar actions against
such criminal activities in the fhture.
Observations
134. The Special Rapporteur regrets that she has not received any response from the
Government with regard to the abovementioned cases. She is particularly concerned about the
amount of allegations of arbitrary arrest and detention for religious reasons. She would like to
draw attention to article 4 (f) of Resolution 2005/40 of the Commission on Human Rights,
which provides that States shall ensure that “no one within theft jurisdiction is deprived of the
right to liberty or security of person because of religion or belief and that no one is subjected
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 34
to torture or arbitrary arrest or detention on that account and to bring to justice all perpetrators
of violence of these rights.”
135. Moreover, she reminds the Government that she is still awaiting a reply to her
request to visit the country.
Greece
Communication sent on 9 June 2005
136. The Special Rapporteur brought the following cases to the attention of the
Government:
On 10 May 2005, MakedonasAlexandridis, a Jehovah's Witness, was
sentenced by the Military Court of Joannini to six months of imprisonment
for insubordination and disobedience. It was reported that Mr. Alexandridis
has performed military service in Russia prior to moving to Greece and
becoming a conscientious objector. He applied for conscientious objector
status, but the Greek Law 2510/1997 excludes anyone who has previously
served in any armed forces from the right to conscientious objection.
On 17 May 2005, Andreas Anastasiou, a Jehovah's Witness, was
reportedly sentenced by the Military Court in Larissa to six months of
imprisonment, for refusing reserve duty. He had already sewed his military
service in the Greek army prior to becoming a Jehovah's Witness.
On 18 May 2005, Nikos Baltoukas, aged 37, was sentenced by the Military
Court of Xanthi to 15 months of imprisonment on charges of
insubordination for refhsing to perform one week of military reserve duty.
Mr. Baltoukas had performed his military service in 1990-91. When he was
called up for reserve duty on 31 October 2004, he refhsed to report, based
on reasons of conscience.
On 23 May 2005, conscientious objector GeorgiosKoutsomanolakis was
sentenced by the Military Court of Athens to a suspended 24-month prison
term on charges of insubordination. Reports indicate that Mr.
Koutsomanolakis was already charged with insubordination in 1979, at a
time when there was no alternative service in Greece, because as a
Jehovah's Witness he refused to serve military service on religious grounds.
He fled Greece and was granted political asylum in Germany, where he has
been living since then. He was reportedly arrested on 12 May 2005 on the
Greek island of Rhodes while visiting his parents and he was transferred to
Korydallos prison on 16 May 2005 where he remained imprisoned until his
trial.
Response from Government dated 12 August 2005
137. The following information was provided by the Government regarding the
handling of these cases by the competent military courts according the legislation in
force:
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 35
Alexandridis Makedonas, 38 years old, was sentenced on 10 May 2005
by the 5-member Military Court of Jonnina (Judgement no 68/2005), with
four to one (4 1) votes, to six( months in prison and to the legal cost (73
Euro), for “Disobedience in times of peace”, because, when he was drafted
into the Armed Forces (Health Operation Centre-Health Training Centre)
on 31 January 2005, he refhsed to receive clothing and equipment and
attend the military training. Instead, he stated that he wished, as a
Jehovah's Witness, to serve in “a social political alternative service”.
The execution of this sentence was suspended for three years and, in the
event of lifting or revocation of the suspension, the commutation of the
sentence to a fme of 4.40 Euro for each day of imprisonment was ordered.
The proceedings revealed that Mr. Alexandridis has carried out 24 months
of military service in the Armed Forces of the former Soviet Union and
was aware that, in Greece, he was obliged to carry out three-months of
military service (presidential decree 292/03). He did not meet the legal
requirements because he did not act within the relevant time limit (from
the date of notice until enlistment) although he had been examined twice in
the past by the competent exemption committee and he had received two
annual deferrals (27 March 2002 and 19 August 2003). An appeal was
lodged against the above judgement. A cassation appeal may be lodged
against the judgement of the military court of appeal before the Supreme
Court
AndreasAnastasiou, 30 years old, was sentenced on 17 May 2005 by
the 5-member Court Martial of Larissa (Judgement no 89/2005), with
three to two (3-2) votes, to a total of six (6) months in prison and to the
legal costs (E73), for “Disobedience in times of peace”, and “draft
evasion in times of peace”, because, on 28 March 2005, he refused to
receive clothing and equipment and attend the military training of his
unit (32TYP), invoking his religious beliefs as a Jehovah's Witness and,
on 13 September 2003, he did not report to the military camp of 30
MKD to carry out a reserve obligation of nine (9) days, although he was
called by special personal notice, again invoking his religious beliefs as
a Jehovah's Witness. Therefore, he became a draft evader from 14
September to 10 January 2005. This sentence was commuted by the
court to a fine of 4.40 Euros for each day of imprisonment and its
execution was suspended for three years. The proceedings revealed that
Mr. Anastasiou has carried out armed military service in the Greek
Armed Forces in the past. An appeal was lodged against the above
judgment. A cassation appeal may be lodged against the above
judgment of the military court of appeal before the Supreme Court.
NikosBaltoukas, 37 years old, was sentenced on 18 May 2005 by the
5-member Court Martial of Xanthi (Judgment No 271/2005) to fifteen
months in prison for “Disobedience in times of peace” because he did
not enlist, although he was called by special personal notice to enlist on
31 October 2004 to the 25th Engineering Company (LMX) to carry out
a reserve obligation. Therefore, he became a draft evader from 1
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 36
November 2004 to 4 February 2005. Mr. Baltoukas did not invoke any
religious reasons for his refusal. The execution of this sentence was
suspendedfor three years and its commutation to a fine of 4.4OEuro for
each day of imprisonment was ordered.
The aforesaid judgment establishes that, in his defence, Mr. Baltoukas
stated, inter alia: “... the Greek army has changed radically as to the
purpose which it serves. It serves economic interests and, for this reason,
they are often beyond the borders. The most important reason for my
refusal to carry out the reserve obligation is my class. I am a
construction worker and l live with the anxiety of day labour. Therefore I
am in no position to leave my work each time the army may call me, until
I become 45 years old. I defend my country in my own way, and, fI have
to.... I will enlist in the extraordinary event that Greece is in danger. I
found myself in a situation of conflict of duties ... Politics change; it was
different in 1980 and d fferent in 1990. In any event, when Iservedmy
regular service, things were more clear”. An appeal was lodged against
the above judgment. A cassation appeal may be lodged against the
judgment of the military court of appeal before the Supreme Court.
Georgios Koutsomanolakis, 45 years old, was unanimously sentenced
on 23 May by the 5-member Court Martial of AthetE (Judgment no
645/2205) to two (2) years in prison for “Disobedience in times of peace”
because he did not enlist, although he was called to enlist on 6 August
1979 in the Greek Armed Forces ( 44 TH Infantry). Therefore, he became a
draft evader from 7 August 1979 to 1 January 2005, when his draft
evasion was discontinued by law, having attained his 45 th year of age. He
invoked his religious beliefs as a Jehovah's Witness for the non-
enlistment. The above sentenced was commuted by the court to a fine of
4.40 Euro for each day of imprisonment and its execution was suspended
for three years. A thirteen-day period of detention was deducted from the
two-year sentence, during which Mr. Koutsomanolakis was detained in
Korydallos prison awaiting trial. An appeal was lodged against the above
judgment. A cassation appeal may be lodged against the judgment of the
military court of appeal before the Supreme Court.
Observations
138. The Special Rapporteur is grateful for the Government's detailed response
to her communication. However, she notes with concern the strict time limits for
applying for conscientious objector status. In this regard, she draws the
Government's attention to Council of Europe Recommendation 15 18(200 1), which
invites member states to introduce into their legislation ‘ [ t]he right to be registered as
a conscientious objector at any time before, during or after conscription, or
performance of military service”. This acknowledges that conscientious objection may
develop over time, and even after a person has already participated in military training
or activities.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 37
139. In Resolution 1998/77, the Commission on Human Rights also recognizes
that persons performing military service may develop conscientious objections. The
Special Rapporteur would also like to emphasize the concluding observations adopted
by the Human Rights Committee on 25 April 2005 (CCPR /CO/83/GRC) fhrther to the
initial periodic report submitted by Greece (CCPR/C/GRC/2004/1), which states that,
“The Committee is concerned that the length of alternative service for conscientious
objectors is much longer than military service, and that the assessment of applications
for such service is solely under the control of the Ministry of Defence (Article 18).
The State party should ensure that the length of service alternative to military service
does not have a punitive character, and should consider placing the assessment of
applications for conscientious objector status under the control of civilian authorities.”
(Paragraph 15)
India
Communication sent on 20 January 2005
140. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government
information she had received according to which, following the tsunami disaster, in
Tamil Nadu, a number of Dalits had been denied aid supplies and expelled from relief
camps by higher caste groups who refhsed to eat with them or live under the same
roof In the relief camps of the port town of Nagapattinam, Dalits were allegedly not
being allowed to drink water from tanks placed by UNTCEF. In the tsunami-hit areas,
food and cash distributions normally took place in Hindu temples, often the only
structures still standing because they were built from solid granite. Reports indicated
that Dalits were left out in these distributions due to the fact that as ‘untouchables'
they were not allowed to enter the halls of worship. Dalits had allegedly carried out
much of the initial work in the immediate aftermath of the disaster such as carrying
away dead bodies and disposing animal carcasses Itcause upper caste people consider
such work taboo and socially degrading.
Communication sent on 17 May 2005
141. The Special Rapporteur was informed that, on 19 April 2005, 200 persons,
some of them carrying weapons, launched an attack and set fire to the ‘Believer's
Church” in Lamding village, Tentha Lamkhai area, State of Manipur, which was still
under construction. Mr. Romol, Mr. S. Tombi, Mr. 0. Tiken, and Mr. L. Thoiba, all
local Christians, were injured. The church had been attacked twice in the recent past
(in early April 2005 and November 2004) and a local court had ordered police to
provide security while reconstruction took place. However, it was not clear whether
security was provided.
142. In a similar incident, a large number of villagers attacked a Christian house
church on 1 May 2005 in Mangalwarapete village, Karnataka state. They harassed the
60 people present at the service and burned Christian literature. They beat Pastor
Paulraj Raju of King Jesus Church and injured his wife and another elder of the
Church. The latter had been attacked and asked to leave the district by villagers earlier
this year. Pastor Raju had also been in detention between January and March 2005 on
charges of converting Hindus.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 38
Communication sent on 9 June 2005
143. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of evangelist Kiran Kurmar, aged 30, who was assaulted n 27 February
2005 by nine Hindu extremists belonging to the Vishwa Hindu Parishad while he was
on his way to visit a Hindu man who had invited him for prayers in the Khurda
district. They tied him up and threatened to throw him into the Chilika Lake. When
the police arrived, they arrested him and charged him with preaching Christianity to
Hindus in order to convert them, an activity prohibited by the “Orissa Freedom of
Religion Act” of 1967. Mr. Kumar was subjected to torture while in police custody.
Reports fhrther indicated that he was presented before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate
in Banapur only on 1 March 2005. He was granted bail on 8 March 2005. Dasarathi
Behera, the Hindu man that Mr. Kumar was visiting on the day of his arrest was also
arrested and accused. He testified before the police that he believed in Jesus Christ
without any fear or pressure induced by anyone, a testimony which should have
absolved Mr. Kumar of any charges of “forced conversion”.
Communication sent on 19 July 2005
144. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Ms. Imrana, a 28-year-old resident of Charthawal, who was raped by her
father-in-law, Mi Mohammad, at Muzaffarnagar in western Uttar Pradesh. The
Islamic panchayat (village council), referring to sharia provisions, subsequently asked
her to abandon her husband. On 29 June 2005, the Deoband School of theologyissued
a fatwa stating that she could not return to her husband. Uttar Pradesh chief minister,
Mulayam Singh Yadav, openly backed the clerics and called for acceptance of the
fatwa.
Communication sent on 29 August 2005
145. The Special Rapporteur was informed that, following pre-election promises
by the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJF) to reduce the number of conversions to
Christianity, the government of Chattisgarh had prepared draft amendments to the
provisions of the Dharma Swatantraya Adhiniyam (Freedom of Religion Act) with the
aim of reducing the number of conversions of the local population to Christianity.
Already the law currently in force allowed punishing persons who attempt to convert
somebody “forcefully or fraudulently” by prison sentences for up to two years and a
fme. The pending amendments foresaw imprisonment for up to four years and a ten-
fold increase in the amount of the fine. Moreover, the pending amendments required a
person who wishes to convert to inform the local authorities 30 days in advance.
146. In a similar move, officials in the north-central state of Madhya Pradesh
announced that their anti-conversion law would be amended to make the conversion
of tribal people to Christianity more difficult following the publication of a rewrt
claiming large-scale conversions initiated by Christian missionaries. No details about
the planned measures were known at the time of the communication, but already
under the applicable law district officials had to be notified of conversions seven da)s
in advance. It was feared that the amendments and the controversies surrounding
them might have lead to increased tensions between the various religious groups.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 39
Observations
147. The Special Rapporteur expresses her concern at not having received any
response from the Government. She urges the Government to provide her a detailed
reply concerning the communications sent as soon as possible.
148. She would like to point out that article 4(g) of Resolution 2005/40 of the
Commission on Human Rights urges States to ensure that all public officials and civil
servants, including members of law enforcement bodies, in the course of theft official
duties, respect different religions and beliefs and do not discriminate on the grounds
of religion or belief In addition article 10 of the Resolution emphasizes the
importance of a continued and strengthened dialogue among and within religions or
beliefs to promote greater tolerance, respect and mutual understanding.
149. With regard to the problem of conversion, the Special Rapporteur would like
to draw attention to paragraph S of General Comment 22 of the Human Rights
Committee which provides that “the freedom to “have or to adopt” a religion or
belief necessarily entails the freedom to choose a religion or belief including the
right to replace one's current religion or beliefwith another or to adopt atheistic
views, as well as the right to retain one religion or belief” In addition the Special
Rapporteur would like to refer to paragraphs 40 to 68 of her previous report to the
General Assembly (A /60/399) where she addressed the question of conversion as well
as missionary activities and propagation of religion. In particular, she underlined that
“ [ m]issionary activities and otherforms ofpropagation of religion are part of the
right to man fest one's religion or belief They may be limited only under restrictive
conditions, and the Special Rapporteur disapproves of the criminalization of certain
acts spec f Ic to the propagation of one's religion
150. She would furthermore like to draw attention to paragraph 21 of General
Comment 28 of the Human Rights Committee which provides that article 18 of may
not be relied on to justify discrimination against women by reference to freedom of
thought, conscience and religion.
Indonesia
Communication sent on 25 January 2005
151. The Special Rapporteur had been informed thata hard line Islamic group had
warned that Christian groups which assisted in aid efforts after the tsunami should not
fry to convert orphaned children in Aceh. The head of the radical Islamic Defenders
Front, Hilmy Bakar Almascaty, allegedly warned an Australian Catholic group called
Youth off the Sfreets that its plan to set up an orphanage in Aceh, the only Indonesian
province to have fully implemented Muslim sharia law, would be unwelcome if it
involved attempted conversion. Hilmy's organization, known as FPI, was reportedly
better known for smashing up bars and nightclubs in Jakarta and elsewhere deemed to
be un-Islamic. FPI was allegedly moving thousands of volunteers to help in the
reconstruction of Aceh and to guard against foreign influence from the thousands of
foreign military and aid workers delivering humanitarian assistance to the region.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 40
Communication sent on 26 July 2005
152. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Ms. Rebecca Laonita, Ms. Ratna Mala Bangun and Ms. Ety Pangesti
who organized and conducted a children's holiday camp, called ‘Happy Week' in
Haurgelis, West Java. The camp's programme consisted of opening and closing
prayers, singing songs, practical tutoring in reading, writing and mathematics and
trips to parks and swimming pools. The camp was organised for local Christian
children but Muslim children were invited to attend if their parents consented.
153. At the beginning of May 2005, the Indonesian Council of Muslim Clerics
(MUI) brought a case against the three women alleging that they tried to convert the
children to Christianity by giving them gifts. On 13 May 2005, the women were
arrested and had since then been held in Indramayu Prison.
Urgent appeal sent on 7 November 2005
154. On 16 October 2005, the congregations of three churches, including a
Lutheran, a Presbyterian and a Pentecostal church, were prevented from holding a
joint outdoor service in Jatimulya, East Bekasi, West Java in Indonesia. The
congregations gathered to hold the service but were prevented from doing so by
approximately 300 Muslims who had gathered in the same place to conduct their own
service. The members of the three churches accordingly moved elsewhere to carry out
theft service. However, the group followed them and verbally abused them until the
congregations were forced to disperse. The police officers who were present did not
reportedly intervene. The Mayor of East Bekasi closed down three churches five
weeks before. Following the closures, the congregations had been gathering regularly
to hold outdoor services. The Special Rapporteur was concerned that similar events
could occur at fhture services held by the congregations of the three churches.
Response from the Government dated 12 December 2005
155. The Government gave a number of clarifications. In particular it informed
the Special Rapporteur that some 200 police officers were present at the incident and
did intenene to separate the two groups.
156. The Joint Decision of the Minister of Religious Affairs and the Minister of
Internal Affairs of 1969 requires adherents of any religious denomination to secure
permission from neighbouring residents if they want to build a place of worship. In
accordance with the Joint Decision, the three churches requested the necessary
authorizations and pending the conclusion of the administrative processes, they used
one of the residential houses in Jati Mulya as a place of worship.
157. The local residents did not approve and consequently sealed the house,
claiming that the Regent of Bekasi had forbidden the use of residential houses for
public worship in accordance with the relevant legislation. After the closure of the
house, the three groups decided to hold theft services in the street in the Jati Mulya
compound, which led to the incident referred to in the letter of 7 November 2005.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 42
the Jammah Ahmadiyyah in Indonesia. The Special Rapporteur was particularly
concerned that this attack was the latest in a series of attacks against the Ahmadiyyah
community. According to the information received, previous attacks had not been
effectively investigated by the police or other state authorities and no efforts had been
made to prevent fhrther attacks from being carried out.
Response from the Government dated 9 January 2006
163. The Government expressed its concern about the incident and condemned the
attack. It stated that despite the fact that Ahmadiyyah is widely regarded by
mainstream Muslims in Indonesia and throughout the world, the belief does not
conform to accepted Islamic tenets. However, there is no excuse for the use of
violence against its members. The Government confirmed that the Indonesian Ulema
Council (MUT) had renewed its fatwa of 1984 pronouncing the Ahmadiyyah heretical.
164. It informed that the fatwa had been the object of much debate in Indonesia,
indicating that the fatwa has both strong supporters and strong critics in Indonesia.
The Government indicated that the MUT and the Indonesian Government are two
distinct entities and that the Government has no authority of any kind to influence or
interfere in the decisions of the religious body.
165. The Government informed that the police took a number of measures
following the incident. They took steps to prevent physical clashes between the
Ahmadiyyah and memltrs of the community, including by asking local imams to
keep the peace. They also took steps to guard the assets and activities of the
Ahmadiyyah by involving the community in a community watch programme
(siskamling).
Observations
166. The Special Rapporte ur is gratefhl for the Government's responses to some
of the communications and urges the Government to reply to the other
communications. The Special Rapporteur draws the Government's attention to
Resolution 2005/40 of the UN Commission on Human Rights, in which the
Commission urges States to ensure the right of all persons to worship or assemble in
connection with a religion or belief and to establish and maintain places for these
purposes.
167. Paragraph 8 (a) of Resolution 200 5/40 urges states to step up tirir efforts to
eliminate intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief notably by taking
all necessary and appropriate action, in conformity with international standards of
human rights, to combat hatred, intolerance and acts of violence, intimidation and
coercion motivated by intolerance based on religion or belief, with particular regard to
religious minorities and also to devote particular attention to practices that violate the
human rights of women and discriminate against women.
168. She alsorecalls Article a) of the 1981 Declaration on the Elimination of
All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion in which it is stated
that the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief includes the
freedom, “ [ t]o worship or assemble in connection with a religion or belief, and to
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 43
establish and maintain places fa these purposes”. In addition Article 6(b) provides
that the freedom to establish and maintain appropriate charitable or humanitarian
institutions is also included in the right to freedom of religion.
169. The Special Rapporteur would also like to take this opportunity to insist on
receiving an invitation from the Government to visit Indonesia to assess the situation
of freedom of religion or belief As she underlined in her previous report to the
General Assembly (A /60/399), the Government has been reminded of this request for
an invitation on many occasions since 1996.
Iran (Islamic Republic of)
Urgent appeal sent on 3 Decem ber 2004 with the Special Rapporte ur on
extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, the Special Rapporteur on
Torture and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and
consequences
170. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Ms. Hajieh Esmaeelvand, a 35-year-old mother of two, and Rouhollah
Maseouili Gargari, aged 22, from the town of Jolfa who were believed to be at risk
of imminent execution. On 16 January 2000, Hajieh Esmaeelvand was sentenced to
death by hanging by the Branch of the Public Court of Jolfa for adultery, and five
years' imprisonment with corporal punishment for assisting in the premeditated
killing of her husband. Then aged 17, Rouhollah Maseouli Gargari was sentenced to
hanging for his role. The 37 th Branch of the Supreme Court of Justice later amended
the verdict against Hajieh Esmaeelvand to stoning, and it was scheduled to be carried
out on 1 September 2004. Following an appeal, the Supreme Court of Justice upheld
the sentence of stoning for Hajieh Esmaeelvand. The sentences were expected to be
carried out within the following three weeks.
Response from the Government dated 13 January 2005
171. The Government informed that Ms. Esmaeelvand was charged as an
accomplice to her husband's murder and was sentenced to death. Upon rejection of
her appeal by the Supreme Court, she had requested to be pardoned. Her request was
under consideration and therefore her sentence had been put on hold.
172. Urgent appeal sent on 13 December 2004 with the Special Rapporteur on
extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, the Special Rapporteur on Torture and
the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences
173. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Leyla Mafi who was facing imminent execution for “morality-related”
offences. The death sentence was said to have been passed to the Supreme Court for
confirmation. She was to be flogged before she was executed. Concern had been
expressed that she was sentenced to death for crimes she would allegedly have
committed while she was less than 18 years old.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 44
174. On 28 November 2004, she was sentenced to death by a court in Arak, while
she was 18, on charges of “acts contrary to chastity”, including controlling a brothel,
having intercourse with blood relatives and giving birth to a child out of wedlock. It
was reported that IQ tests had revealed that she had the mental age equivalent to that
of an eight year-old. However, she had apparently never been examined by the couit
appointed doctors, and was sentenced to death solely on the basis of her explicit
confessions, without consideration of her background or mental health. She was
forced into prostitution by her mother at the age of eight and bore several children as a
result. She was also repeatedly raped, sold into marriage, and subsequently forced into
prostitution by her respective spouses.
Response from the Government dated 4 February 2005
175. The Government confirmed that Ms. Leila Mafi had been sentenced to death.
The verdict was challenged and therefore sent to the Supreme Court for fhrther
consideration. On this basis, the sentence was not considered as final. In addition to
the reconsideration of the Supreme Court, there were provisions of extraordinary
appeals offered to the accused, should the sentence be reconfirmed.
Urgent appeal sent on 15 Decem ber 2004 with the Special Rapporteur on the
promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the
Special Representative of the Secretary General on Human Rights Defenders
the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances and the Special
Rapporteur on torture
176. The Special Rapporteurs brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Mr. Bahram Mashhadi, aged 31, and a member of the Baha'I
community, who was arrested on 1 December 2004 by the Iranian intelligence
authorities when he arrived to present an appeal on the situation of Baha'Is in Iran to a
group called the Eastern Tehran Assembly of Jurists (Majma'-e-Qada'i-e-Sharq-e-
Tehran). He was taken to the local police station, where he was detained overnight.
177. On 2 December, he was transferred to the headquarters of the Prosecutor's
Office of the Revolution (Dadsitani-e-Markaz-e-Enghelab), where he was
interrogated. Accompanied by a guard, he was subsequently brought back to his home
to collect some personal effects and then taken to Evin Prison, Tehran. Since then, his
relatives had gone there on several occasions in order to visit him. Each time, the
prison authorities denied any knowledge of him being held there. It had been
impossible to obtain any further information on Mr. Mashhadi's whereabouts.
178. It was believed his detention was related to a written appeal submitted to the
President of the Islamic Republic of Iran on 15 November 2004 on the situation of
Baha'Is in Iran, by a group of Iranian Baha'Is on behalf of the entire community.
Subsequently, some of the Baha'Is who distributed the message were arrested. Most
of these individuals were detained for a short period of time and then released.
Urgent appeal sent on 14 March 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on the
promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and
the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 45
179. The Special Rapporteurs brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Mr. Shahrukh Ta'e Mr. Kayvan Rahimiyan, and his wife Ms.
Fereshteh Subhani, three prominent Baha'Is, who were arrested on 6 March 2005 in
Tehran by agents of the Intelligence agency. No reasons were given for their arrests.
Their family members and other Baha'Is had been unsuccessful in locating them. It
was also reported that on the same day, early in the morning, seven or eight agents
entered the home of Mr. and Ms. Rahimiyan and ransacked their house. They took
away a quantity of documents; books; printed material; a copy machine and other
possessions.
180. It was further reported that Mr. Mehran Kawsariwas re-arrested on 8
March 2005. He had been previously arrested for distributing a letter to the President
of the Republic denouncing the destruction on 2-3 Feb r uary 2005 of the Baha'I
cemetery of Yazd. Mr. Kawsari was sentenced to three years imprisonment. He was
held in Evin prison. Mr. Bahram Mashhadi, another Baha'Is previously detained,
who was the subject of a communication sent on 15 December 2004, was also re-
arrested and given a one-year sentence for the same alleged offence.
181. According to the source, these actions coincided with the launch of a
campaign against the Baha'Is in government-controlled media. In an article published
on 8 January 2005 in Jomhouri-e-Eslami newspaper, the Baha'Is letter to the President
of the Republic was portrayed as a “provocative” activity by the Baha'Is and as “part
of a plan by the United States” to exert pressure on Iran. Another article appeared in a
Yazd newspaper complaining about the Baha'Is.
Response from the Government dated 27 May 2005
182. The Government indicated that Mr. Shahrukh Ta'ef has been charged with
fmancial corruption and the legal proceedings were underway. Mr. Mehran Kawsari
had been charged for mea sures against the internal security of the State. The
preliminary proceedings had been carried out and, since he had filed an appeal, his
case had been sent to the Tehran Appellate Court for consideration. He refused the
offer of bail and has remained in custody.
Urgent appeal sent on 12 April 2005
183. Follow -up communication concerning the situation of Mr. Hamid
Pourmand, a 47-year-old lay pastor with the Assembly of God Church in Bandar-I
Bushehr who was the subject of a previous communication on 3 November 2004.
Recent reports indicated that, on 16 February 2005, a Tehran military court found him
guilty of deceiving the armed forces by not declaring that he was a convert from
Islam. The Court reportedly sentenced him to three years in jail. He was reported r
held at the Evin Prison in Tehran where he had allegedly spent most of his
imprisonment in solitary confinement. The verdict of the military court was reportedly
under appeal to the Supreme Court. Besides, concerns had been expressed that, on 4
April 2005, he was allegedly told that he would be produced before a Shariah Court
within 7 to 10 days, on two separate charges of apostasy and proselytizing, the first of
which is a capital crime in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 46
Urgent appeal sent on 11 May2005 with the Special Rapporteur on the
promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and
the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
184. The Special Rapporteurs had been informed that, on 2 May 2005, Mr. Abu'l-
Qasem Shushtari was arrested in connection with a gathering of Baha'Is who were
celebrating the First Day of Ridvan (a holy day). After an argument with officials, he
was taken to the Prosecutor's Office, where an order was issued for his arrest. At the
time of the communication, he was held in Evin prison without charge.
Response from the Government dated 1 July 2005
185. The Government indicated that Mr. Abu'l-Qasem Shushtari, who was
charged with activities against the state and disturbing public order, had been released
on bail for fhrther consideration.
Urgent appeal sent on 13 May 2005 with the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention
186. The Special Rapporteurs brought the following situation to the attention of
the Government:
187. On 16 April 2005, Ms. Minu Sasani, a Baha'I, was arrested without charge
in Tehran and taken to an unknown location. Her home was searched, her papers,
confiscated. Her whereabouts were still unknown.
188. On 25 April 2005 five Baha'Is were arrested: Mr. Ardeshir RasteI Mr.
Shirzad Bahineh, Mr. Imam-Quli Rasteh-nejad, Mr. Allahreza Khastar and Mr.
Husnu'llah Davaran. In November 2004, these persons had filed complaints to
protest against the confiscation of homes and land of theft families in the village of
Kata (province of Buyir-Ahmad and Charmahal-Bakhtiyari). They were summoned to
appear for a hearing before the court of the Sisakht region on 25 April 2005. When
they presented themselves at the court house, they were arrested upon a decision from
the judge ordering their detention for an undetermined period of time. They were held
incommunicado.
189. On 3 May 2005 Mr. Najaf-Quli Bahamin, Mr. Alijan Dastpish, Mr. Ali
RasteI and Mr. Valiu'llah Parandush, Baha'is living in the province of Buyir-
Ahmad and Charmahal-Bakhtiyar as well, were similarly arrested by order of a court.
They had been summoned to a court hearing at which the judge asked them whether
they would relinquish real estate in their possession to the authorities. When they
refusedto do so, they were arrested upon a decision from the judge ordering theft
detention for an undetermined period of time. They were held in a prison in the city of
Yasuj.
Urgent appeal sent on 18 August 2005 with the Working group on arbitrary
detention and the Special Rapporteur on torture
190. The Special Rapporteur had received the following information concerning
the arrest of 14 Baha'Is in the first week of August 2005:
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 47
191. On 3 August 2005, Ms. Simm Gorji was arrested in the city of Ghaem
Shahr. 0114 August 2005, Mr. Hooman Bakhatavar, Mr. Kaviz Nuzdehi, Ms.
Nahid Ghadiri, Ms. Nasrin Ghadiri, Mr. Valid Ghadiri, Ms. Sima Rahimian, Mr.
Jalayer Vahdat, and Ms. Rozita Vaseghi were arrested in the city of Mashhad. Ms.
Sima Eshraghi, who was not at home at the time of the arrests, was summoned to
appear at the police and, when she did so, arrested on 6 August 2005.
192. On 5 August 2005, a group of trainers working to promote the moral
education of young Baha'Is in Iran were arrested, while they were meeting in the city
of Karaj. The group consisted of Mr. Pooya Movahhed, resident of Karaj, Ms.
Nasim Ashrafi, Ms. Nasim Naderi, and Mr. Emad Sharghi, all residents of Tehran,
193. The whereabouts of the 14 individuals were not known at the time of the
communication. In view of theft incommunicado detention, concern was expressed
that they might have been at risk of torture or ill-treatment.
Communication sent on 11 October 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on the
promotion and protection of to freedom of opinion and expre ssion
194. The Special Rapporteurs had received the following information concerning
the situation of Bahá'Is in Iran in August and September 2005:
195. On 19 August 2005, Mr. Davar Nabilzadeh was anested in the city of Mashhad.
196. On 14 September 2005, Ms. Sima Rahmanian Leghaee, Mr. Changiz
Derakhshanian, and Ms. Mina Hamran were arrested in the city of Ghaem Shahr.
197. On 21 September 2005, Mr. Misagh Laghaee, Mr. Shahin Sanaee and Ms.
Mahvand Laghaee were arrested in the city of Babol Sar.
198. Ms. Soheila Motallebi and Mr. Foad Naeemi were arrested in Sari on 20 and 28
August 2005 respectively.
199. It was feared that they were arrested because of their religious belief All of them
were still in custody, except for Mr. Derakhshanian, who was released on bail on 17
September 2005, Ms. Soheila Motallebi and Mr. Foad Naeemi, who were released on 19
September 2005.
200. On 5 September 2005, the homes of nine Baha'is, Mr. Farshid Dadvar, Mr.
Ezzatollah Khorram ,Mr. Ahmad Naeemi, Mr. Majid Ghane, Mr. Azizollah Khordadi,
Mr. Farrokh Shadpour, Ms. AshrafYavari, Mr. Amrollh Sarafraz, and Mr. Behnam
Rohani Fard, nine Baha'Is in the city of Yazd were searched, and their books, along with
their computers, tapes, videos and CDs confiscated.
201. The Special Rapporteurs were also informed that, on 5 September 2005, the court in
Karaj sentenced four Baha'Is, namely, Ms. Nasim Ashrafi, Mr. Pooya Movahhed, Ms.
Nasim Naderi, and Mr. Emad Sharghi, subject to a communication sent by the Special
Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief on 18 August (IRN 29/2005), to ten months of
imprisonment on the charge of opposition to the Islamic Republic of Iran. This charge was
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 48
verbally conveyed to the Bahá'Is. When they asked for a written document, the court refused
to issue one. At the time of the communication, the sentence was under appeal. It was feared
that the convictions were related to their religious beliefs.
Urgent appeal sent on 8 November 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on the
promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and
the Special Rapporteur on torture
202. The Special Rapporteurs were informed that, on 27 April 2004, Grand
Ayatollah Yasub al-Din Rastgari, aged 78, a religious leader and scholar, of Qom in
Iran, was arrested in Qom for publishing a book on religious history titled “The reality
of religious unity”. His two sons were also arrested and the company that published
the book was closed down. It was difficult to obtain exact information on the criminal
charges, trial and subsequent sentencing of Ayatollah Rastgari. However, it was
thought that he was accused of insulting Islam and inciting schism in the book. It was
thought that he was secretly sentenced to four years imprisonment by the Special
Court for the Clergy. Ayatollah Rastgari was held in incommunicado detention and
his relatives had not been informed of his whereabouts. He was also reported to be in
poor health, suffering from diabetes and heart disease.
203. Concern was expressed for Mr. Rastgari's health, and in view of his
incommunicado detention, it was feared that he might have been at risk of torture or
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Urgent appeal sent on 14 November 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on torture
and the Special Rapporteur on Violence against women, its causes and
consequences
204. The Special Rapporteurs expressed their concerns in view of the imminent
execution of Leyla Mafi.
205. Her death sentence had been commuted and she was now facing a sentence
of flogging and three and a half years in prison. The Supreme Court reportedly
overturned the verdict issued in 2004 but upheld the sentence of flogging, sending the
case back to the Court of First Instance in the city of Arak for a retrial. The Court of
First Instance acquitted Ms. Mafi of the charges of incest and controlling a brothel.
She was however found guilty under Article 637of the Penal Code of an “unchaste act
with next of kin (other than fornication).” She was sentenced to 99 lashes of the whip
for this offence. She was also found guilty of “providing the facilities for corruption
and prostitution by being available for sexual acts” and sentenced to three and a half
years imprisonment for this offence.
Response from the Government dated 25 January 2006
206. The Government informed that Ms. Mafi had teen charged with establishing
a brothel and had been sentenced to death by the court of first instance. The Supreme
Court subsequently overturned the sentence and referred the case to the Court of
Appeal for reinvestigation. The Court of Appeal reconsidered the case and acquitted
her on the charges of incest and establishing and running a brothel. However, she was
found guilty of facilitating corruption by way of fornication contrary to the Islamic
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 49
penal code. The Court ruled that since she did not have a personal residence, she
should reside in a rehabilitation centre for at least eight months to ensure her physical
and mental integrity.
207. The Government informed that the allegations of torture or ill-treatment were
categorically denied. It also stated that the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion
or belief should not send urgent appeals that were irrelevant to her mandate.
Observations
208. The Special Rapporteur is grateful for the Government's responses to some
of her communications. However, she regrets that some of the responses were only
partial and hopes to receive further information as soon as possible.
209. The Special Rapporteur remains particularly concerned about the continued
persecution of members of the Baha'I community and would in this respect like to
reiterate her support for the recommendations made by the Committee on the
Elimination of Racial Discrimination in its most recent concluding observations
(CERD/C/63/CO/6, para. 14).
210. Additionally she would like to draw the Government's attention to paragraph
9 of General Comment 22 of the Human Rights Committee which provides that, ‘The
fact that a religion is recognized a State religion or that it is established as official or
traditional or that its followers comprise the majority of the population, shall not
result in any impairment of the enjoyment of any of the rights under the Covenant,
including articles 18 and 27, nor in any discrimination against adherents to other
religions or non-believers”. Furthermore paragraph 21 of General Comment 28 of the
Human Rights Committee provides that State parties must take measures to ensure
that freedom of thought, conscience and religion will be guaranteed and protected in
law and practice for both men and women, on the same terms and without
discrimination. Article 18 may not be relied upon to justify discrimination against
women by reference to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
Iraq
Communication sent on 7 October 2005
211. The Special Rapporteur wanted to raise her concerns over the situation of
women in the context of religious norms and traditions. This topic was the subject of
an allegation letter sent by the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of
the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Special Rapporteur on the question of
torture, Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest
attainable standard of physical and mental health, Special Rapporteur on the sale of
children, child prostitution and child pornography, Special Rapporteur on violence
against women, its causes and consequences and Special Representative of the
Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders on 30 September 2005.
212. Women and girls, including non-Muslims, were believed to be increasingly
under pressure, often violent, to wear a veil or headscarf and to wear the traditional
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 50
abaya. This had led to a reduction in the number of girls and women attending schools
and universities. The Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research had been
informed of 3000 cases of women and girls who had requested postponement of theft
studies as a result of the security situation linked to this matter. An increase in acid
attacks at the hands of religious groups and militia against women for not wearing the
veil and not wearing the traditional abaya had also been reported. Justification for
these attacks was based on the reasoning that when a woman or a girl does not wear a
veil or the abaya, she was going against Muslim traditions and should be punished.
213. In northern Iraq, the practice known as “Jin be Jin” (exchanging one woman
for another) has contributed to the high incidence of forced marriage. The law allows
the mitigation of punishment for perpetrators found guilty of crimes such as honour
killings and mutilations. Continued use of female genital mutilation continues to be
reported in the northern region of Iraq.
214. Reports indicated that several women had been targeted by religious groups
that perceive politically active women as contrary to their religion. In this context, the
killings of Fern Holland, Salwa Oumashi, Amal al-Ma'amalachi, Lami'a Abed
Khadawi, Aquila aiHashimi, all women's rights activists or politically active women,
had been reported. Several cases of women receiving death threats to prevent them
from pursuing theft advocacy or political work had been brought to the attention of
the Special Rapporteur.
Observations
215. The Special Rapporteur regrets that there has been no response received from
the Government to this communication. While she recognizes the difficult situation
that the Government is facing at the moment, she would like to draw attention to
paragraph a) of Resolution 2005/40 of the Commission on Human Rights in which
States are urged to eliminate intolerance and discrimination based on religion and to
devote particular attention to practices that violate the human rights of women and
discriminate against women, including in the exercise of their right to freedom of
thought, conscience, religion or belief
Jordan
Communication sent on 20 May 2005
216. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Mr. Samer Muhammad Khair Talib al-Aidy, who was reportedly
convicted on charges of apostasy. He had converted from Islam to Christianity several
years before.
217. Mr. al-Aidy was arrested on 15 September 2004 and charged before a Shari'a
court with apostasy. However, he was released on bail the next day. Between
September and late November he appeared at several court hearings, where he was
asked to reconsider his conversion. At the last hearing, on 23 November 2004 he was
convicted of apostasy. Mr. al-Aidy's lawyer appealed the decision. In March 2005, he
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 51
received a verdict from the Court of Appeal, dated 25 January 2005, which upheld the
original conviction.
Response from the Government dated 24 June 2005
218. The Government indicated that Mr. Al-Aidy converted from Is lam to
Christianity ten years ago; something in itself considered a serious breach of the law.
Yet no action was initiated against him during this period. However, Mr. Al-Aidy
recently began proselytizing amongst Muslims, in clear defiance of the standing laws
and well-established norms of the country, including Article 99 of the Jordanian
Constitution. This conduct led to the inithtion of a court case against him for apostasy
and illegally proselytizing. The Government fhrther informed the Special Rapporteur
that Mr. Al-Aidy's case was being reviewed by the Court of Appeal in accordance
with applied legal procedures in Jordan. All legal action was carried out with fhll
respect of Jordanian legal norms in due processes of law.
Communication sent on 12 July 2005
219. Following on the Government's response dated 24 June 2005, the Special
Rapporteur requested the Government of Jordan to provide her with the relevant
excerpts of the legal acts on which the actions taken against Mr. Al-Aidy were based
She also asked the Government to explain which restrictions to proselytism and
missionary activities are provided for by Jordanian legislation and whether they
comply with international standards as provided by article 18 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Response from the Government dated 17 October 2005
220. The Government informed that Jordan has undertaken a number of
legislative initiatives to move towards a society where individual freedoms are
upheld, and where majority n ile is coupled with minority rights. However, in certain
situations societal pressures could impair freedom of choice. Those who proselytize
amongst Muslims may be in danger of being alienated by society, which regards its
sacred duty to protect Islam. However, we are in a process of societal change which
government institutions strongly support.
221. When Mr. Al-Aidy got married, he did so in a cordance with Shari'a Law.
Once he decided to convert to Christianity, his marriage contract, as well as every
legal aspect relating to his marital life is affected by the dramatic change. It therefore
becomes possible to take legal action against him either by members of his family and
or members of society. It is apparent that Mr. Al-Aidy himself chose to publicize his
case. I f he had decided to convert quietly, there would have been less tension
surrounding it.
222. The Government indicated that it was theft firm belief that Mr. Al-Aidy
could reduce or alleviate the pressures he is facing if he were to become aware of the
religious sensitivities that Muslims in Jordan face and show respect for that. There
are legislative and procedural requirements that Mr. Al-Aidy needs to undertake
which may enable him to become a missionary in Jordan, such as the need to apply
and register at the Prime Minister's Office.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 52
Observations
223. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the additional legal materials sent by
the Government in response to her letter dated 12 July 2005. She takes this
opportunity to draw the attention of the Government to Article 180) of the
International Covenant on Civil or Political Rights, which provides thatthe right to
freedom of religion ‘ hall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of
his choice [ .4.” In addition, the Special Rapporteur would like to refer to paragraphs
40 to 68 of her previous report to the General Assembly (A /60/399) where she
addressed the question of conversion as well as missionary activities and propagation
of religion.
Kazakhstan
Response from the Government dated 1 April 2005 to a communication sent on 3
November 2004 (See E/CN.4/2005/61/Add. 1, at para. 149 to 152)
224. The Government informed the Special Rapporteur that, following inquiries
made by the Aktobe procurator's office in May 2004, it was established that Mr.
Vrasily D. Kliver, the leader of the International Council of Evangelical
Christians/Baptists in Aktobe, regularly conducted religious services without having
registered this association.
225. On S May 2004, Mr. Kliver, the leader of the aforesaid religious association
presided over a religious service attended by 30 people at a private residence located
at 30 (b) Klenovaya Street. As a result, the Aktobe procurator's office instituted
proceedings in connection with an administrative offence contrary to article 375,
paragraph 1, of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Republic of Kazakhstan
(administrative liability for failure by leaders of religious associations to register an
association with the State authorities).
226. By its decision of 7 June 2004, Aktobe city court ruled that Mr. Kliver had
committed an administrative offence contrary to article 375, paragraph 1, of the
aforesaid Code, on account of which he was fmed 9,100 tenge and the activities of the
association were suspended for three months. He was also fined 1,838 tenge for
violating article 521 of the Code (failure to obey a subpoena or to give evidence). No
appeals or objections were lodged against this decision.
227. Moreover, Mr. Kliver had previously been the subject of administrative
proceedings in connection with his failure to register a religious association, as
indicated by the following judicial decisions:
-Decision of Aktobe city court dated 12 June 2001 in connection with an
offence contrary to article 375, paragraph 1, of the Kazakh Code of
Administrative Offences (a warning);
-Decision of Aktobe city court dated 19 Feb r uary 2002 in connection with an
offence contrary to article 375, paragraph 1, of the Code of Administrative
Offences (fined 823 tenge);
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 53
-Decision of Aktobe city court dated 12 March 2003 in connection with an
offence contrary to article 375, paragraph 1, of the Code of Administrative
Offences (fmed 4,360 tenge, three-month suspension of the activities of the
association);
-Decision of Aktobe city court dated 25 September 2003 in connection with
an offence contrary to article 375, paragraph 1, of the Code of Administrative
Offences (fmed 8,720 tenge, six-month suspension of the activities of the
association).
228. These judicial decisions were not reviewed by way of appeal or supervision.
The Government noted that no administrative measures have been taken against Mr.
Kliver under article 525 of the Code of Administrative Offences.
229. The Taraz procurator's office instituted proceedings against Mr. Petr F.
Panafidin, the leader of the local congregation of the Evangelical Christian /Baptist
Church, in connection with an administrative offence contrary to article 375,
paragraph 1, of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Republic of Kazakhstan
(canying on activities without registering with the Ministry of Justice).
230. By its decision of 15 April 2003, Taraz city court ruled that Mr. Panafidin
had committed an administrative offence contrary to the aforesaid article of the Code,
and cautioned him. In spite of this, Mr. Panafidin took no steps to register the
religious association with the Justice Department and persisted in carrying on his
unlawful activity. Accordingly, on 23 March 2004 the Taraz procurator's office once
again instituted proceedings against him in connection with an administrative offence
contrary to article 375, paragraph 1, of the Code and referred the case to the courts.
By its decision of 6 May 2004, Taraz city court ruled that Mr. Panafidin had
committed the said administrative offence and fined him 1,838 tenge.
231. Mr. Panafidin did not challenge the court's decision in appeal or supervisory
proceedings.
232. Thus, the Government stated that administrative proceedings were correctly
brought against the above-mentioned individuals for flouting the provisions of the
Religious Freedom and Religious Associations Act. Religious freedom and the
separation of church and State are gwranteed by Kazakh law. The cardinal points in
State policy towards religious associations are consistency and a balanced approach as
regards relations between different faiths, equal rights for all religions, tolerance, and
the prohibition of lobbying in the interests of a particular religion.
233. Meanwhile, the activities of unregistered religious associations are becoming
a serious problem. Many of these associations are operating under the guise of
schools, healthy lifestyle groups, and religious educatbnal and commercial
organizations. They have a significant impact on the overall religious situation and
have the potential to undermine the established yet fragile network of
interdenominational relations in Kazakhstan. Accordingly, the relevant State a ncies
are obliged to monitor compliance with the laws and regulations on the activities of
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 54
religious associations in Kazakhstan, and action is taken against those who fail to
comply.
234. Finally, the Government noted that, in Kazakhstan, questions of religious
freedom are viewed in the broader context of efforts to uphold human rights.
Religious associations may resolve any problems arising at the local level by applying
to independent institutions to protect theft rights, for example the Kazakh
Government's Council for Relations with Religious Associations, whose members
include the leaders of many of the religions represented in Kazakhstan; the
Association of Religious Associations, which is playing an increasingly prominent
role in solving interdenominational problems; and the national Human Rights
Commission, the Ministry of Justice and the Office of the Commissioner for Human
Rights of the Republic of Kazakhstan.”
Communication sent on 6 July 2005
235. The Special Rapporteur was informed thatthe Parliament had recently
approved what were believed to be far -reaching “national security” amendments to
eleven laws. Concern had been expressed that the ban on the activity of unregistered
religious associations and the amendments to the administrative code significantly
limited believers' rights.
236. The draft law introduced amendments to both the criminal and the
administrative codes. Indeed, Article 337(1), included in the Criminal Code,
provided that: “Organizing the activity of a public or religious association or another
organization after a court has taken a decision to ban their activity or to close them
down because they give rise to extremism”. It punished participation in the activity of
a religious association that had been banned by a court with a fine of 200 times the
monthly wage, or up to two years' imprisonment.
237. Moreover, a new Article, 374-1, was introduced to the administrative code,
and punished participation in the activity of an unregistered religious organization
with a heavy fine. Also article 375 of the administrative code, which dealt with
violations by religious groups in the past, including by punishing refhsal to register a
religious organization was amended as follows: “Missionary work carried out by
citizens, foreign citizens and persons who have no citizenship, without the appropriate
registration, will attract a fine of up to 15 times the monthly wage of a citizen, while
foreigners and persons without citizenship will be fined up to 15 times the monthly
wage and will be expelled beyond the borders of the Republic of Kazakhstan.”
Response from the Government dated 31 August 2005
238. The Government informed that on 8 July 2005 the Head of State signed an
Act amending and supplementing certain legislative acts, including the Freedom of
Religion and Religious Associations Act. With the entry into force of the new Act,
the operation of unregistered religious organizations is prohibited as a criminal
offence. The penalty is a prison term of three to six months imprisonment. In
addition, the Act regulates the procedure for reorganizing and closing down religious
organizations and introduces additions to the definition of criminal and administrative
responsibility for certain offences arising from displays of extremism. The bodies
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 55
responsible fa official registration check information on the establishment,
reorganization and dissolution of legal entities. Under Article 42 of the Civil Code,
they are not entitled to refuse registration in the absence of evidence that the
establishment of a legal entity is improper.
Observations
239. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its response to her
communications. She would like to take this opportunity to draw the Government's
attention to paragraph 4(c) of Resolution 2005/40 of the Commission on Human
Rights, which urges all States “to review, whenever relevant, existing registration
practices in order to ensure the right of all persons to manifest theft religion or belief,
alone or in community, with others and in public or in private.”
240. Moreover, the Special Rapporteur wishes to emphasize that the right to
freedom of religion is not limited to members of registered religious community. As
she reminded in her previous report to the Commission on Human Rights, referring to
the OSCE/ODJI-IR Guidelines for Review of Legislation pertaining to Religion or
Belief, “registration should not be compulsory, i.e. it should not be a precondition for
practicing one's religion, but only for the acquisition of a legal personality and related
benefits” (E/CN.4/2005/61, para. 58).
Kuwait
Communication sent on 20 May 2005
241. The Special Rapporteur had received information concerning a clause in the
recent amendments to the electoral law promoting a specific religious belief
According to the information received amendments to the election law adopted on 16
May 2005 by the Parliament giving women passive and active election rights contain
a clause stating that women voting and running for political office must adhere “to the
dictates of Islamic Sharia.”
Response from the Government dated 16 August 2005
242. The Government informed the Special Rapporteur that the amendment to the
electoral law does not promote a specific religion and that the Special Rapporteur had
received incorrect information on this point. According to article 2 of the Constitution
of the State of Kuwait: “The religion of the State is Islam and the Islamic sharia is the
principal source of legislation.” Article 12 stipulates that the State must preserve the
Arab Islamic heritage. Thus, the information which the Special Rapporteur has
received, suggesting that the amendment promotes a specific religion, does not chime
with the above-mentioned constitutional provisions. The clause: “Women who stand
for office and vote must comply with the precepts of the Islamic sharia”, as contained
in article 1 of Act No. 17 of 2005, amending article 1 of the Parliamentary Elections
Act No. 35 of 1962, is consistent with the Constitution of Kuwait, which provides that
the religion of the State is Islam and the Islamè sharia is the principal source of
domestic legislation and laws.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 56
243. In addition, the provisions of article 1 of the aforementioned Act are
redundant, since they confirm the actual state of affairs, whereby Kuwaiti women
comply with the precepts of the Isla mic sharia, which do not negate freedom of
religion or deny rights, but are simply there to ensure that women are respected and
that they respect themselves. This clause is there to help women and not to harm
them.
244. With regard to the Special Rapporteur's requests for clarification, the
competent authority's reply had been summarized in the following points:
(a) The amendment to the Act was intended to grant women the right to
stand for election and the right to vote;
(b) Generally speaking, elections to the National Assembly are monitored
by the sub committees and the main committees of the electoral
commission, under the chairmanship of a judge or public prosecutor, and by
the National Assembly and the Constitutional Court. Each body carries out
this task in accordance with its respective fhnctions and pursuant to the
Parliamentary Elections Act No. 35 of 1962, as amended, and Act No. 14 of
1973, concerning the establishment of the Constitutional Court;
(c) The clause in article 1 of the Act No. 17 of 2005, providing that
women who stand for election and who vote must comply with the precepts
of the Islamic sharia, has no influence whatever on women's right to stand
for election and to vote;
(d) With regard to safeguarding the religious rights of minoritës, suffice it
to say that article 29 of the Constitution of Kuwait provides: “All people
are equal in human dignity and with respect to their public rights and duties
before the law. There shall be no distinction among them on grounds of
sex, origin, language or religion.” Article 35 stipulates: “Freedom of belief
is absolute. The State shall protect freedom of worship in accordance with
prevailing customs and without prejudice to public order or morals.”
Observations
245. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the details provided in the
Government's response.
Malaysia
Communication sent on 12 October 2005
246. The Special Rapporteur had received information concerning a decision by
Malaysia's Court of Appeal according to which conversions from Islam to another
religion have to be authorised by sharia courts in the case of Lina Joy, formerly
Azlina Jailani, aged 41.
247. Lina Joy, a former Muslim who converted to Christianity in the late 1980s, had
approached the National Registration Department (NRD) in February 1997 in order to
request that her name and religious status be changed on her identity card. The
application was rejected in August 1997 on the grounds that the sharia court had not
granted permission for her to renounce Islam. When she appealed the decision, in
1998, the NRD allowed the name change, but refhsed to change the religious status on
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 57
her identity card. Following another appeal, High Court Judge Datuk Faiza Tamby
Chik ruled in April 2001 that she could not change her religious identity, because
ethnic Malays are defined as Muslims under the Constitution. He also said jurisdiction
in such cases lay solely in the hands of the sharia court. On 19 September 2005 the
Court of Appeal announced the final decision stating that Lina Joy must apply to a
sharia court for permission to legally renounce Islam.
248. Law requires all Malaysian citizens over the age of 12 to carry an identity card
with them at all times and all identity cards issued to Muslims must clearly display
theft religious identity. A Muslim designation on an identity card has legal
consequences, such as the prohibition of manying a Christian
Observations
249. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Permanent Mission for acknowledging the
communication. She would like to remind the Government that paragraph 9 of
General Comment 22 of the Human Rights Committee states that, “the fact that a
religion is recognized as a state religion or that it established as official or traditional
or that its followers comprise the majority of the population, shall not result in any
impairment of the enjoyment of any of the rights under the Covenant, including
articles 18 or 27, nor in any discrimination against adherents to other religions or non -
believers. In particular, certain measures discriminating against the latter, such as
measures restricting eligibility for Government service to members of the
predominant religion or giving economic privileges to them or imposing special
restrictions on the practice of other faiths, are not in accordance with the prohibition
of discrimination based on religion or belief and the guarantee of equal protection
under article 26.”
250. Moreover, she reminds the Government that the right to change religion is a
fhndamental part of freedom of religion or belief In its General Comment No. 22, the
Human Rights Committee stated that “the freedom to “have or to adopt” a religion or
belief necessarily entails the freedom to choose a religion or belief, including the right
to replace one's current religion or belief with another”. This aspect of the right to
freedom of religion or belief is absolute and may therefore not be subjected to any
form of limitation (see A160/399, paras 46 to 54).
Maldives
Urgent appeal sent on 8 July 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion
and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
Representative of the Secretary General on Human Rights Defenders
251. The Special Rapporteurs raised their concerns at reports that, on 4 July 2005,
the Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs issued a press release stating that the
Universal Declaration, and in particular its article 18, contradicts t1t Constitution of
the Maldives and the Islamic faith. Moreover, the aforementioned Supreme Council
prohibited people from acquiring copies of the Universal Declaration that were given
out by the National Human Rights Institution. In addition, the Council made the
following statement: “As no Maldivian wishes to practice another religion but Islam
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 58
we have banned people from possessing the Declaration that is being distributed by
the Commission”.
252. Following the press release, the National Human Rights Commiss ion
(NT4CR) had stopped the distribution of the Universal Declaration. Concern was
expressed that this statement aimed at preventing the NHRC from carrying out its
human rights activities in particular to raise awareness about religious freedom by
distributing the UDHR.
253. The Special Rapporteurs requested the Government to provide them with
information on the formal powers given to the Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs by
the legislation and whether the laws of the country provide for a hierarchy between
different religious groups. They also requested the Government to indicate how the
banning of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights was compatible with
international norms and standards on the right to freedom of opinion and expression
and standard contained in the Declaration on human rights defenders, and the UN
Charter.
Response from the Government dated 11 July 2005
254. Pending the official response from the Government, the Permanent
Representative forwarded to the Special Rapporteur a copy of the self explanatory
Media Release issued by the Government on 11 July 2005 regarding the above
mentioned statement.
Response from the Government dated 31 August 2005
255. “Fully understanding that the statement issued by the Supreme Council for
Islamic Affairs of the Maldives about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was
disconcerting, the Government has quickly re-affirmed its commitment to
international standards of human rights protection and is looking at ways of
expediting signing on to ICCPR and ICESCR. The reform process that President
Gayoom has initiated, in particular the revising of the Constitution, provides a historic
opportunity to incorporate international standards of human rights protection into our
basic law.
256. Furthermore, it is mentioned that the President has ratified the Human Rights
Bill which gives statutory status to the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives.
This is an important development which will contribute to strengthening the
independence and effectiveness of the Commission. The Government is fhlly
committed to supporting and strengthening the Human Rights Commission as it has a
central role to play in ensuring better human rights protection.
257. The Government provided the following responses to the questions raised in
the communication:
258. Although the Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs issued a Press Release
which stated the position summarized in the communication, the pronouncement had
no legal effect. This was explained by statements issued by the Government on 11
July 2005 and on 12 July 2005. The Government's statements explained that the
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 59
Declaration was not banned in the Maldives and asserted the Government's
commitment to the protection and promotion of human rights.
259. The Government gave widespread publicity to the above -mentioned
statements clarifying the Government's commitment to the Universal Declaration. It
also informed the Supreme Council to desist from making such pronouncements
without prior consultation with the concerned authorities.
260. The mandate of the Supreme Council is derived from Law No. 6/94 (Islamic
Unity of the People) and from Presidential Decree. The mandate covers the
administration and supervision of all matters relating to the public conduct of rites,
rituals and observances of the Islamic faith and the propagation of the Islamic faith,
values and knowledge. The Council is also empowered to approve books on Islamic
knowledge whether produced locally or imported for local distribution.
261. The Declaration is not banned in the Maldives. On the contrary, the
Government very firmly asserts that “it is unthinkable for this Government to ban
international human rights standards”. The Government attached the statement issued
by the Government stating that there was no ban and further stating that Government
filly endorses the objective of the Declaration. The Government believes that banning
the Declaration would be incompatible with compliance with international norms and
standards on the right to freedom of opinion and expression and standards contained
in the Declaration on Human Rights.
Observations
262. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the Government's response and
encourages the Government to continue taking positive steps with regard to upholding
its obligations under the Universal Declaration.
The Netherlands
Communication sent on 28 October 2005
263. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Ms. Samira Haddad , a 32-year-old Muslim woman who was reportedly
refused a post as Arabic teacher at the Islamic College in Amsterdam based on her
refusal to wear a headscarf.
Observations
264. The Special Rapporteur hopes to receive a reply to her communication in the
near fhture. However, in the meantime, she has been informed by various reliable
sources that the national Equality Commission ruled in favour of Ms. Haddad on 15
November 2005. Although the Netherlands' system of parallel public and private
denominational education gave the Islamic college a high level of discretion in
deciding what requirements it could set fix its staff, the Equality Commission found
that the fact that non-Muslim employees were exempt from the requirement to wear a
headscarf while Muslim employees were obliged to wear a headscarf constituted an
inadmissible differentiation on the basis of religion.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 60
265. While the Special Rapporteur does not discourage the existence of
denominational schools, she expresses her concern about pressure within the schools
to adhere to certain religious obligations. In this regard she would like to draw the
Govermient's attention to article 5(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights which provides that, “Nothing in the present Covenant may be
interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any
activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms
recognized herein or at theft limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the
present Covenant.”
New Zealand
Communication sent on 14 July 2005
266. The Special Rapporteur was concerned at reports that several mosques and
Islamic centers were reportedly vandalized in the northern city of Auckland on the
night of 11 July 2005. The buildings' windows were broken and some graffiti, which
read “RIP (Rest In Peace) Londoners,” and “RIP London” were sprayed in black paint
on walls facing the street. Concern had been expressed that these attacks on the
Muslim community were perpetrated in retaliation to subway and bus bombings in
central London on 7 July 2005, which killed more than 50 people and injured 700 and
for which a Muslim group had reportedly claimed responsibility. The Special
Rapporteur had been informed that both Muslim and political leaders had condemned
these recent series of attacks.
Response from the Government dated 6 Setitember 2005
267. The Government provided the following answers to the questions raised by
the Special Rapporteur:
268. The facts alleged in the letter of 14 July are accurate. There were seven
incidents concerning five mosques (one being targeted twice) and one Muslim cultural
centre in Auckland over the period 8-11 July 2005. The nature of the incidents was as
outlined in the Special Rapporteur's letter.
269. In relation to each of the above seven incidents complaints were lodged with
the Police.
270. As a result of tir complaints to the Police an investigation was carried out,
leading to the arrest of two 18-year-old students who are both members of a right
wing group. The two individuals have been charged with seven counts of intentional
damage under section 269 of the Crimes Act 1961. The Police are not looking for any
other offenders.
271. At the time of the attacks Police patrols were tasked with increasing their
observations on mosques. Additionally, meetings were held with mosque leaders to
provide advice and support as well as to provide briefing on the Police investigation
that was at that time taking place. Liaison with the mosques and with local leaders is
continuing.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 61
272. The Prime Minister Helen Clark released a statement condemning the attacks
on 10 July, a copy of which was attached to the Government's response.
Observations
273. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the Government's detailed response
and appreciates the efforts made by the Government in order to prevent the
reoccurrence of such acts. She is pleased that the Government is taking all necessary
steps to comply with paragraph 8(a) of Resolution 2005/40 of the Commission on
Human Rights which urges states to step up theft efforts to eliminate intolerance and
discrimination based on religion or belief notably by taking all necessary and
appropriate action, in conformity with international standards of human rights, to
combat hatred, intolerance and acts of violence, intimidation and coercion motivated
by intolerance based on religion or belief, with particdar regard to religious
mrnorities.
Pakistan
Response from the Government dated 18 November 2004 to a communication
sent on 10 Novem ber 2004 (See E/CN.4/2005/61, at paragraph 187 -189)
274. The Government indicated that Pastor Wilson Fazal was kidnapped on 16 May
2004 by unknown persons. His son Jery Wilson lodged a report at Airport Police
Station Quetta on the same day. Keeping in view the past threats reported by him to
the Police, two Police Constables had been provided at his disposal to ensure 24 hours
security.
275. The abduction case of Pastor Wilson Fazal was registered at Airport Police
Station Quetta on 16.05.2004 (FIR No. 4704 U.S. 365 PPC). The case was being
investigated by an experienced team of CIA Quetta under the supervision of
Superintendent of Police/CIA. It was also reported that Pastor Wilson Fazal had
appeared at Islamabad Parliament Lodges on 16 May 2004. The Police teams were
accordingly sent to Islamabad to collect him. The Pastor had, however, so far given no
clues as to the names and otlrr details of the alleged perpetrators to the Police and
investigating authorities.
276. The Government had provided him security for his protection even before the
incident because of the threats reported by him, which he did not use on the day of the
incide nt. However, the Government had continued to provide him necessary security
to avoid any untoward incident in the fhture.
Additional response from the Government dated 11 February 2005
277. The Government informed the Special Rapporteur that discreet enquiries
conducted into the matter revealed that on 12 September 2004 one Burner B. Newton,
President Christian Social Welfare, an uplift organization, Jacobabad lodged an FIR
No. 57/04 u/s 154 at Police Station Civil Lines, Jacobabad about the kidnapping of
Mr. Yousaf Masih by some unknown armed persons when he was returning from
church to his home. Two days later i.e. on 14 September 2004, the YousafMasih was
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 62
found to have been recovered from Banu (NWFP). On return from Banu, the Yousaf
Masih told Police thatafter his kidnapping from Jacobabad, he was taken to Sukkur
and later on to the place where the kidnappers kept him which was at a drive of half
an hour from Bannu City, where he contacted Christian Hospital for help and support.
278. On 17 September 2004 the YousafMasih was brought to Jacobabad under
Police custody where he stated that kidnappers were Pushto speaking and had anti-
American feelings. In the investigations, the veracity of his account could not be
established. However, authorities remained alert for security of Churches and the
Pastors.
Communication sent on 21 June 2005
279. On 27 March 2005 the Apostolic Church in Khahamba village, near Lahore
was attacked. One worshipper, Arshad Masih, died and others were seriously
wounded. The Christians ha d been asked to close the Church in the past and the
graveyard next to the Church had been seized by local Muslims.
280. The Special Rapporteur was further informed that Pastor Shamoun Babar,
37, and his driver, Daniel Emanuel 36, were kidnapped on 5 April J05, from the
university town area of Peshawar by unknown persons. Their families informed the
police and government authorities about the kidnapping and registered a complaint
with the district police station.
281. On 7 April 2005 the badly mutilated bodies of the two men were found near
Mulazai village in Nasirbagh, Peshawar, North West Frontier Province, with their
noses and ears cut off. Pastor Babar was a well-known preacher and evangelist at
Peshawar. According to reports, before the kidnapping he had been receiving threats
and had been asked to stop his church activities.
Response from the Government dated 18 July 2005
282. The Government indicated that the enquiries revealed that the issue was a
dispute on 06 Kanal of land in phase-IT WAPDA town, Lahore. At first that land was
subject of a dispute between WAPDA Town and M/s Zulfiqar Dogar and Mukhtar
Dogar, but the court decided in favour of Dogars who constructed cattle shed at the
land in question.
283. Some local Christians also wanted that land to extend their graveyard adjacent
to the land. Reportedly a group of 25-30 people on 2t March 2005 started
dismantling the cattle shed which led to a row between the two groups. Some
individuals namely Zulfiqar Dogar, Mukhtar Dogar, Imran Dogar and Shah Behram
Dogar resorted to aerial firing. Resultantly, one individual named Irshad died while a
few others were injured.
284. On report of the incident, Police Station Sattokatla registered FIR No. 200/05
under section 302/324 of the Pakistan Penal Code. Those involved in the incident
were arrested and Police recovered a 30-bore pistol, 244 bore riffle and a pump action
from them. The case against the accused is presently being heard by Judge Ghulan
Rasool in Anti-Terrorism Court.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 63
Communication sent on 24 August 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on the
promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
285. The Special Rapporteurs were informed that, on 3 February 2005, Mohammed
Younus Shaikh was arrested by police in the city of Kharadar for having distributed
copies of his book, “Shaitan Maulvi” (Satanic Cleric), in which he stated that stoning
to death (Rajam) as a punishment for adultery was not mentioned in the Quran. He
was also accused of insulting four local Imams (religious leaders) by describing them
as “Jews”. In response, local clerics issued several fatwas declaring that Younus
Shaikh should be killed for insulting Islam. On 11 August 2005 he was sentenced to
life imprisaiment by a special “anti-terrorism” court for writing and distributing
books that contained blasphemous and sacrilegious material. He was being held in
solitary confinement in Karachi Central Prison. Concern was expressed that the
charges brought against Mohammed Younus Shaikh were a means of restricting his
right to freedom of religion and his right to freedom of opinion and expression, and
also a tool at silencing human rights defenders.
Communication sent on 17 November 2005
286. On 12 November 2005, a group of between 1,500 to 2,000 unidentified
individuals attacked and set fire to a number of churches and other Christian buildings
in the town of Sangla Hills in Pakistan. The buildings that were attacked included a
Catholic Church, a Salvation Army Church, a United Presbyterian Church, a school
and a student hostel. According to the information received, approximately 450
Christian families had left theft homes the night before after receiving threats from
local residents. The incident took place after the alleged burning of an Islamic school
and the desecration of the Koran by a Christian man on 11 November 2005.
Response from the Government dated 20 December 2005
287. The Government informed that it had investigated the details of the incident
and that the relevant authorities had provided the following information. An
individual threw a burning match into Quaran Mahal, where old copies of the Holy
Quran are preserved. As a result, copies of the Holy Quran caught fire. A case was
registered against the accused at Sangla Hill police station and he was interrogated in
accordance with procedure. Soon after the incident, District Police Officers arrived at
the scene to control the mob. To maintain peace and order, the District
Administration also requested representatives of traders, student leaders and other
prominent personalities to use their influence to avert any demonstration or
procession. The protestors who were allegedly involved in damaging the properties
and Churches of the Christian community have been arrested and a case under 16
N'IPO and the Anti-terrorist Act has been registered against them at City Police
Station, Sangla Hill.
288. The Government has taken a number of measures to carryout a thorough and
effective investigation and to dispense justice. An Enquiry Officer has been
appointed who enquire into the failure of the local police to take effective preventative
measures. In addition, a Tribunal will conduct an inquiry into the incident and submit
a report to the Government. Two platoons of the Punjab Constabulary, along with
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 64
officers from Sangla Hill police force were deployed at local churches and residences
of Christians in Tariq Colony for the safety and protection of minorities. In addition,
religious leaders of both Muslim and Christian communities have been approached to
use theft influence to keep the city peaceful and calm.
Observations
289. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the Government's response and
investigations into the cases of Pastor Fazal and Pastor Babar and his driver.
290. She would like to draw the Government's attention to paragraph 12 of
Resolution 2005/40 of the Commission on Human Rights with regard to her
communication concerning the arrest of Mohammed Younus Shikh. In paragraph 12
the Commission on Human Rights emphasizes that restrictions on the freedom to
manifest religion or belief are permitted only if limitations are prescribed by law, are
necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals or the fhndamental rights
and freedoms of others, and are appliedin a manner that does not vitiate the right to
freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
291. She would also like to encourage the Government, with regard to the Sangla
Hills violence, to continue taking the necessary steps to comply with paragraph 8 (a)
of Resolution 2005/40 of the Commission on Human Rights which urges states to step
up theft efforts to eliminate intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief
notably by taking all necessary and appropriate action, in conformity with
international standards of human rights, to combat hatred, intolerance and acts of
violence, intimidation and coercion motivated by intolerance based on religion or
belief, with particular regard to religious minorities.
Republic of Korea
Communication sent on 24 May 2005
292. The Special Rapporteur had received reports that 1030 Jehovah's witnesses
were jailed in the Republic of Korea because they refhsed to do military service for
reasons related to their religious belief
293. The Special Rapporteur was informed that the Republic of Korea had not
established a mechanism to allow members of certain religious minorities not to serve
in the military, if theft belief forbids them to do so, e.g. it was claimed that 1030
Jehovah's witnesses were imprisoned for this reason Furthermore, there were reports
that these persons face discrimination once they leave the prison with regard to
employment and other social services
Response from the Government dated 29 July 2005
294. The Government provided the following information in response to the
Special Rapporteur's communication:
295. Regarding the accuracy of the infomiation, the Government informed that there
are 1,114 Jehovah's Witnesses who arejailed as of July 12, 2005, which roughly
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 65
conesponds to the information provided. There is no official record of Jehovah's
Witnesses facing discrimination with regard to employment or other social services after
they leave prison. Since conscientious objection to military service is not permitted by
law, there is a realistic possibility that such individuals may experience disadvantages.
However, this may be attributed purely to the free will of employers and does not stem
from systemic discrimination.
296. Regarding judicial procedures, the Government informed that on July 15, 2004,
the Supreme Court ruled that conscientious objectors to military service were guilty of
violating the Military Service Law. On August 26, 2004, the Constitutional Court
confirmed that Article 88 of the Military Service Law, intended to penalize the evasion of
conscription, is constitutional. However, the Court indicated that there is a need for the
legislature to develop a national solution in order to protect the conscience of
objectors to military service. Tn November 2004 a revision bill which aims at providing
Alternative Service for conscientious objectors to military service was proposed and this
is under discussion at the National Assembly.
297. The Government further indicated that in light of the specific circumstances in
the Republic of Korea, conscientious objection to military service needs to be restricted as
it may be harmful to national security.
298. Unlike the freedom to form or determine inner conscience, the freedom to
object to fulfilling the duty of military service for reasons of religion or conscience
may be restricted by Clause 3 of Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights for public causes in that it manifests or realizes one's
conscience through passive non performance.
299. Given the specific security circumstances in the face of a hostile North
Korea, the Republic of Korea, the world's sole divided nation, has adopted the
Universal Conscription System, which recognizes all citizens' obligation to
perform military service. Thus, the principle of equality in military service duty
and responsibility carries much greater significance in the Republic of Korea than
in any other country.
300. Considering the strong social demand for and expectation of equality in
the performance of military service, allowing exceptions to military duty may
undermine social unity and greatly harm national capabilities by giving rise in
society to the problem of inequality in the obligation to fhlfil military service.
301. Furthermore, the approval of conscientious objection to military service
while military manpower is still the mainstay of national defence may lead to the
misuse of conscientious objection as a legal devise to evade military service. This
would be greatly detrimental to national security by destroying the oasis of the
national military service system, the Universal Conscription System. This is of
particular concern in light of the social trend of attempting to evade military
service duty by using any and every means possible.
302. Various considerations in the Republic of Korea mean that the time is not
right for the adoption of the Alternative Service System even though it is under
discussion at the National Assembly.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 66
303. By its very nature a nation's military service system has a direct bearing
on national security. It is a matter of legislative discretion vested in the lawmakers
for the creation of a national army with the maximum capabilities for national
defence, taking into account a nation's geopolitical stance, internal and external
security conditions, economic and social state, and national sentiment, as well as
various other factors.
304. Considering the Republic of Korea's security situation, the demand for
equality in military service duties, and various concomitant tumbling blocks to the
adoption of the Alternative Service System, it does not seem that the ROK has
reached the necessary stage of improved conditions in security and military service
nor has national consensus been reached on this.
Observations
305. The Special Rapporteur is grateful for the Government's detailed
response. She has also taken note of the Government's position on conscientious
objectors through the third periodic State Party Report, which it submitted to the
Human Rights Committee in February 2005 (CCPR /C/KOR /2005/3). While she
notes that military service may sometimes be necessary for purposes of national
security she would like to draw the Government's attention to paragraph 11 of
General Comment 22 of the Human Rights Committee which provides that
although the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights “does not
explicitly refer to a right to conscientious objection, the Committee believes that
such a right can be derived from article 18, inasmuch as the obligation to use lethal
force may seriously conflict with the freedom of conscience and the right to
manifest one's religion or belief”
Romania
Urgent appeal sent on 21 October 2005
306. The Special Rapporteur had received information concerning the current
draft of a new religion law that was approved by the Government at its session on 14
July 2005 and recently sent to parliament under “emergency procedures.” It was
believed that the parliament would adopt the new law, set to replace the 1948
communist-era religion law which had remained in force in the post-communist era,
by the end of the year 2005. The draft law was at the time of the communication
being reviewed by the Committee on Human Rights, Religious Denominations and
Minorities of the Senate. It was also being considered by the parallel committee in the
lower house, the Chamber of Deputies.
307. Concerns had teen expressed that the proposed law divided religious
communities into three categories with widely differing rights. It was reported that 18
faiths recognised by the Government as “religious denominations” or “cults”, a
category that was allegedly almost inaccessible to other faiths, were given the greatest
rights. Those with fewer than about 22,000 members could register as “religious
associations” with lesser rights, while those with fewer than 300 members could only
fhnction as “religious groups” which were given no legal status.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 67
308. Reports indicated that, under the draft law, only the “recognised religious
denominations” or “cults” had the right to provide religious education in public
schools, establish their own religious schools, or receive financial support from the
state.
309. Besides, Article 13 paragraph 3 of the draft prescribes punishment only for
those who obstruct the religious practice of members of the “recognised
denominations”, providing no such protection to unrecognised communities. In this
regard, concern was also expressed about the alleged undefined powers which the law
gives to the State in deciding which religious communities should gain the status of
“recognized religious denominations”.
Observations
310. The Special Rapporteur is concerned that the Government has not responded
to her communication. In this regard she would like to draw the Government's
attention to paragraph 4(a) of Resolution 2005/40 of the Commission on Human
Rights which urges States to ensure that their constitutional and legislative systems
provide adequate and effective guarantees of freedom of thought, conscience and
religion and belief to all without distinction. Furthermore, paragraph 4(c) of the same
Resolution requires States “to review whenever relevant existing registration practices
in order to ensure the right of all persons to manifest theft religion or belief, alone or
in community with others and in public or private.”
311. In addition, the Special Rapporteur would like to reiterate the points made
with regard to this issue by her predecessor in the report submitted to the Commission
on Human Rights following his visit to Romania in September 2003
(E/CN.4/2004/63/Add.2, paras 94 to 96): “With regard to the distinction between
recognized religions and non-recognized religions or religious or faith-based
communities, the Special Rapporteur [ 1 considers that the principle of freedom of
religion or belief, as enshrined in international human rights law, is difficult to
reconcile with a formal or legal distinction between different kinds of religious or
faith-based communities insofar as such a distinction in theft status must imply a
difference in rights or treatment, which may, in some cases, constitute discrimination
that is incompatible with the exercise of human rights”. The Special Rapporteur
therefore encouraged “the RomanianGovernment to abolish the distinction between
recognized and non-recognized religions, possibly when it adopts the new law on
religions, which it is hoping to do in the near fhture. In any case, the Government
should ensure that this distinction does not lead to discrimination that is incompatible
with international human rights law or to restrictions that might curtail the right to
freedom of religion or belief, in violation of international law”.
312. The Special Rapporteur wishes to receive further information from the
Government, including regarding the compatibility of its measures concerning
religious communities with relevant international human rights law.
Russian Federation
Response from the Government dated 30 June 2004 to a communication sent on
26 March 2004 (See E/CN.4/2005/61/Add. 1, at paragraph 202)
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 68
313. The relevant ministries and departments have no information concerning the
alleged violations of the rights of the Grace Pentecostal Church and the Orthodox
Parish of the Annunciation. The leaders of the congregations have not filed
complaints in the courts regarding any unlawfhl actions by the authorities of the city
of Sovetskaya Gavan.
Response from the Government dated 24 March 2005 to a communication sent
on 27 October 2004 (See E/CN.4/2005/61/Add. 1, at paragraph 203 -204)
314. The Government indicated that a religious conference entitled “International
Brotherhood of the Council of Churches” was held in August 2004 in the village of
Lyubuchany in the Chekhov district of Moscow oblast (region) on a plot of land
belonging to V.A. Chekanov and intended for farming. In contravention of articles 4,
5 and 7 of the Federal Meetings, Rallies, Demonstrations and Processions Act of 19
June 2004 no written notification of the holding of a public event at this place was
submitted to the Chekhov district local government authorities. The procurator's
office of the town of Chekhov was given notice by LI. Chekanova regarding the
impermissibility of holding a public event on a plot of land provided for farming and
of arbitrarily erecting a structure on it. The event nevertheless took place. In the
procurator's office V.A. Chekanov explained that the event could not be stopped in
view of the fact that about 5,000 people had arrived from various regions of Russia to
take part in the religious gathering.
315. With a view to ensuring law and order and averting any possible violations,
militia officers carried out a range of preventive measures in which the services of
Russia's Ministry of Emergency Situations and first-aid teams were also involved. No
disturbances of public order occurred during the holding of the conference. The
actions of the law-enforcement bodies were recognized as justified by the procurator's
office of the Chekhov district of Moscow oblast. The prayer house of the International
Union of Churches of the Evangelical Christian Baptists ( IUC ECB) located at 38,
Novaya Street, in the village of Lyubuchany belongs to the Kareev family. In
connection with the arson of this house, a criminal case was initiated pursuant to
article 167, paragraph 2, of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (intentional
destruction or damaging of property), and proceedings are now being conducted by
the investigative section of the Chekhov district internal affairs department of
Moscow oblast.
316. The Government fhrther indicated that the reason for the closure of the annual
Urals regional Jehovah's Witnesses congress, held in July 2004 in the Uralmash sports
stadium of the city of Yekaterinburg, was the cancellation of the rental agreement by
the management of the stadium.
Additional response from the Government dated 19 April 2005
317. As a result of fhrther inquiries into the incident involving the disruption of a
congress of the Jehovah's Witnesses religious organization at the Uralmash sports
stadium on 10 March 2004, the acting procurator of the Ordzhonikidze district of the
city of Yekaterinburg opened a criminal case on the basis of indications of an offence
under article 148 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (obstruction of the
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 69
exercise of the right to freedom of conscience and religion). The progress of the
investigation into this case is being supervised by the Office of the Procurator -General
of the Russian Federation.
Communication sent on 17 March 2005
318. The Special Rapporteur was informed that, in southern Russia, three
confessions regarded as “traditional”, namely the Greek Orthodox, the Muslims and
the Jews, had all failed to regain theft places of worship which were confiscated by
the state in Communist times.
319. The Greek Orthodox community in the city of Krasnodar is part of the
Moscow Patriarchate and has the support of its local Russian Orthodox bishop. Yet it
has failed to get the authorities to return a church it can prove belonged to it, which
now houses a state sanitation and disease control department. Indeed, despite having
the backing of its local Russian Orthodox bishop, the Greek Orthodox community has
unsuccessfully fought to win back its historical church building for eight years.
Currently scattered among Russian Orthodox parishes, there were approximately
1,000 practising Greek Orthodox in Krasnodar region. Although they were content to
be under the Moscow Patriarchate and currently had access to priests who have a
reasonable knowledge of Greek, the Greek Orthodox would be able to worship as one
parish led by an ethnic Greek priest if they had theft own church. In particular,
parishioners could then make their confessions in Greek and obtain commemoration
services for the thousands of Greek victims of the 1915 genocide in present-day
eastern Turkey and local Stalinist purges dftected against Greeks in 1938.
320. Moreover, the Krasnodar's Progressive Jewish community, another
confession usually counted as “traditional” in Russia, had abandoned its nine year
struggle to win back a pre-revolutionary synagogue in the city centre that the
community once used and which would now be a government trade department. The
70-strong Progressive Jewish congregation is currently able to meet for worship at
nearby rented premises, where there would not be enough space at festivals. In late
October 2004, Krasnodar region's religious affairs official, Mr. Aleksandr Babskov,
reportedly stated that he did not have official confirmation that the building in
question had ever been a synagogue, and claimed to be unaware of any official claim
to it by a religious community.
321. Finally, in the neighbouring region of Stavropol, the local Muslim
community had similarly fought in vain for over ten years for the restitution of a pre-
revolutionary city mosque, which currently houses Stavropol's regional museum.
According to a March 2004 statement from the Council of Muslim Religious
Organisations in Stavropol City, the region's arbitration court finally refhsed to hear a
case set to decide the issue - after seven months of preliminary deliberations - on the
grounds that it was “outside its competency”. The local Muslim community was
forced to file the suit with the court in the fftst place, explains the statement, because
the Stavropol regional authorities repeatedly refhsed to acknowledge receipt of a 31
December 1999 instruction issued by Russia's Ministries of Culture and State
Property demanding the return of the former mosque to local Muslims. In late October
2004, Mufti Ismail Berdiyev of the Spftitual Directorate of Muslims of Karachai-
Cherkessia and Stavropol Region maintained that the Stavropol regional authorities'
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 70
apparent support for the creation of a local muftiate separate from his own was due to
his insistence upon the return to believers of the historical mosque in Stavropol city.
Response from the Government dated 15 August 2005
322. The Government informed that under Article 22 of the Freedom of
Conscience and Religious Associations Act, only a religious organization registered
as a corporation was entitled to request that places of worship belonging to the State
be transferred to it. At the time of the application, the Greek Orthodox Brotherhood
of SS Constantine and Elena had not been re-registered in order to confirm its status
as a corporation and as such the building could not be transferred to it.
323. The Synagogue is a site of historical and cultural importance. The issue of
transferring title of the building has never been brought before the courts. In 2005,
Krasnodar's Deputy Chief Executive has justified the refusal to approve the transfer
on the grounds that the building is encumbered by contractual obligations with a
regional voluntary organization of law enforcement officers, security guards, police
and detective organizations.
324. The Mosque is a federally listed historical and cultural monument, which
houses the G.N. Prozritelev and G.K. Prave Stavropol Local Museum. The Federal
Ministry of Culture does not object to a religious heritage site being used for its
originally intended purpose. However, such a transfer would only be possible if the
museum gave its consent and was provided in advance with comparable premises. To
date no comparable premises have been offered to the Museum and as such, the
transfer of the Mosque to the Muslim religious organization is not possible at the
present time.
Observations
325. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the Government's responses to these
communications and would appreciate being notified of the progress of the
investigation regarding the incident at Uralmash sports stadium on 10 March 2004.
Furthermore she would like to draw the Government's attention to paragraph 4(b) of
Resolution 2005/40 of the Commission on Human Rights in which States are urged to
exert the utmost efforts, in accordance with their national legislation and in
conformity with international human rights law, to ensure that religious places, sites,
shrines and religious expressions are fully respected and protected.
326. The Special Rapporteur would also like to take this opportunity to insist on
receiving an invitation from the Government to visit the Russian Federation. As she
underlined in her previous report to the General Assembly (A/60/399), the
Government has been reminded of this request for an invitation on many occasions
since 1998.
Saudi Arabia
Urgent appeal sent on 13 May 2005 with the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention and the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the
right to freedom of opinion and expression
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 71
327. The Special Rapporteurs brought to the attention of the Government
information they had received concerning the arrest of 40 Pakistani Christians during
a meeting for worship in Badeea district, the arrest of three Egyptian Christians and a
raid of a house church in A1-Olaya district, all in Riyahd.
328. On 22 April 2005, 40 workers from Pakistan, resident in Saudi Arabia, were
arrested by officials from the independent body ensuring the conformity with religious
norms under the religious authorities (muttawa) while meeting forjoint Catholic-
Protestant prayer. Several muttawa surrounded the house, beat some of the
worshippers, destroyed Christian symbols and confiscated bibles, tapes and other
Christian materials. All persons present, including minors, were detained at the Dera
police station and later released. The police refhsed to return the labor cards that
foreigneis need in order to be able to stay in Saudi Arabia.
329. On 24 April 2005, the Saudi Police arrested three Egyptian citizens residing
in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Nabil NassifYoussef, 35 years, Hani Nassif
Youssef, 30 years, Youssef Nassif Youssef, 25 years, in Riyadh. They were accused
of preaching Christianity because bibles were found in their possession. They were
held incommunicado. It was unclear whether charges had been brought against them.
330. On 29 April 2005, muttawa, together with several high-ranking sheiks, broke
up a private worship service of 60 Ethiopian and Eritrean Christians in A1-Olaya
district. They arrested five of them (Yemane Gebre Loul and Gazai Zarom from
Eritrea and Msfen Tekle, Yonas Tekle, and Teklu Mola from Ethiopia) who were
transferred to prison facilities of the Ministry of Interior, where they were still held at
the time of the communication. Police also confiscated the worshippers' bibles.
Urgent appeal sent on 29 November 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on the
independence of judges and lawyers, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion
and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special
Rapporteur on torture and the Special Rapporteur on the right to education
331. The Special Rapporteurs brought to the attention of the Government
information they had received according to which, on 12 November 2005, a Court in
Bukairia permanently banned Mr. Muhammad al-Harbi, a high school chemistry
teacher in Qassim Province, from teaching and sentenced him to 40 months
imprisonment and to a public flogging of 750 lashes after he was found guilty of
blasphemy (15 lashes per week at the public market in the town of A1-Bikeriya in Al-
Qassim). The sentence against him was based on complaints from students and their
parents, as well as a number of his colleagues who teach religious studies of the
Muslim faith at his school. They claimed that Mr. Al-Harbi had mocked Islam and
had attempted to sow doubt in the students' creed by sharing his opinion with them on
various topics including Christianity, Judaism and the causes of terrorism. He had
moreover encouraged his students to engage in critical thinking in resolving apparent
differences of meaning between the Koran and the words and deeds of the prophet
Muhammad. Mr. Al-Harbi was not allowed to attend the trial against him and his
lawyer was not recognised by the Court. Mr. Al-Harbi is appealing the decision.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 72
332. In March 2004, Mr. Muhammad al-Sahimi, a former Arabic teacher in
middle and high school, was banned from teaching and sentenced to three years
imprisonment and to 300 lashes for having expressed his views in class. The court had
found him guilty of un-Islamic, sexual, social and religious practices. Charges against
him had mainly been based on discussions he led onthe varying concepts of love in
poetry. Religion teachers at his schools had interpreted his words as constituting
apostasy.
333. The Special Rapporteurs requested the Government to indicate on what legal
basis Mr. Al-Harbi and Mr. Muhammad al-Sahimi had been sentenced and subjected
to criminal sanctions, and how this legal basis was compatible with international
norms and standards on the rights and freedoms provided for in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. They also wanted to know on what legal bas is Mr. Al
Harbi's lawyer was not recognized by the Court, and how this legal basis was
compatible with international norms and standards on the right to appropriate legal
assistance during a trial.
Observations
334. The Special Rapporteur is concerned that the Government has not responded to
her urgent appeals. She would like to draw the Government's attention to paragraph 9
of General Comment 22 of the Human Rights Committee which provides that “the
fact that a religion is recognized as a state religion or that it is established as official or
traditional or that its followers comprise the majority of the population, shall not
result in any impairment of the enjoyment of any of the rights under the Covenant,
including articles 18 or 27, nor in any discrimination against adherents to other
religions or non-believers. In particular, certain measures discriminating against the
latter [ ...] are not in accordance with the prohibition of discrimination based on
religion or belief and the guarantee of equal protection aider article 26. The measures
contemplated by article 20, paragraph 2 of the Covenant constitute important
safeguards against the infringement of the rights of religious minorities and other
religious groups to exercise the rights guaranteed by articles 18 and 27, and against
acts of violence or persecution directed towards those groups.” Paragraph 10 provides
that: “If a set of beliefs is treated as official ideology in constitutions, statues,
proclamations of ruling parties etc. or in actual practice, th shall not result in any
impairment of the freedoms under article 18 or any other rights recognized under the
Covenant nor in any discrimination against persons who do not accept the official
ideology or who oppose it.”
335. The Special Rapporteur is concerned about the measures taken against those
individuals or groups who profess a different religion to the official religious doctrine
and urges the Government to take steps to ensure that freedom of religion does not
make adherence to a religion other than t1t State religion impossible.
Serbia and Montenegro
Response from the Government dated 14 February 2005 to a communication
sent on 27 October 2004 (See E/CN.4/2005/61/Add. 1, at paragraph 210)
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 73
336. The Government informed that the Bill was drafted by the Ministry of
Religious Affairs of the Republic of Serbia, with the aim of regulating relations
between State and the Church. The Bill was drafted because the previous Law on the
issue was repealed in 1993. The draft Bill has not yet been considered by the
Government or the Assembly of the Republic of Serbia. The Government enclosed a
memo prepared by the Ministry of Religious Affairs, containing a number of
observations and comments on the Bill.
Communication sent on 17 March 2005
337. The Special Rapporte ur sent this communication to raise her concern in view
of reports that the latest and fourth draft of the proposed religion law would, like
previous drafts on which she had previously sent a communication on 27 October
2004 (see above), divide religious communities into “traditional” faiths and other
faiths with lesser rights. Baptist Pastor Dane Vidovic indicated that this division “is
critical, because it will affect other laws and areas of life, including rights to religious
education in public schools, taxes and property, social security and pension funds.”
Religion Minister Milan Radovic has reportedly wrongly justified this situation on the
basis that Serbia is the “only country in Europe without a law regulating relations
between the state and religious communities”, claiming that this is a “dangerous legal
void”. Reports indicate that the religion ministry is attempting to fmalize the text after
receiving many critical comments from domestic and international non-governmental
organizations and religious groups. It is convening a roundtable discussion of this
latest draft with religious organizations and legal specialists, as well as representatives
of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the Council of
Europe.
338. Serbia has not Md a law on religious communities since 1993 and attempts to
draft this new law have been controversial. For the last 13 years, religious
communities attempting to gain legal status in Serbia have had to register as citizens'
associations, which is legally problematic.
Response from the Government dated 18 April 2005
339. The Government noted that its response dated 14 February 2005 sent to a
communication dated 27 October 2004 on the same issue as those raised in the
communication sent on 17 March 2005 had not been included in the report for the 61 st
Session of the Commission on Human Rights.
Observations
340. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the responses received from the
Government, along with the copy of the draft bill and the observations and comments.
Sri Lanka
Communication sent on 20 January 2005
341. The Special Rapporteur had received information according to which, with
the controversial anti-conversion bill to be presented in the Parliament shortly, anti-
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 74
Christian sentiments had re-surfaced with the main Buddhist representative party, the
Jathika Hela Urumaya (JT4U) protesting against large amounts of Tsunami funds
being allocated to Christian organisations.
342. The initial protests in this regard were allegedly directed at the Sri Lankan
branch of the World Vision following fhnds generated from the Tsunami-aid cricket
match being directed to the organisation for relief work.
343. The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna party (JYP), had allegedly joined in the
accusations that the allocation of fhnds to World Vision Sri Lanka would make
conversions from Buddhism to Christianity more rampant.
Response from the Government dated 17 March 2005
344. The Government indicated that it was not in a position to substantiate, deny
or justify any statement or opinion expressed by independent political parties or
organizations with regard to the allegations and concerns expressed in the Special
Rapporteur' s communication.
345. Within the country's democratic framework that provides for the freedom of
expression and opinion, independentpolitical parties, civil society organizations and
religious groups and individuals have expressed different views on the subject of
alleged unethical religious conversions in Sri Lanka. Therefore, it was the wish of the
Government of Sri Lanka that during the forthcoming visit to Sri Lanka, the Special
Rapporteur would be able to speak to all stakeholders on the issue of alleged unethical
conversions and form an independent opinion on the subject, while appreciating the
democratic framework that prevails in Sri Lanka not only with regard to freedom of
religion or belief but also to the freedom of expression and opinion.
Urgent appeal sent on 25 May 2005
346. The Special Rapporteur was informed that the erection of a Buddha statute in
abus -stand in the town of Trincomalee had provoked angry reactions since 17 May
2005. Two explosions had allegedly occurred close to the site where the Buddha
statute stands; protests and demonstrations opposing the erection of the statute had
taken place and a number of public establishments, schools, banks and other buildings
had been closed for several days. As a result of the explosions and disturbances, one
person was allegedly killed and a few others were injured.
Observations
347. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the Government's response dated 17
March 2005 and would like to take this opportunity to once again thank the
Government for having enabled her to visit Sri Lanka from 2 to 12 May 2005. For a
fhll analysis of the situation of freedom of religion or belief in Sri Lanka, including
regarding the issues raised above, the Special Rapporteur refers to the report she has
recently submitted following her visit (E/CN.4/2006/5/Add.3).
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 75
Thailand
Communication sent on 12 July 2005
348. The Special Rapporteur sent this communication in relation to a series of
beheadings of Buddhists by Muslim militants between November 2004 and June
2005. A similar incident was subject of a communication on 14 June 2004, to which
the Government replied on 6 July 2004 (See E/CN.4/2005/6 1/Add. 1, at para. 227 to
232).
349. On 15 June 2005 the corps of a retired Buddhists teacher, aged 65, was found
in Pattani Province. He had been beheaded by a group of Muslims who left a note
next to the head, saying that they would kill two civilians for every innocent Muslim
detained by the authorities without evidence.
350. On 5 June 2005 the body of Boonchan Saipeth, aged 59, a rubber plantation
employee, was found at his house in Yaha district of Yala province. His head had
been left hundred meters away on the road.
351. On 9 November 2005, the decapitated body of Kaew, aged 60, was found in
a house in Changpeuk village in Narathiwat province. Police found handwritten letters
with the body that threatened more attacks on religious grounds.
352. On 2 November 2005 the head of deputy village chief Ran Tulae was found
by a road in southern Narathiwat province. The rest of the body was discovered on the
same road a kilometer away together with a note saying the killing was in revenge for
the killing of Muslims in November in Tak Bai district.
Observations
353. The Special Rapporteur is concerned that there has been no response yet to
this communication and hopes that the Government will remedy this situation in the
near fhture. She would like to draw the Government's attention to Paragraph 8 (a) of
Resolution 2005/40 which urges states to step up their efforts to eliminate intolerance
and discrimination based on religion or belief notably by taking all necessary and
appropriate action, in conformity with international standards of human rights, to
combat hatred, intolerance and acts of violence, intimidation and coercion motivated
by intolerance based on religion or belief She would also like to refer to paragraph
10 of the same resolution, in which the Commission on Human Rights emphasizes the
importance of a continued and strengthened dialogue among and within religions or
beliefs, encompassed by the dialogue among civilizations, to promote greater
tolerance, respect and mutual understanding.
354. Moreover, as she underlined in her previous report to the Commission on
Human Rights (E/CN.4/2005/61, para. 42), “human rights obligations of States [ 1
also consist in ensuring the free exercise of freedom of religion or belief by protecting
religious minorities and enabling them to practise theft faith in all security. States also
have an obligation to bring the perpetrators of acts of violence or of other acts of
religious intolerance to justice and to promote a culture of religious tolerance”.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 76
Turkey
Communication sent on 22 June2005 with the Special Rapporteur on the
promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and
the Special Rapporteur on torture
355. The Special Rapporteurs brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Mr. Mehmet Tarhan who was arrested on 8 April 2005, early in the
morning, and brought to a military unit in Tokat, and later transferred to the military
prison in Sivas. A declared conscientious objector to compulsory military service,
Mehmet Tarhan was charged under Article 88 Turkish Military Penal Code for
insubordination. In the Sivas Military Prison, according to his lawyer, he faced threats
and abuse by fellow detainees without any intervention on his behalf of the prison
staff. On his arrival, staff sergeant Mustafa S clvi threatened Mehmet Tarhan with
transfer to “Common Cell No. 2”, where the “wildest” prisoners are imprisoned. Later,
he was ordered to enter a darkened “Common Cell No. 1” where the inmates
threatened him with death for being a traitor and beat him and pulled his hair. He was
later transferred to a single cell, where he continued to be subject to threats, beatings,
and demands for money and clothes from fellow prisoners. He sustainedinjuries to
his lips, bruises to his chin, neck, body, knee, legs and feet. As a result of his injuries
he has experienced breathing pains, hair loss, and difficulty standing. Despite
informing the prison staff, they did not prevent fhrther attacks, but rather encouraged
other prisoners to beat him. Following the requests from his lawyer, the prison
authorities recorded his abuse and undertook to ensure his safety. However no
information was available concerning any investigations carried out. Mehmet Tarhan
had reportedly gone on a hunger strike to protest his treatment in detention.
Response from the Government dated 7 October 2005
356. The Government indicated that Mr. Mehmet Tarhan was being sought for
failing to report for military service when he was caught on 10 April 2004 in Izmir.
Later he was transferred to Menderes Recruitment Office in Izmir and then to his
military unit where he did not obey the instructions given to him, declaring his refhsal
to perform military service on grounds of conscientious objection. He was transferred
to Military Prison after he was arrested on 11 April 2005. His lawyers lodged
complaints with the Military Prosecution Office on 3 May, 25 May and 6 June 2005,
alleging ill-treatment in prison.
357. Mehmet Tarhan was released on 9 June 2005 during his trial on the charge of
insubordination to avoid military service under Article 88 of Military Penal Code.
However, he committed the same offence after his release and was returned to the
military unit he was assigned to. A second investigation was commenced against
Mehmet Tarhan who was later arrested upon the Court's ruling. The Military Court
convicted him on both insubordination charges and sentenced him to a total of 4 years
imprisonment and also ruled on the continuation of his arrest at the hearing held on 10
August 2005 for both cases.
358. His lawyers have submitted a petition for extension of time to appeal against
the Court's ruling which is at the stage of being notified to the parties.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 77
359. An inquiry was launched by the MilitaryProsecution Office into his
allegation of ill-treatment in prison. This inquiry is still underway.
360. Mehmet Tarhan went on hunger strike between 25 May and 29 June 2005
during which he refused any assistance including food and drink and consumed only
sugar and vitamin pills.
361. The Government fhrther informed the Special Rapporteur that Article 72 of
the Turkish Constitution stipulates that national service is the right and duty of every
Turkish citizen, the implementation of which shall be regulated by law. In this
framework, according to Article 1 of the Military Act No. 1111 military service is an
obligatory service for every man who is a citizen of the Republic of Turkey. In this
light, it is not possible to be exempted from military service on grounds of
conscientious objection under Turkish legislation in force. Currently, there is no
legislation or application on alternative service in Turkey.
362. The Government indicated that conscientious objection has not been
recognized as a right under international law. In this framework, Article 4(3) b) of the
European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms stipulates that
forced or compulsory labour shall not include “any service of a military character or,
in case of conscientious objectors in countries where they are recognized, service
exacted instead of compulsory military service”. Thus, this provision explicitly leaves
the recognition of conscientious objectors to the discretion of States. Similar wording
is used in Article 8(3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Furthermore, the European Court of Human Rights and the Commission have
supported the view that “the Convention and its Protocols do not guarantee, as such,
any right to conscientious objection and that Article 9 of the Convention, which
provision guarantees to everyone the right to freedom of thought, conscience and
religion, does not give conscientious objectors the right to be exempted from military
or substitute civilian service. It does not prevent a Contracting State from imposing
sanctions on those who refuse such service (cf. No. 7705/76, Dec. 5.7.77. D.R.9 p.
196; No. 10600/83, Dec. 14. 10.85, D.R. 44 p. 155; and No. 17086/90, Dec. 6. 12.91,
D.R. 72, p. 245).
Additional response from the Government dated 2 December 2005
363. The Government informed that Military Prosecutor's Office initiated an
investigation into the allegations of ill-treatment at the Military Prison at the 5 th
Infantry Training Brigade Command, where he is currently detained. As a result of
the investigation, an indictment was issued on 26 October 2005 charging an officer
and a non-commissioned officer in the military prison administration with neglecting
official duty and charging two detainees with looting. The trial is underway at the
Military Court of the 5 th Infantry Training Brigade Command.
Observations
364. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the Government's response to this
communication. However, she would like to underline that she did not raise the issue
of conscientious objection under article 8 of the ICCPR but rather under article 18
ICCPR. Moreover, the right to conscientious objection has been addressed by the
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 78
Human Rights Committee, which stressed, in paragraph 11 of its General Comment
22 that although the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights does not
explicitly refer to a right to conscientious objection, the Committee believes that
such a right can be derived from article 18, inasmuch as the obligation to use lethal
force may seriously conflict with the freedom of conscience and the right to
manifest one's religion or belief
Turkmenistan
Communication sent on 17 March 2005
365. The Special Rapporteur addressed several situations in this communication.
366. The following situations involving Jehovah's Witnesses had been brought to
her attention: on 8 September 2004, Gulzhemal Allagulyyeva a Jehovah's Witness
from the Khojamb district of Turkmenabad region was fined 1,250,000 manats
allegedly because of her religious activities. She was reportedly forced to sign a
statement that she would stop sharing her faith with others. Reports indicated that an
officer of the NSM secret police and two officers of the police's 6th department,
which deals with terrorism, were present at the administrative commission.
367. In the evening of 29 September 2004, Altyn Jorayev a Jehovah's Witness
from Seydi, and her three children aged 6, 7 and 8 were visiting fellow believer
Babakuly Yakubov in the village of Khojakenepsi in Farab district. Three other
Jehovah's Witnesses, namely Shukurjan Khatamova, Rozyzhan Charyyev, and
Oguldurdy Altybayeva were also reportedly present. Four policemen suddenly entered
the apartment without producing any personal identification documents. Deputy
police chief Akhmetjan Alymov and Serdar Khuseynov searched the apartment for
religious literature and confiscated what they could find. Ms. Jorayeva and her
children were taken to the police station where the Chief of police, Mr. Khemrayev
interrogated her in an alleged verbally abusive manner. As a consequence of threats
and intimidation, her children were forced to utter the oath of loyalty to President
Saparmurat Niyazov as well as to recite verses to him. The family was released
shortly before midnight.
368. On 13 October 2004, Mr. Yakubov and Mr. Khatamov who were also
present during the above-mentioned raid, were summoned to the hyakimlik's
administrative commission and each fined 2,500,000 manats. The chairman of the
commission, Berdyyev, reportedly ordered hyakimlik official Abdull Charyyev to
have Mr. Yakubov dismissed from his work.
369. On 19 October 2004, officers of the hyakimlik of Ashgabad's Azatlyk district
forcibly took Vladimir Rodionov, an underage boy, from school to the hyakimlik.
Without notifying his mother, Tatyana Rodionova, Vladimir was intensively
interrogated and threatened in an alleged attempt to obtain the addresses of his
mother's fellow believers. He was forced to sign a statement that he would not attend
any more Jehovah's Witness meetings with his mother.
370. On 2 November 2004, the police arrested AmangozelAtageldiyeva,
Gu lshirin Atageldiyev Ayjemal Khummedovaand Maysa Annagylyjova in the
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 79
town of Saparmurat Turkmenbashi, in the Mary region of south-eastern Turkmenistan.
The four women were taken to the local administration, threatene d and allegedly
mocked with the aim of forcing them to abandon their religious views before they
were freed. Two fhrther Jehovah's Witnesses, Guncha Atageldiyeva and Bakhar
Sapayeva, were reportedly summoned and similarly threatened in the following days.
371. On 12 November 2004, Ms. Bilbil Kulyyevawas forcibly evicted from the
hostel in Ashgabad where she was living with her four children. The eviction was
reportedly ordered by the religious affairs department of Ashgabad city hyakimlik.
372. On 16 November 2004, a district police officer arrested Maksat Khalyshev
while he was in the street in an outlying suburb of Ashgabad. After finding a Bible
and other religious literature on him and in the absence of a permit to live in the
capital, Khalyshev was taken to the police station. He was reportedly verbally insulted
and humiliated before he was taken to a holding centre where he was kept for 24
hours in the open air on a cold concrete floor without any covering.
373. On 26 November 2004, Murat Saryyev, originally fran Dashoguz, was
summoned to the administration of Ashgabad's Kopetdag district. He was reportedly
met by a commission of nine persons in the room dedicated to the Ruhnama, a book
of President Niyazov's “spiritual” writings which has taken the place of the works of
Lenin as an object of official veneration. He was then reportedly humiliated by the
members of the commission who also allegedly threatened him that his apartment
would be confiscated and that he would be evicted from Dashoguz if he continued to
conduct meetings with his fellow believers in his apartment and to speak about the
gospel to others.
374. On 10 December 2004, Darya Meshcherina, a 20-year old Jehovah's Witness
in Ashgabad was arrested by the police after she gave a friend ‘ My Book of Bible
Stories”. Two police officers reportedly drove her to the police station where the
content of her bag was inspected and the following items were confiscated: The
Watchtower magazine, brochures, audiocassettes, photocopied sheets of paper and a
medical identification document. Reports fhrther indicate that she was forced to make
a written statement. Finally, on 20 December 2004, the Ashgabad's Azatlyk district
court fined her 2,500,000 manats under Article 205 of the Code of Administrative
Offences, which punishes any religious activity that has not been authorized by the
Government.
375. Finally, it has been brought to the attention of the Special Rapporteur that the
Jehovah's Witnesses are among a whole range of religious communities that had failed
to obtain registration with the Government and therefore the right to conduct any
religious activity. Other such faiths effectively banned would include all Protestant
denominations apart from the Adventists and possibly the Baptists whose registration
had not reportedly been completed eight months after they were given their
registration certificate, Shia Muslims, the Armenian Apostolic Church, the Catholics
(except on Vatican diplomatic territory), the Lutherans, the Jews, the Yezidis as well
as the New Apostolic Church. Besides, even for registered faiths such as the Muslims,
the Russian Orthodox, the Adventists, possibly the Baptists, the Hare Krishna
community and the Baha'is, religious activity is reportedly legal only in the few
authorised places of worship.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 80
376. T1 Special Rapporteur was also informed that two mosques were demolished
in Ashgabad in October 2004 in addition to the four demolitions which reportedly
took place earlier in the capital. Both mosques were located in Shor -Garadamak in
Azatlyk district of mrthern Ashgabad. Reports indicate that a sign hanging in front of
one of the properties indicated that the Azatlyk district police outreach unit would be
built to replace this mosque. All six mosques were reportedly destroyed a few days
before the start cf the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan.
377. Two people were allegedly arrested for protesting against the demolition of the
mosque near Ashgabad's Customs Clearing House. The names of those detained were
unknown and it was not known whether they were still be ing held or whether they
were punished for the protest.
378. The Special Rapporteur had fhrther been informed that the authorities
continued to retain tight control over all Muslim activity. For instance, it was reported
that the main imam for the city of Ashgibad, Hezretguly Khan, was dismissed in
September 2004 because “some Wahhabis” had been found in the city.
379. Finally, the 2004 pilgrimage to Mecca, the haj, as in previous years, saw only
188 pilgrims allowed to travel. This number was reportedly far below the reported
quota allocated to Turkmenistan by the Saudi authorities. It was reported that at least
one person who had been on the haj waiting list for at least 10 years went on this
year's haj by paying a bribe in US dollars to somebody else who had been on the
waiting list for less than 2 years.
380. The Special Rapporteur was also informed that Turkmenistan had increased the
number of religious prisoners of conscience it had jailed by imprisoning two fhrther
Jehovah's Witnesses, Atamurat Suvkhanov, aged 18, and Begench Shakhmuradov,
aged 26, for refhsing on religious grounds to serve in the armed forces. Atamurat
Suvkhanov was sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment in the north-eastern town of
Dashoguz on 17 December 2004, while Begench Shakhmuradov was reportedly
sentenced in the Azatlyk district of the capital Ashgabad to one year's imprisonment
on 10 February 2005. It was reported that Mr. Suvkhanov was held in the women's
labour camp in the eastern town of Seydi whereas the whereabouts of Mr.
Shakhmuradov were unknown. Both men were sentenced under Article 219 of the
Criminal Code, which punishes refhsal to serve in the armed forces. This brings the
total number of known religious prisoners of conscience in the State to five, four of
them Jehovah's Witnesses and one Muslim, the 57-year-old former chief mufti,
Nasrullah ibn Ibadullah , who was arrested after falling out with President Niyazov
and was sewing a 22-year sentence on charges that the Government allegedly refhsed
to make public. He had not been freed despite recent reported prisoner amnesties. The
two other Jehovah's Witness prisoners, Mansur Masharipov and Vepa Tuvakov, both
from Dashoguz, were reportedly sentenced on 28 May and 3 June 2004 on the same
grounds and were reportedly held in the Seydi men's labour camp. All these sentences
were reportedly issued following the televised announcement by President Saparmurat
Niyazov in early 2004 that all imprisoned conscientious objectors should be released.
Reports indicated that religious prisoners of conscience in Turkmenistan had been
harshly treated in the past, regularly beaten, threatened with homosexual rape, and in
one case allegedly treated with psychotropic drugs. Concerns had been expressed that
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 81
Turkmenistan offers no non-combat alternative to those who cannot serve in the
military on grounds of conscience.
Response from the Government dated 18 April 2005
381. The Government indicated that Turkmenistan is a secular State and,
according to the country's Constitution, religion is separate from the State. At the
same time, a respectful attitude to generally accepted norms and values in the spiritual
sphere of society is one of the main principles of the formulation and application of
State policy in Turkmenistan. In this connection, Turkmenistan has be en and remains
committed to the rigorous and consistent pursuit of a policy for the comprehensive
implementation of guarantees in the field of human rights and freedoms, including in
the sphere of religion or belief
382. In this context, the Government referied to the constitutional provision
specifying that in Turkmenistan “the State guarantees freedom of religions and faiths
and their equality before the law. Religious organizations are separate from the State
and may not intervene in affairs of State or perform State fhnctions. Everyone has the
right independently to determine his or her own religious preference, to practice any
religion alone or in association with others, to practice no religion, to express and
disseminate beliefs related to religious preference, and to participate in the
performance of religious cults, rituals and ceremonies” (article 11 of the Constitution
of Turkmenistan).
383. In accordance with domestic legislation, the registration of religious
organizations and groups is ensured in the territory of Turkmenistan through
compliance with generally recognized international norms regardless of their number,
faith or religion.
384. Convincing evidence of this process is the fact that Turkmenistan now knows
(officially registered and fhnctioning) teligious organizations and groups of Muslims,
Orthodox Christians, Seventh-day Adventists, Baha'is, Evangelical Christian Baptists
and a Hare Krishna group. In addition, on 16 April 2002 the following religious
organizations and groups were also registered: the Church of Christ, the “Greater
Grace” Evangelical Church, the “Light of the East” Church of Evangelical Christians,
the Full Gospel Christian Church and the New Apostolic Church. At the same time,
we can report that, following the humanistic traditions of the Turkmen people and
guided by the principles of justice, mercy and philanthropy, Vepa Tuvakov, Atamurat
Suvkhanov, Mansur Masharipov and Begench Shakhmuradov were pardoned by a
Presidential Decree of 16 April 2005.
385. The Government also indicated that there were no instances of the detention
of persons on account of theft religion or cases of application of administrative
sanctions against them. Furthermore, we can report that there are no instances of the
demolition of buildings in which religious ceremonies or acts of worship are
conducted.
386. Neutral Turkmenistan, strictly following the international obligations that it
has undertaken, is steadfastly pursuing a policy of close cooperation with the United
Nations and its institutions.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 82
387. In conclusion, the Government emphasized that Turkmenistan is
demonstrating in practice its readiness to engage in a dialogue at the level of the
international organizations, and primarily with the United Nations, in a spirit of
constructivism and dedication to the achievement of the common goals defined in the
name of peace and of the well-being of each of the peoples constituting the foundation
of our cooperation within the framework of the community of nations.
Observations
388. The Special Rapporteur is grateful for the Government's response. She
remains, however, concerned about the number of alleged cases of violations or
limitations of the right to freedom of religion or belief She also notes that the lack of
freedom of religion in Turkmenistan has been raised by other United Nations human
rights mechanisms. In its most recent concluding observations on Turkmenistan
(CERD/C/TKM /CO/5), the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
stated that, “while stressing the complex relationship between ethnicity and religion in
Turkmenistan, [ it noted] with concern information that members of religious groups
do not fhlly enjoy theft rights to freedom of religion”.
389. In particular, the Special Rapporteur wishes to emphasize that the right to
freedom of religion is not limited to members of registered religious communities. As
she reminded in her previous report to the Commission on human rights, referring to
the OSCE/ODIHR Guidelines for Review of Legislation pertaining to Religion or
Belief, “registration should not be compulsory, i.e. it should not be a precondition for
practicing one's religion, but only for the acquisition of a legal personality and related
benefits” (E/CN.4/2005/61, para. 58).
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Urgent appeal sent on 25 April 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on the
promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the
Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on torture
390. The Special Rapporteurs brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Hua Jin, a 35 year-old student and national of the People's Republic of
China, residing in Manchester, who was detained at Harmondsworth Immigration
Removal Centre and was at risk of imminent forcible return to China, following the
rejection of his asylum application. On 10 September 2003, around 2am, while on
vacation in China, he was arrested together with another person, Zhu Zhigong, in
Jinxi City, Liaoning, by officers of the Jinxi City Lianshan District Police. At the time
of their arrest, they were distributing Falun Gong-related flyers in a residential area.
They were brought to separate interrogation rooms on the second floor of the station
and interrogated about theft activities. Zhu Zhigong was beaten, including with
handcuffs. Hua Jin was slapped, beaten and kicked by three police officers, and lost a
tooth. The two men were later held together in a room, from which Hua Jin escaped
through a window. He reportedly remained in hiding for ten days in Taiyuan City,
Shanxi, before boarding a flight back to the United Kingdom on 21 September 2003.
He has been involved with Falun Gong activities prior to his arrival as a student in the
UK, for which his family has been threatened, and continues to be involved, including
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 83
protests against the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners before the Chinese
consulate in Manchester.
391. In view of allegations of ill-treatment of Hua Jin and threats related to his
practice of Falun Gong, concern was expressed that he might have been at risk of
torture or other forms of ill- treatment should he be returned.
Response from the Government dated 30 August 2005
392. On 30 August 2005 the Government replied to the communication of 25
April 2005 concerning Hua Jin. The Government informed that he was scheduled to
return to China on 26 April 2005. It informed that the allegations regarding Hua Jin's
treatment in China essentially repeat the account he gave to the Adjudicator who
heard his appeal against the refhsal of his asylum claim. The account Hua Jin gave to
the Adjudicator contained a number of discrepancies when compared with the
accounts he had previously put forward in support of his claim. The Adjudicator did
not accept that Hua Jin was arrested or persecuted in China. His application to appeal
against the Adjudicator's decision to the Immigration Appeal Tribunal was refused on
25 June 2004.
Communication sent on 14 July 2005
393. The Special Rapporteur first wished to condemn the bombings which took
place in London on 7 July 2005 and expressed her sympathy and her sorrow to the
families of all those killed. She also praised the Government as well as the people of
London for pursuing the values of tolerance and non- discrimination.
394. The Special Rapporteur then brought to the attention of the Government
information she had received according to which, despite strong calls from
community leaders not to retaliate on any group, following these attacks Muslims
across the country had been facing a stream of insults and attacks.
395. According to the information received, there had been several arson attacks
and acts of vandalism reported on mosques in various parts of the country, including
London, the West Midlands, Merseys ide, Leeds, Tower Hamlets [ east London],
Merton [ south London] Telford and Birkenhead. For instance, the police were
investigating a fire in a Leeds mosque, which might have been caused either by a
petrol bomb or an incendiary device.
396. It was fhrther repifted that Muslim monitoring groups had recorded with the
authorities between three and four thousand hatefhl and threatening messages
received by mosques across the country. The East London Mosque, near the site of
one of the attacks, had reportedly received hate c-mails and specific threats to disrupt
Friday prayers. A few police officers reportedly stood outside during the prayers on 8
July 2005, which ultimately ended without any incidents.
397. In view of the above, the Special Rapporteur welcomed reports that the
police service has increased patrols near places of worship and has put in place
consultations with a view to reassure and protects all individuals in the country.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 84
Response from the Government dated 30 September 2005
398. The Government first agreed that regrettably, such incidents do occur and it
is important that the police respond and make every effort to identify those
responsible.
399. With reference to the arson attempt on Armley mosque in Leeds, the
Government indicated that this attack was a failed attempt to set fire to the toilet block
of the mosque in the early hours of 8 July 2005. West Yorkshire Police had advised
the Government that it had not been possible to apprehend any suspects in relation to
the incident, because local CCTV did not give sufficiently good quality material to
identify anyone involved. Of course, should fhrther information come to light, this
position might have changed. They also confirm it was a relatively minor incident
(some burning material was pushed through a window, but no
accelerants/inflammable liquids etc. were used).
400. While the Government could not separately identify the incident of abusive
emails to the mosque in East London it confirmed that there were widespread reports
of abusive/threatening Islamophobic emails, letters and phone calls shortly after the
attacks.
401. The Prime Minister and the Home Secretary met faith leaders shortly after
the attacks and gave a commitment to intensify their work with faith communities
over the following months. That work was now taking place, with a programme of
ministerial meetings with community and faith group representatives, and a series of
working groups, including one addressing security issues, Islamophobia, protecting
Muslims from extremism, and community confidence in policing.
402. The police were alive to the need to reassure communities that might be
targeted and were liaising directly with community leaders and with local authorities
to ensure the safety and security of all theft communities at this time. This has
involved, for example, high visibility police patrols near mosques, following
consultation with representatives of local communities. In addition, the Government
had been working to reassure communities and to ensure they would receive feedback
about theft experiences. The Government fhrther assured the Special Rapporteur that
the police response to hate crime at all levels was robust. This work would continue
and relates to wider work the Home Office, regional and local partners and the police
are engaged into foster greater community cohesion and address community tensions.
For example, relationships have been developed with media outlets to ensure that
issues relating to race, cohesion, faith and asylum and immigration are reported in a
fair and responsible way, to avoid exacerbating tensions or creating a climate in which
extremism and hate crime are more likely.
403. The Government finally indicated that it continued to monitor community
tensions. On the whole, community relations remain positive and the sort of attacks to
which the Special Rapporteur referred in her communication are reducing and the
tension levels in communities returning to normal. The experiences of the past two
months had reinforced the Government's determination to root out unacceptable
behaviour.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 85
Observations
404. The Special Rapporteur is grateful for the Government's detailed responses
and welcomes the Government's commitment to take necessary measures to prevent
the reoccurrence of such acts.
United States of America
Communication sent on 23 May2005
405. The Special Rapporteur was informed that there had been several acts of
desecration of the Holy Koran during the interrogations of detainees at the detention
facility in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. It was for instance reported that a copy of the
Koran was flushed down a toilet by interrogators and that detainees have reacted to
such desecrations including by organizing a hunger strike. It was moreover reported
that instances of desecration of the Holy Koran may have taken place in other
detention facilities under control of the US Army.
406. These allegations began to appear through the media but also through the
testimonies of several former detainees. As a result of these allegations, a number of
demonstrations, rallies and other forms of popular reactions have taken place in
different places, including in Afghanistan, Indonesia and Pakistan, during which
people have been killed or injured.
Response from the Government dated 18 August 2005
407. The Government stated that the Department of Defense (DoD) has carefhlly
looked into the matter of Koran mishandling at the U.S. detention facility in
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The DoD investigation found five instances of apparent
mishandling by guards or interrogators.
408. The Government reemphasized its dedication to the freedom of religion. The
Joint Task Force has carefhlly implemented a standard operating procedure that
makes every effort to provide detainees with religious articles associated with the
Islamic faith (which was attached to the Government response) and takes particular
care that the Koran is handled in a respectful manner.
409. The alleged instances of Koran mishandling, and specifically the claim that a
Koran was flushed down the toilet, were the focus of an in-depth investigation that
was concluded on 3 June 2005. This investigation found no credible evidence that a
member of U.S. military personnel responsible for providing security to Al Qaeda
detainees under U.S. Control at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba ever flushed a Koran down
the toilet. An interview with the detainee who reportedly made this allegation revealed
that he was not a witness to any such mistreatment and no other claims of this type
have been made. The matter is therefore considered closed.
410. Since the issuing of Korans to detainees in January 2002, there have been
nineteen incidents involving handling of the Koran by Joint Task Force personnel, Of
these nineteen incidences, ten involved the touching of a Koran during the normal
performance of duty. The other nine incidents involved intentional or unintentional
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 86
mishandling of a Koran. General Hood, who led the investigation, identified seven
incidents where a guard may have mishandled a Koran. In two additional instances
(one confirmed) an interrogator may have mishandled a Koran. The investigation also
revealed fifteen cases in which the detainees themselves mishandled or
inappropriately treated the Koran.
411. With regard to the five instances of confirmed Koran mishandling the Joint
Task Force found:
1) During an interrogation in February 2002, a detainee complained that
guards at Camp X-ray kicked the Koran of a detainee in a neighbouring cell.
The interrogator reported the incident, the guards were aware of the
detainee's complaint but there is no evidence of fhrther investigation.
2) On 15 August 2003, two detainees complained that their Korans were wet
because the night shift guards had thrown water balloons on the cell block.
The complaints were recorded. It has not been determined whether fhrther
complaints were made by the detainees or whether their Korans were
replaced. There is no evidence of fhrther investigation into this incident.
3) On 21 August 2003, a detainee complained that a two-word obscenity had
been scrawled in English on the inside cover of his English-language Koran.
The complaint was recorded and the English-language Koran was taken from
the detainee who retained his Arabic -language Koran. There is no record of a
formal complaint of the detainee to the commander.
4) On 25 March 2005 a detainee complained to his guards that urine came
through an air vent and splashed on him and his Koran while he lay near the
air vent. A guard reported to his cellblock commander that he was at fault
since he had left his post to urinate outside and had done so near the air vent
so that the wind blew his urine into the air vent. The guard was relieved of
duty and the detainee was immediately issued with a fresh uniform and a new
Koran.
5) On 25 July 2003, a contract interrogator apologized to a detainee for
stepping on the detainee's Kifan in an earlier interrogation. The
memorandum of the 25 July 2003 interrogation shows that the detainee had
reported to other detainees that his Koranhad been stepped on. The detainee
accepted the apology and agreed to inform other detainees of the apology and
ask them to cease the disruptive behaviour caused by the incident. The
interrogator was later terminated for a pattern of unacceptable behaviour.
412. As part of the investigation, General Hood has determined that the current
guidance to the Guard force for handling the Koran is adequate although a number of
recommendations for minor modifications are under review. The Government feels it
is important to note the number of Korans (some 1600) which have been distributed
among detainees to facilitate thei desire to freely worship and the small number of
very regrettable incidents should be seen in light of the volume of efforts to facilitate
free religious practice.
Communication sent on 30 June 2005
413. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government
information she had received concerning the situation of Mr. Wazir Ahmed, Mr.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 87
Zahid Ahmed, Mr. Hashmat All, Mr. Abdul Majeed, Shamsulhaq, Mr.
Muhammad Aslam and Mr. Muhammad Abid, former detainees of the detention
facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. They were among a group of forty-five men
originally arrested four years ago in Afghanistan.
414. According to the information received, while they were in custody in
Guantanamo Bay, the aforementioned were victims of ill-treatment, such as sexual
harassment during prayers as well as humiliation through desecration of the Holy
Koran, which was deliberately designed to hurt theft religious beliefs.
Observations
415. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl to the Government for its detailed reply
and would like to refer to the joint report that she submitted with the Chairperson of
the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the
independence ofjudges and lawyers, the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and the Special Rapporteur on the
right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and
mental health, on the situation of detainees at Guantánamo Bay (E/CN.4/2006/120).
Uz bekistan
Communication sent on 4 May 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on torture
416. The Special Rapporteurs brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Mr. Iskander Tolipov, UYa-64/18 Prison infirmary, Tashkent, who was
imprisoned in KIN-36 Prison, Navoi City, from 17 December 2004 to 17 February
2005. When he arrived at the prison, guards stood in lines on either side of him and
beat him with truncheons. The guards prohibited him from praying or reading the
Koran. When he protested this rule, guards handcuffed and beat him several times
with truncheons on his chest and lower back and on the soles of his feet. After one of
the beatings, the prison director, Ziyodullal Madievich, asked him ‘Do you
understand the rules now?” After he replied that he would continue to pray, the
director instructed to the guards, ‘It seems he does not understand the rules,
continue.” He was also threatened with sexual assault. For refhsing to stop his
religious activity, he was later punished with six months in a damp isolation cell,
without heating or bedding. He became ill, and since 17 February 2005 he has been
held in the UYa-64/18 Prison infirmary, Tashkent, suffering from tuberculosis.
Iskander Tolipov was sentenced to seven years' and six months' imprisonment on 24
March 2002 for membership in an illegal religious organisation.
Response from the Government dated 1 July 2005
417. The Government informed that Iskander Tolipov was convicted of a number
of offences on 24 March 2002 and was sentenced to seven and a half months
deprivation of libeity. He is currently serving his sentence at UYa-64/36 in the city of
Navoi. It informed that no unlawful actions had been taken by the administration of
the prison. Furthermore, he did not show any signs of torture or ill-treatment when he
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 88
underwent a routine medical check on his arrival. They indicated that he had been
suffering from tuberculosis before he was admitted to the prison.
418. The Government informed that under Article 12 of the Penal Correction
Code, convicts are guaranteed freedom of conscënce. It informed that Iskander
Tolipov is entitled to profess any religion or not to profess and religion at all. The law
allows inmates to practice religious rites and make use of articles of worship and
religious literature. The Government informed that these requirements of the law are
strictly observed by the administration of the institution.
Communication sent on 7 June 2005
419. The Special Rapporteur was informed that Uzbek authorities had banned the
relics of two saints recognized by the Russian Orthodox Church from entering the
country. The two saints, Grand Duchess Elizaveta Fyodorovna and a lay-sister
Varvara, were reportedly both nuns martyred in 1918, by being thrown alive down a
mine shaft. Reports indicated that the relics had already been brought to eight other
former Soviet republics over the past six months.
420. The Special Rapporteur was fhrther informed that the Protestant Peace
Church, in the town of Chirchik, outside the capital Tashkent, and the capital's
Jehovah's Witness congregatbn were the latest religious communities to be refhsed
registration by the Government. Both communities would now be at risk of
prosecution and therefore the possibility of being imposed large fines and jail terms.
The reasons given to the Peace Church for the decision on 7 January 2005 reportedly
included the claim that theft application contained “many grammatical and spelling
mistakes.” In fact, it was reported that none of the reasons given were specified by
Uzbekistan's religion law. Reports indicate that the Tashkent community of the
Jehovah's Witnesses had long been denied registration, despite renewed attempts to
register since March 2004. Refhsal to register a religious community has serious
implications. Indeed, the country's law on religions makes the activities of an
unregistered religious community subject to prosecution, both as administrative and
criminal offences. Reports indicate that, in 2004, only one new non-Muslim religious
community was registered by the State.
421. On 11 February 2005, Hal im a Boltobayeva, a Muslim from Margelan
whose husband was in jail, had reportedly been freed after two months in jail and
given a one year suspended sentence. Concerns had been expressed that she was
framed by prison staff, after she refhsed to accept their claims that she dressed like a
“shahidka”, a term reportedly widely used for a female Muslim terrorist. She
reportedly wears the hijab headscarf and a long garment that covers her entire body.
In order to justify their actions, the prison staff claimed to have found leaflets on her
from the banned Islamist group Hizb-ut-Tahrir. However, Ms. Boltova insisted that
these leaflets were planted. The Prosecutor had reportedly demanded that she receive
a three year jail sentence, which demand Judge Zainuddin Begmatov did not accept.
Judge Begmatov, who presided at all three sessions of the trial, imposed the one year
suspended sentence for Ms. Boltobayeva's alleged breaching of both article 25 of the
Criminal Code (preparation for a crime or attempt to commit a crime) and article 159
(undermining the constitutional order).
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 89
422. Reports indicated that no investigation was conducted into the actions of the
prison staff.
423. According to the information received, the Uzbek Government was limiting
the number of adult Muslims who could go on the haj, or pilgrimage, to Mecca as
required by Islam. In 2004, only 4,200 of the more than 6,000 Uzbek citizens who
wanted to make the pilgrimage were allowed to go. The numbers were reportedly
controlled under an agreement between Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan, by which the
Saudis only issue haj visas to Uzbeks whose names were on a list drawn up by
representatives of the State Committee for Religious Affairs and the state -controlled
muftiate, or Islamic religious leadership. Uzbek state control was further ensured as
Uzbek Muslims reportedly have to travel to Saudi Arabia by air using only the state-
run Uzbek Airways. The cost of these flights would be prohibitively expensive for
most Uzbeks. The minority Shia Muslim community also experie nced problems in
making the haj with Sunnis.
424. The Special Rapporteur was also informed that there had been an increase in
trials in which Muslim religious convictions form part of the case against devout
Muslims. Uzbekistan had reportedly imprisoned two followers of Sufi Islam in
February 2005. Indeed, reports indicated that, on 17 February, the Tashkent regional
criminal court sentenced Abdurashid Toshmatov and Nurali Umrzokov to six years
imprisonment. They were reportedly both accused of breaching articbs 159
(undermining the constitutional order) and 244- 1 (preparation or distribution of
materials containing a threat to public security and public order) of the Criminal
Code. It was reported that it was clear during the trial that both Muslims were
adherents of the Sufi Naqshbandi order. It was alleged that Hizb-ut-Tahrir leaflets
were planted on them during their arrest and that they were tortured while in detention
in an attempt to extract a confession from them. Concerns had been expressed that the
case against the two men was completely fabricated and that they had no connection
to the banned Islamist Hizb-ut-Tahrir movement whatsoever.
425. On 14 February 2005, Tashkent City Criminal Court sentenced Ismatullo
Kudratov,DilshodYuldashev,and BatyrYuldashev to 7 years' imprisonment,
Hasan Asretdinov to 6 years, Abdullo Nurmatov, Negmajan Ermatov and Karim
Ziyayev to five and a half years, Eamberdiyev to five years, all under article 244-2,
part 1 of the Criminal Code (forming religious extremist organisatbns). The eight
men were reportedly accused of studying Islam from the position of Wahhabism. It
was reported that the court recognized that their only guilt was that they studied Islam
together and adhered to the Hanbali school of Islam. Reports indicated that they had
made no attempt to change the country's religious life by spreading their views to
other Muslims. The meetings of the eight men were allegedly a sort of “club” of like-
minded people, who discussed religion and read the Koran. Unlike traditional Uzbek
Muslims, these Muslims regarded the veneration of mazars and extravagant weddings
and fhnerals as deviations from Islam.
Response from the Government dated 2 August 2005
426. The Government informed that the import of religious relics into Uzbekistan
is covered by Cabinet of Ministers decision No.131 of 23 March 1999 regulating the
import and export of cultural property. In this connection, the competent bodies in
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 90
Uzbekistan have not dealt with the import into Uzbek territory of the relies of two
saints of the Russian Orthodox Church.
427. On 7 October 2004, Tashkent Province Justice Department received an
application to register the Protestant Peace Church. It informed that the application
contained several violations of the Regulations on processing applications to officially
register religious organizations. There was no indication of when the Charter had
been approved by the Organization's General Assembly and the Charter did not list
the members of the Governing Body. Moreover, in contravention of existing
legislation, the executive of another religious organization had approved the Charter.
As a result of these violations, the Protestant Peace Church was denied registration
and was notified of this decision in writing. The relevant authorities received a
second application on 12 April 2005, which was also denied due to breaches of the
Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations Act.
428. On 24 December 2004 the Tashkent City Justice Department received an
application from an initiative group in Tashkent's Yakkasarai district to register the
Jehovah's Witness religious organization. The application revealed a number of
serious breaches of the Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations Act and
the Regulations on processing applications to officially register religious
organizations. The documents had not been drafted in accordance with the
regulations and other essential documents had not been enclosed. As a result, the
application was denied.
429. An investigation by the competent auththties has revealed that the
allegations regarding Halima Boltobayeva have no basis in fact. The Government
informed that on 20 November 2004, Ms. Boltobaeva arrived at Penal Institution
No.64/46 in Navoy Prison, to visit her husband who was sentenced to seven years'
deprivation of liberty by Akhunbabaev District Court on 19 November 1999. She was
searched by the prison officers who found brochures and leaflets published by Hizb-
ut-Tahrir in condensed milk jars. The material called for the destruction of the
constitutional order and the overthrow of the authorities. As a result, criminal
proceedings were initiated against her on 23 November 2004 and she was remanded
in custody. She was subsequently convicted under Article 25, 1590) and 72 of the
Criminal Code. She was given a suspended sentence of three years' deprivation of
liberty.
430. The claim that Ms. Boltobaeva was framed by prison officers is based on
questionable sources. Her guilt is evidenced by the confiscation of the literature from
her possession, as confirmed by five witnesses, expert opinion and other elements of
the case file. Furthermore, the case file contains no evidence of any unlawfhl actions
on the part of the employees of the penal institution and Ms. Boltobaeva did not
submit any complaints to the prosecutorial agencies during the investigation or the
trial.
431. The Government informed that since independence, more than 50,000 Uzbek
pilgrims have made the haj to the holy places in Saudi Arabia and roughly 35,000
have made the little pilgrimage, or Umrah. The Muslim Board of Uzbekistan and the
Saudi Arabian Ministry of Pilgrimage Affairs conclude bilateral agreements on
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 91
pilgrimages. Accordingly, 5,000 pilgrims are due to travel from Uzbekistan to Saudi
Arabia in 2006. There are no restrictions on pilgrimages.
432. The Uzbek Government arranges essential assistance for pilgrims. Uzbek
pilgrims fly to Saudi Arabia on charter flights laid on by the Uzbek khavo iullari air
company, which has the best fleet of aircraft in the region. Ticket prices are kept as
low as possible and special teams of cooks and doctors fly to Saudi Arabia to attend to
their needs. Regarding the claims that Shiite Muslims face restrictions in making the
haj, it may be safely said that no such complaints have been received when pilgrims
have left for Saudi Arabia during the post-independence period.
433. In the course of an inquiry conducted by the competent bodies, the reports of
increasing trials against devout Muslims were found to be without substance. The
Government confirmed that on 17 February, Tashkent regional criminal court
convicted Abdurashid Toshmatov and Nurali Umrzokov and sentenced them to six
years' imprisonment. The judgment stated that Abdurashid Toshmatov and Nurali
Umrzokov were found guilty of storing and disseminating material containing
religious extremism, separatism and fhndamentalism. The material called for
unconstitutional change to the political system, the seizure of power and the removal
of the authorities.
434. The guilt of the two men is confirmed by evidence including the confiscation
of the literature from their possession, witness testimony, expert opinion and other
elements of the case file. The Government fhrther informed that the case file contains
no evidence that any ±ysical or mental pressure was applied to the convicted
persons. The two men did not submit any complaints to the prosecutorial agencies
during the preliminary investigation or the trial. The Government informed that on
appeal the sentences of the two men were commuted to three year's deprivation of
liberty at an open prison.
435. The allegations that eight other individuals referred to in the communication
made no attempts to change the country's religious life by spreading theft views to
other Muslims are withoutjustification. According to the judicial decisions, Mr.
Kudratov, Mr. D. Yuldashev, Mr. B. Yuldashev, Mr. Asretdinov, Mr. Nurmatov, Mr.
Ziyaev and Mr. Egamberdiev were found guilty on the grounds that between 2002 and
2004 they were involved in the activities of the Wahhabi sect. They met regularly in
each other's homes to study extremist literature and other material calling for change
to Uzbekistan's political system. The guilt of the convicted persons is confirmed by
evidence including the confiscated literature, the testimony of witnesses, expert
opinion and other elements of the case file. The Appeals Chamber of Tashkent City
Court ruled that the verdicts were justified and upheld them. Mr. Ermatov was
granted an amnesty by a Presidential Decree of 1 December 2004.
Communication sent on 8 July 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on torture
436. The Special Rapporteurs brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Mr. Kural Bekjanov, a nineteen-year-old Pentecostal Christian from
Tashkent, who was arrested on 14 June 2005 and taken to Mirobad District Police
Station. He was accused of involvement in the murder of a 65-year-old US citizen of
Korean origin, Kim Khen Pen Khin, who had worked with Pentecostal churches in
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 92
Tashkent. When the police discovered that he was a Christian, they started beating
him. Then he was transferred to the main city police station where he was put in a cell
with Muslims. His celimates also beat him after they found out that he was a
Christian. Police tortured him every night for twelve days, inserting needles under his
fmger nails and threatening him that he would be put on a chair wired up to the
electricity. As a result of the torture, his ribs were broken, he lost weight, he had
difficulty walking and his fingers and legs were covered with blood. He was held at
the main city police station until 29 June 2005. He was then transferred back to
Mirobad Police Station, where he was allowed access to a lawyer and where he
remained in detention. He was believed to be the main suspect of the murder of Kim
Khen Pen Khin. A case was opened under Article 97, part 1, of the Criminal Code.
437. According to the information received, Mr. Bekjanov was not the only Full
Gospel church member interrogated in connection with the murder of Kim Khen Pen
Khin. It was indeed alleged that the police used the murder as a pretext to question
church members about theft religious beliefs.
Response from the Government dated 28 November 2005
438. The government informed that the information in the communication was
entirely far fetched. Kurat Bekjanov was placed in the rehabilitation centre in
Tashkent City Department of Internal Affairs as he had no papers. After his identity
was established he was released on 14 July 2005. Ku rat Bekjanov himself explained
that he did not suffer any illegal actions during the period he spent in the rehabilitation
centre. He also explained that nobody prevented him from performing his religious
duties.
Communication sent on 1 September 2005
439. On 1 June 2005, the prosecutor of the Transport Procuracy of Kungrad 200
kilometers north of Nukus Karakalpakstan, issued warnings to five local Protestants,
namely Lepesbay Amarov, Grigori Kogay, Asitbek Kunekeev, Raushan
Matjanova and Gutbahor Orimbetova for trying to bring Christian literature into
the country through Nukus airport.
440. On 16 June 2005, an apartment belonging to a Hare Krishna devotee, Asa
Bekabayeva, in Bostan on the outskirts of Nukus, was searched by the police. Ninety
Hare Krishna bool
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 93
of 7,835. The five appealed against the actions of the customs officials and as a result
a judicial investigation was conducted. The investigation found the actions of the
customs officials to have been lawfhl.
443. The Government informed that the law enforcement bodies of the Republic
of Karakalpakstan had established that Asa Bekabayeva, an English teacher, was
insfructing pupils about Hare Krishna on her own initiative. She voluntarily handed
over 90 books, 3 Hare Krishna audio-teaching cassettes and 13 photographs to the law
enforcement bodies. She was warned that she was not entitled to engage in religious
instruction with the appropriate permission. She was fried before Ellikalin Disfrict
Court for an offence under Article 241 (violation of legislation on religious
organizations) of the Code of Administrative Offences and was fined a sum of 39,175.
444. The Government informed that officers from the Department of Internal
Affairs conducted an inspection of a named individual's house, during which they
discovered and confiscated 20 religious books belonging to Viktor Klimov. The
expert examination determined that the literature was permitted only for use in
religious organizations. No criminal case was initiated against Vikto Klimov and the
confiscated books were returned to theft owner.
Observations
445. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the Government's response. She
would like to point to the Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee,
dated 26 April 2005, (CCPR/CO/83/UZB), paragraph 22: ‘The Committee notes that
the provisions of the Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations Act require
religious organizations and associations to be registered in order to be able to manifest
theft religion or belief It is concerned about de facto limitations on the right to
freedom of religion or belief, including the fact that proselytizing constitutes a
criminal offence under the Criminal Code. The Committee is also concerned about the
use of criminal law to penalize the apparently peaceful exercise of religious freedom
and the fact that a large number of individuals have been charged, detained and
sentenced and that, while a majority of them were subsequently released, several
hundred remain in prison.” The Special Rapporteur joins the Human Rights
Committee in its recommendation that it should ensure that its legislation and practice
are in fhll conformity with article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights.
446. Moreover, the Special Rapporteur wishes to emphasize that the right to
freedom of religion is not limited to members of registered religious communities. As
she reminded in her previous report to the Commission on human rights, referring to
the OSCE/ODIHR Guidelines for Review of Legislation pertaining to Religion or
Belief, “registration should not be compulsory, i.e. it should not be a precondition for
practicing one's religion, but only for the acquisition of a legal personality and related
benefits” (E/CN.4/2005/61, para. 58).
447. Finally, she reiterates that she is still awaiting an invitation from the
Government to carry out a visit in Uzbekistan.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 94
Viet Nam
Communication sent on 25 November 2004 jointly with the Special
Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights
defenders
448. The mandate holders had received information related to the Mennonite
Church, concerning in particular Reverend Nguyen Hong Quang, General Secretary
of the Mennonite Church in Ho Chi Minh City and an activist who defended land
rights cases of impoverished farmers, who has already been the subject of an urgent
appeal by the Special Representative of the Secretary General on the situation of
Human Rights Defenders and the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention on 7
September 2004 and an allegation of the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion
on 10 November 2004 (See E/CN.4/2005/61/Add.1, at paragraphs 366 to 370).
449. According to new information received, Nguyen Hong Quang, after a trial
that took only four hours and was marred by some procedural shortcomings, was
convicted to three years of imprisonment on 12 November 2004 by the people's court
of Ho Chi Minh City in connection with his religious convictions and related activities
for “resisting persons doing official duty”. It was also reported that several of his
collaborators, Pham Ngoc Thach, Le Thi Hong Lien, Nguyen Van Phuong, Nguyen
Huu Nghia, Nguyen Thanh Nhan received sentences of between 9 and 36 months for
the same offense.
Response from the Government dated 6 December 2004
450. The Government indicated that the information and allegations were false. In
Vietnam, the rights to freedom of religion or belief and freedom of non-religion or
belief are clearly enshrined in the Constitution and laws and are guaranteed in
practice. No one shall be arrested or detained merely for religious reasons. Only
violators of the law will be punished in accordance with the laws.
451. According to the Government's response, on 25 July 2002, the People's
Committee of Binh Khanh Commune, District 2, Ho Chi Minh City took
administrative measures against Nguyen Hong Quang as he breached local
construction management regulations by illegally building on public property for his
personal benefit. Thus, on 8 July 2003, the People's Committee of District 2 issued an
order of administrative enforcement to compel Quang to dismantle his non- permitted
building. Quang blatantly refhsed to comply with the order.
452. During the South East Asia Games 22 (SEAGAtVIES 22) organized in
Vietnam from 5 to 14 December 2003, Quang, together with friends and collaborators
in Ho Chi Minh City, with money received from Pastor Phan Minh Hoi (an overseas
Vietnamese now living in the USA) illegally printed and disseminated publications
using the logo of the SEAGAMES 22, breaching the trademark and patent rules and
regulations of Vietnam. When detected and duly intervened by the police, Quang
instigated his followers to cause public unrest in front of the police station of Nguyen
Thai Binh Commune, District 1, Ho Chi Minh City.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 95
453. Since early 2003, Quang had continuously disseminated distorted and
slanderous documents through Internet with ill- intended contents about the alleged
Government's violations of human rights and freedom of religion such as destroying
churches, forcing believers to renounce theft religion, prohibiting people to practice
their belief, arresting and beating religious activists...
454. Worse still, on 2 March 2004, Nguyen Hong Quang and his accomplices
chased up and violently assaulted two youngsters, who they claimed to be following
after the youngsters had attempted to assassinate them, took away these youngsters'
motorbike, caused extreme public chaos and even violently fought against the police.
As a result, the police of District 2, Ho Chi Minh City caught 4 persons: Pham Ngoc
Thach, Nguyen Thanh Nhan, Nguyen Van Phuong and Nguyen Huu Nghia on charge
of “fighting against on-duty public officers”. On 8 June 2004, the police of Ho Chi
Minh City arrested Nguyen Hong Quang on the same charge.
455. On 12 November 2004, the People's Court of Ho Chi Minh City brought
Nguyen Hong Quang and his accomplices to trial on charge of “assaulting on-duty
public officers”. The Court decided to sentence him to 3 years of imprisonment (in
accordance with C, point 2, Article 257 of the Penal Code of Vietnam), Pham Ngoc
Thach to 2 years in prison, Le Thi Hong Lien and Nguyen Van Phuong to 1 year in
prison, Nguyen Thanh Nhan and Nguyen Huu Nghia to 9 months in jail (in
accordance with 1, Article 257 of the Penal Code). The trial was conducted in fhll and
strict observance of legal proceedings of Vietnam.
Additional response from the Government dated 31 August 2005
456. The Government informed the Special Rapporteur that, on the occasion of
the 60 th anniversary of the National Day, the State President of Vietnam had decided
to grant special amnesty to 10,428 inmates, including Mr. Nguyen Hong Quang.
Urgent appeal sent on 10 January 2005 with the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention, the Special Rapporteur on torture, the Special Rapporteur on the
right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical
and mental health, the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes
and consequences and the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on
the situation of human rights defenders
457. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government the
situation ofMs. Le Thi Hong Lien, a 21 year-old teacher for the Vietnamese
Mennonite Christian Church, who was the subject of a joint letter of allegation sent by
the Special Representative of the Secretary General on the situation of human rights
defenders and the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief on 25
November 2004 (See above).
458. She was detained in the prison infirmary at Chi Hoa Prison, Ho Chi Minh
City, where she was suffering from severe mental illness. Prison guards told relatives
that they did not have the means to care for inmates with such a severe illness and
explained that they had resorted to tying her hands and feet to the bed. She was said to
be receiving no treatment for her condition, which was likely to deteriorate fhrther.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 96
459. She was arrested in June 2004 along with a nimber of other members of the
Mennonite community, and was sentenced on 12 November 2004 to 12 months in
prison on charges of “resisting a person performing official duty”. These charges
reportedly arose from her collaboration with Reverend Nguyen Hong Quang (who
was the subject of a communication sent on 25 November 2004), General Secretary of
the Mennonite Church in Ho Chi Minh City and an activist, who defended land rights
cases of impoverished farmers. It was reported that during her imprisonment she was
beaten by prison guards, suffering particularly serious beating by a guard escorting
her to and from her trial.
460. In view of the allegations of ill-treatment and denial of appropriate medical
treatment, concern was expressed for her physical and mental integrity.
Response from the Government dated 24 January 2005
461. The Government indicated that the information and allegations provided to
the Special Rapporteur and contained in the Appeal with regard to Ms. Le Thi Hong
Lien were totally untrue. The Government whished to reaffirm that in Vietnam, the
rights to freedom of religion or belief and freedom of non-religion or belief are clearly
enshrined in the Constitution and laws and are guaranteed in practice. No one shall be
arrested or detained merely for reigious reasons. Only those who violate the law will
be punished in accordance with the laws. Torture and other forms of inhumane
treatment and punishments are forbidden. Article 71 of the 1992 Constitution
stipulates: “The citizen shall enjoy inviolability of the person and the protection of the
law with regard to his life, health, honor and dignity... It is strictly forbidden to use
all forms of harassment and coercion, torture, violation of his honor and dignity,
against a citizen”. The Penal Code of Vietnam has provisions on penalties for those
who infringe upon the above-mentioned rights (Chapter XII). Also, these are strictly
observed in practice.
462. Ms. Le Thi Hong Lien was put on trial on 12 November 2004 by the
People's Court of Ho Chi Minh City on charge of “assaulting on-duty public
officers”. The Court sentenced Ms. Le Thi Hong Lien to a year in prison (in
accordance with point 1, Article 257 of the Penal Code). Ms. Lien was sewing her
prison sentence. Like others, she was entitled to the rights and conditions of inmates.
Her right to healthcare and medical treatment was ensured as well as her right to
physical and mental integrity.
Additional response from the Government dated 27 April 2005
463. The Government indicated that, on the occasion of the 30 th anniversary of the
day of 30 April, the President of Vietnam had signed a decision to grant special
amnesty for 7820 inmates, including Ms. Le Thi Hong Lien.
Urgent appeal sent on 14 April 2005
464. The Special Rapporteur brought the two following cases to the attention of
the Government:
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 97
465. Thich Nguyen Vuong, a Buddhist monk member of the Unified Buddhist
Church of Vietnam (UBCV), was reportedly arrested by the Security Police in Ho Chi
Minh City on 11 April 2005. He was stopped on his way home after he visited the
UBCV Deputy leader, Thich Quang Do, at the Thanh Minh Zen Monastery. Reports
indicated that he protested and claimed that the police had no legitimate reason to
arrest him and asked if he could get his papers from the monastery but the police
refthed to let him do so. Several Buddhists from the Thanh Minh Zen Monastery then
went outside and surrounded him. He was therefore able to escape from the police and
took refuge in the monastery. Concerns had been expressed that the police were still
posted outside the building where Thich Nguyen Vuong remained at the time of the
communication in order to arrest him if he ever attempted to leave the place.
466. Thich Vien Phuong, another UBCV monk, was also arrested in similar
circumstances on 30 March 2005. He was reportedly stopped for a traffic offence after
he visited Thich Quang Do and then held in custody for interrogation by security
agents who allegedly seized his camera on which there was a message from Thich
Quang Do to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. Reports indicated
that Thich Vien Phuong was subjected to several days of intensive questioning before
he was released.
Response from the Government dated 14 June 2005
467. The Government indicated that the information and allegations provided to
the Special Rapporteur were totally untrue and that that the facts were as follows:
468. Tran Minh Hoang (Thich Nguyen Vuong), born in 1948, resides at Gia Lam
pagoda, Go Vap district, Ho Chi Minh City. On 11 April 2005, the traffic police
signaled Hoang while he was riding on motorbike to stop him for committing a traffic
offence. Hoang did not obey and attempted to run away. The traffic police prevented
him from doing so and recorded his offence. Finding that Hoang had no relevant
motorbike documents, the police requested him to take his motorbike to a police
station opposite to Thanh Minh Zen Monastery. The police also discovered that the
number plate of the motorbike that Hoang was riding on was false. On the way to the
police station, Hoang fled into the Monastery. On 19 April 2005, a summon order was
issued for Hoang to present himself at the police station so that his offence could be
processed. Until now, he has not presented himself to the police.
469. Nguyen Thanh Tho (Thich Vien Phuong), born in 1972, temporarily resides
at Giac Hoa Pagoda, Binh Thanh district, Ho Chi Minh City. On 30 March 2005, Tho,
while riding on motorbike, was stopped by police for a traffic offence. Tho strongly
opposed, trying to involve some Buddhist monks to support him in the incident, thus
causing public disorder. The police had to take Tho to a police station.
470. Tho was found holding a DVD disc which contained a message from Thich
Quang Do slandering the State of Vietnam on religious suppression and human rights
violation. The police made a minute on Tho's traffic offence and his unlawful act (in
violation of bullet A, pointS, Article 23 of the Decree 36/CP concerning
administrative treatments for cultural offences).
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 98
471. It is affirmed that Hoang and Tho committed traffic offences and violations
of the law. The police treatment they received was in fhll accordance with the law.
However, Hoang and Tho, under their religious cloak, attempted to accuse the
administration of persecution on religious grounds.
472. Tran Minh Hoang and Nguyen Thanh Tho now are completely free.
Communication sent on 3 June 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on torture
473. The Special Rapporteurs had received information concerning Degars, a
Vietnamese Christian community in the provinces of Gia Lai, Dak Lak, and D ak
Nong.
474. In March and April 2005, government officials in Chu Se, Dak Doa and Ia
Grai Districts of Gia Lai province held several long meetings for Montagnards from
many villages at district headquarters, during which they warned them not to follow
Degar Christianity, and in some cases forced them to sign documents in which they
would promise to renounce theft belief There have also been attempts to force several
Degar Christians to abandon their belief by threats or other forms of violence. Several
pastors and a large number of Christians were arrested and warned not to practice
their belief without government approval. During detention several of them were ill-
treated. Similar incidents took place in Dak Lak province. There were also allegations
that some members of the Degar community were subjected to torture.
Response from the Government dated 25 July 2005
475. The Government indicated that in Vietnam, the rights to freedom if religion
or belief and freedom of non-religion or belief are ensured. Article 70 of the 1992
Constitution of Vietnam clearly states: “The citizen shall enjoy freedom of belied and
of religion; he can follow any religion or follow none. All religions are equal before
the law... No one can violate freedom of belief and religion; no one can misuse belief
and religion to contravene the law and the State policies”. No one is punished or
detained on religious grounds. Only violations of the law will be treated in accordance
with the law. In practice, these rights are guaranteed and strictly observed.
476. Like other religions, freedom of practice of Protestantism is respected and
ensured throughout the country, including the Central Highlands. Since the passing of
the State Decree on Belief and Religion (Nov. 2004) and the Instruction No. 01 by the
Prime Minister (Feb. 2005), local governments, especially in the Central Highlands,
have been taking fhrther measures to create favourable conditions for local people to
exercise theft right to freedom of belief and religion.
477. In the Central Highlands,the legal status of 12 Protestant Associations has
been recognized; 7 other Associations have been registered for operation; the
construction of 2 churches has started; 1 church has been restored in Dak Lak
province. Training courses have been held for 82priests.
478. Some people mistakenly think of ‘Degars Christianity” as a sect of
Protestantism. “Degars Christianity”, in fact, is illegally created and disseminated by
separatists (most of them are FULRO members) among some ethnic minority groups
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 99
in the Central Highlands with a view to inciting acts of overthrowing the legal
government and establishing a separatist State in the Central Highlands. This violates
the Constitution and laws of Viet Nam. The Government of Viet Nam never allows
the use of “Degars Christianity” as a cover-up for the purpose of undermining the
national unity, sabotaging the people's normal life and overthrowing the
administration. Local authorities have taken measures to help local people realize the
real nature of “Degars Christianity” and advise them to be vigilant at attempts of
separation or riots. The information and allegations provided to you and contained in
the letter concerning “Degars Christianity” are totally untrue.
Communication sent on 14 October 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on the
promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
479. The Special Rapporteurs had received information according to which, on 21
August 2005 local public security police chief, Dinh Van Hoanh, and his deputy, Thai
Mai Quan, came to the home of evangelist Dinh Van Hoang, member of the Hre
minority, Quang Ngai Province, and told him that Christians were not accepted there.
They asked him to sign a paper denying his Christian faith, which Dinh Van Hoang
refhsed. The two officials indicated that he would have to give up his religious faith or
face the destruction of his home. When Hoang refused, a mob including war veterans,
local defense forces, young pe ople and village chief Dinh Van Xoa forced its way into
his house. They demanded once more that he and his wife give up Christianity, which
they rejected. So they burned down the house.
480. This was the latest in a series of incidents aiming at forcing Dinh Van Hoang
and his family to abandon Christianity. His house had been burned down twice
before; also he and his family were beaten and forced to participate in pagan practices
in the past; there had been repeated attempts to defame Hoang by the official Vietnam
News Service (accusing him of “luring people to believe in nonsense and refuse to
work” and of not having official residence registration). Between 26 and 31 July 2005
authorities in Son Tinh district destroyed the homes of 10 Hre families because they
refhsed to give up theft Christian faith.
Response dated 5 January 2006
481. The Government informed that the information contained in the
communication was totally untrue. It informed that local people burnt down the
house due to personal disagreements. The Local Authority provided assistance to
Hoang in rebuilding the house. Hoang subsequently left the locality and went to live
in Son Thuong in Quang Ngai province. While he was there, he seized land used by
Hre people. As a result, local Hre people set his house on fife on 21 August 2005.
The Local Authority provided assistance to Hoang in rebuilding the house.
482. Regarding the allegation that the homes of 10 Hre families were destroyed,
the Government informed that as a part of the implementation cf Government
Programme 134/CP and a plan for socio-economic development in the village, a
number of families should have moved to other areas for resettlement. The majority
of the families moved voluntarily. As a result of mediation, six of the seven families
that did not move voluntarily have now settled in new areas.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 100
Communication sent on 19 October 2005
483. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of two Hoa Hao Buddhists, Tran Van bang, aged 47 and Tran Van
Thang, aged 36, who were arrested on 25 February 2005, at theft home in Dinh
Thanh City, Thoai Son District, in the province of An Giang for the distribution of
compact discs and tapes containing Hoa Hao teachings. On 27 April 2005, Tran Van
Hoang was sentencedto nine months of imprisonment and fmed 20 million
Vietnamese dongs, while Tran Van Thang was sentenced to six months of
imprisonment, and fmed 10 million dongs.
484. The Special Rapporteur requested the Government to indicate which offence
Tran Van Hoang and Tran Van Thang were convicted of and to provide information
on the law on which the conviction was based.
Response dated 6 January 2006
485. The Government informed that Tran Van bang and Tran Van Thang
were arrested for illegally printing and copying CDs and tapes without a permit from
the relevant authority. The Government confirmed the sentences handed down to the
two and indicated that they had been convicted of “violating regulations on
publication and distribution of audio and video tapes and compact discs” under
Article 271 of the Criminal Code. The Government informed that the two have now
been released as they have severed their sentences.
Observations
486. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its replies but remains
concerned by the amount of reports that are transmitted to her disclosing alleged
violations or unlawfhl limitations on the right to freedom of religion or belief She
reminds the Government that she would like to visit the country to analyze the
progress that has been made fhrther to her predecessor's visit and recommendations.
487. She would also like to draw the Government's attention to paragraph 6 (d) of
the 1981 Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief which provides that, “the right to freedom
of thought, conscience, religion or belief includes the freedom to write, issue and
disseminate relevant publications in these areas”. Furthermore, paragraph 4 of
General Comment 22 of the Human Rights Committee establishes that, “the practice
and teachings of religion or belief includes acts integral to the conduct by religious
groups of their basic affairs [ 1 the freedom to establish seminaries or religious
schools and the freedom to prepare and distribute religious texts or publications.”
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 101
Yemen
Urgent appeal sent on 27 October 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on
extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, the Special Rapporteur on the
independence of judges and lawyers, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion
and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
Rapporteur on torture
488. The Special Rapporteurs brought to the attention of the Government the
situation of Mr.Yahya Al-Daylami, a religious leader of the Shiite Zaydi minority,
who was taken into custody in Sa'da by agents of the Political Security Force on 9
September 2004. As this arrest was carried out by force, covertly, and without an
arrest warrant, it had been described as abduction rather than an arrest. Since then, he
had been held incommunicado at the intelligence detention centre in Sana'a. On 29
May 2005, a special criminal court sentenced Mr. Al-Daylami to death. At the time of
the communication, he was awaiting execution, as the death sentence required the
approval of the President of Yemen, which was still pending.
489. Mr. Al-Daylami's trial fell short both of international human rights standards
and of the standards set forth in Yemen's Constitution. On 30 January 2005, Mr. Al-
Daylami's lawyers withdrew from the case having reached the conclusion that the
court was unwilling to respect minimum fair trial guarantees.
490. As set out in the court's decision of 29 May 2005, Mr. Al-Daylami was
accused and convicted of two offences: “First, he and another person conducted
intelligence connections with, and worked for the interest of, a foreign state which
will harm the political and diplomatic position of the Republic. Secondly, he in
association with others, planned to attack the constitutional authority in order to
change and restrict it from exercising its powers and then to change the regime; he
established an organization called ‘Youth of Sana'a' to achieve this end The
decision fhrther states: “Such acts are criminal offences according to Articles 21,
128(1) and 129 of the Presidential Decree No. 12 of 1994 relating to Crimes and
Penalties.” The charges against Mr. Al-Daylami were not fhrther specified. It is
alleged that the actual reason for the charges against him are his efforts to motivate
the public to peacefully protest against detention campaigns that targeted opposition
activists. Mr. Al-Daylami had also delivered speeches during public gatherings where
he criticized certain policies of the Government such as the failure to respect the law
and to com bat corruption.
Response from the Government dated 14 December 2005
491. The Government indicated that all the procedures of arrest of Mr. Yahya Al-
Daylami and his colleague Mohamed Miflah have been carried out in a legal manner
and under the supervision of the Attorney General. What is more, neither of the two
accused persons has submitted any complaint of mistreatment and one of them is still
continuously writing from his cell a column in the “Balagh” newspaper which
explains that they are not deprived of their fundamental rights including those to
receive visitors and keep continuous contact with them.
E/CN.4/2006/5/Add. 1
Page 102
492. The Government also wished to inform the Special Rapporteurs that the
specialized court would have taken instant measures in case of confirmed occurrence
of any abuse concerning the procedures of arrest and interrogation especially since the
case has come to the appeal phase at the criminal court. In addition, the Government
indicated that the judiciary body in the country was totally independent in all the
spheres of its competence and no other body can interfere in the judicial affairs.
Observations
493. The Special Rapporteur is gratefhl for the Government's response.
