Report: Human Rights Monitoring - Religious minorities

REPORT

on the monitoring of religious tolerance and discrimination in Syunik region of the Republic of Armenia conducted for training purposes

Content

Introduction ……………………………………………………………………..3 The Monitoring Methodology …………………………………………… …….5 Findings of the monitoring ………………………………………………….. …6 Conclusions …………………………………………………………………….13 Recommendations ………………………………………………………………14

2

Introduction Still in the Soviet Union, not only religious intolerance was displayed against religious communities1 but also the operation of some of those was banned. After the collapse of the Soviet Union opportunities for free operation were afforded to religious communities. In 1991, the Republic of Armenia (RoA) Law On Freedom of conscience and on religious organizations was adopted. Even though, on the one hand, the Law gave freedom to religious organizations, on the other hand, it created unequal conditions by granting privileges to the Armenian Apostolic Church and placing limitations on free operation of other religious communities.

Persecutions of religious organizations started in 1993. Those were initiated by the Armenian Apostolic Church clergymen and by some participants of the Karabakh war and later on by members of the Union of the Country’s Volunteer Defenders non-governmental organization (See Issue # 3, 2002, of Ditord/Observer periodical of Helsinki Committee of Armenia).

Negative attitudes towards religious communities gradually became predominant in mass media and in the society at large. Not infrequently, those attitudes are expressed through attaching various stigmas, in particular, that of “sectarians.” This conclusion is further corroborated with the findings of the monitoring of electronic versions of mass media conducted in 2006 by the Center Partnership for Democracy. According to those findings, “… the analysis of the materials used in the [media] articles has shown that some media outlets deliberately seek to turn religious movements, including “new” and “traditional” religious movements, into a target for public intolerance.”

Becoming a member State of the Council of Europe in 2001, Armenia took on an obligation to ensure equal conditions for religious organizations. However, so far the obligation has not been met adequately. Even though the national legislation grants certain freedom to religious communities, at the same time it puts limitations on and places artificial obstacles to free operation of religious organizations.

As is the case in many regions of Armenia, in Syunik too the opinion that religious communities “have gone astray” and “they demonstrate a queer behavior isolating themselves from the world and withdrawing into their shell” is prevalent. The widespread rumor has it that the “sectarians” do not send their children to school and do not avail themselves of medical services (as a result of which some people die) and that they become conscientious objectors and perform sexually perversive rites. Mass media and other social institutions make no effort 1

The expression “religious communities” is used throughout this Report to designate religious communities other than the Armenian Apostolic Church.

3

whatsoever to find out the extent to which those rumors correspond to reality, if at all. As a result, confusing the rumors with reality, many people often display intolerance to and discrimination against religious communities.

The monitoring of religious tolerance and discrimination was conducted in Kapan, Goris, Sissian, Shinuhayr and Akhlatian communities in Syunik region of the Republic of Armenia within the framework of the Human Rights Education: Step by Step Project. Studied were instances, forms and nature of discrimination against and intolerance to religious communities.

The study was done in local governments (LGs), educational institutions, health care facilities, Armenian Apostolic Church, religious communities and among general public. The monitoring was conducted from September 25 till December 10, 2007.

The goal of the monitoring is to contribute to the elimination of discriminatory attitudes and to create a climate of tolerance towards religious minorities in Kapan, Goris, Sissian, Shinuhayr and Akhlatian communities in Syunik region of the Republic of Armenia.

The following objectives were set to achieve the goal of the monitoring: 1. to study the enjoyment of the religious communities’ right to freedom of conscience, thought, religion and belief; 2. to identify limitations put on religious communities and to ascertain their lawfulness.

The findings of the monitoring are intended for the RoA Government’s Department for National & Religious Minorities, the RoA National Assembly, the RoA Ministry of Justice and the RoA Ministry of Education as well as for NGOs and mass media.

The monitoring was conducted by: Lilit Mkrtchyan (Teachers’ Union of Goris NGO, Coordinator of the monitoring group in the RoA Syunik region), Irina Yolyan (LAST TV Company), Lilit Atasunts (Avetis Club NGO) and Anush Barkhudaryan (Information Center on Law NGO) - from Goris; Vahagn Gasparyan (Chairperson of Knarik commercial organization, lawyer), Shushan Movsisyan (volunteer) and Lala Avetisyan (Sissian Development Center NGO) – from Sissian; Armine Arzumanyan (4th-year student, Kapan branch, Agricultural University) - from Kapan.

Technical assistance to the group was provided in the course of the monitoring by Armen Varosyan and Samvel Nazaryan (Urban Foundation).

4

The monitoring methodology

1. Analysis of legislation

Examined were: RoA Constitution (UN) International Covenant on Political and Civil Rights European Convention on Human Rights RoA Code of Administrative Violations RoA Law On Freedom of conscience and on religious organizations RoA Law on the relations between the Armenian Government and the Armenian Holy Apostolic Church

2. Surveys

The overall number of those surveyed is 300, including

a) 257 individuals filled out questionnaires: 60 individuals from religious communities, 12 individuals from local governments, 13 individuals from health care facilities, 90 individuals from institutions of higher learning, junior colleges and schools, 7 individuals from the Armenian Apostolic Church, 75 individuals from general public. b) 43 members of religious communities (7th-Day Adventists and Christians of the Evangelical Faith) as well as randomly sampled local residents and students.

5

Findings of the monitoring

1. Analysis of legislation

After gaining independence in 1991, Armenia joined the respected international organizations, particularly the UN and the Council of Europe, and assumed, inter alia, an obligation to create equal opportunities for all religious organizations operating in the country.

The Republic of Armenia signed the (UN) International Covenant on Political and Civil Rights thereby recognizing the Covenant-enshrined right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion and the right to manifest religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching. In 2001, the Republic of Armenia joined the Council of Europe and signed the European Convention on Human Rights, which, too, recognizes the freedom of thought, conscience, religion and worship (Article 9). The Convention also recognizes everyone’s “right to freedom of expression”, including “freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority” (Article 10).

The Armenian Constitution sets out the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, to freedom of expression, to freedom to impart information and ideas and to freedom of assembly and association and it rules out discrimination (Articles 26, 27, 28 and 14.1).

Nevertheless, as per the Constitution, “the Republic of Armenia recognizes an exclusive mission of the Armenian Holy Apostolic Church as a national church in the spiritual life of the Armenian nation, in the development of the latter’s national culture and in the preservation of its national identity” (Article 8.1). The securing of this exclusiveness virtually relegates other religious communities operating in the Republic of Armenia to a subordinate position.

That discrimination originates in the RoA Law On Freedom of conscience and on religious organizations that was passed in 1991 and amended in 1997 and 2001. According to that Law, “the State shall not obstruct the accomplishment of the missions that are the monopoly of the national church.” This discrimination, which was introduced by the 1997 September amendment to the Law, goes back to the RoA Law On Freedom of conscience and on religious organizations that was adopted in 1991 and amended in 1997 and 2001.

In February 2007, a law was passed on the relations between the Government of Armenia and the Armenian Holy Apostolic Church. The law grants new privileges to the Armenian Apostolic Church and provides funding from the State budget.

As per Article 206 of the RoA Law On administrative violations, religious organizations can be fined, if they set up children’s or youth work, literary or “other hobby groups that are not related to the rites of a religious service.” Thus, one more Law limits the framework of the 6

religious communities’ right to freedom of practicing religion and of imparting information and ideas without interference.

Thus, the Armenian legislation has not been fully harmonized with international legislation.

Individual articles of the Armenian legislation contradict the obligations assumed under the international documents. The legislation grants privileges only to the Armenian Apostolic Church thereby giving rise to discrimination against other religious communities since there is no other law that would secure adequate privileges also to other religious communities.

2. Surveys.

Surveys conducted among local residents. 75 residents of urban and local communities were surveyed (See Annex 1). According to the questionnaire-based survey, a sizeable group of the respondents (55%) has a negative attitude towards religious communities, while others (45%) have a positive attitude with some reservations. Some of the respondents expressed the following opinions:

- I will kill them off one by one.

- I have a normal attitude; let them do what they want so far as they do not harm me.

- I do not like those who have wandered off the right path.

Negative attitudes are also reflected in the answers to questions of starting a family with members of a religious community, of having them as neighbors as well as of working with them and of dealing with them at the workplace. 36% of the respondents pointed out that in case they discover that their good neighbor is a member of a religious community, their “attitude towards that neighbor will immediately become negative and they will sever all the relations with that person.” Among those answers were:

- I would beat him up; I would become hostile - I would try to hold him back The overwhelming majority of the respondents (87%) were against starting a family or getting into kinship with members of a religious community. Thus, one respondent said, “I would like to live with a person that has such ideas as subsequently s(he) will force me too to embark on that wrong way.”

7

A large group of the respondents (48%) is against working with members of religious communities, whereas those who are relatively tolerant pointed out certain reservations:

- I would work but would not keep company with them.

- I would work with them but would jeer at them.

- At present there is such an individual at our workplace; however, we all displayed such an attitude towards that person that the latter would not even venture to speak on that subject.

Surveys conducted in schools. The surveys were conducted in schools in the towns of Goris, Sissian and Kapan and in the villages of Shinuhayr and Akhlatian (See Annex 2). The majority (76%) of students and teachers take a negative attitude towards members of religious communities, while only 24% have a positive attitude. Some of the survey participants noted that at their schools there are students and teachers who are members of religious communities. A large group of respondents from such schools mentioned that instances of preaching on the parts of those believers are rare. One teacher described how they reacted to a student preaching, “I seized them by the hand and flung off….”

According to the respondents, even though members of religious communities do not preach, their social environment displays a manifestly discriminatory attitude to them.

“One of the students in Shinuhayr mentioned that the entire family of a classmate are members of the Christians of the Evangelical Faith religious organization. The classmate takes all the school subjects with the exception of the History of the Armenian Church. In that class there was some tension between that student and the teacher and the latter even threatened to get the student expelled from school.

A few months ago a teacher was dismissed because of her religious beliefs. Even though the official explanation was formulated in another way, the real reason was clear to all.

Once a teacher was picking on a student who is a member of a religious community, and that student turned pallid while listening…”

Those surveyed had not observed instances of alienation of members of religious communities on the grounds of religious beliefs.

Surveys conducted in institutions of higher learning. 45 individuals were surveyed in State University in Goris (SUG), in State University in Kapan (SUK) and in the Humanities College in Sissian (President, Deputy President, Department Heads, professors and instructors, 8

laboratory assistants and students) (See Annex 3). 62.22% of them take a negative attitude towards religious communities, while 22.44% positive and 13.33% neutral. Quite a few of the respondents added that religious communities include “ignorant, even idle people from socially vulnerable groups who have neither other interests nor stable sources of income.” In the course of the interviews the students pointed out that they are aware of the cases, when family disputes arose because of one or several family members attending the meetings of a religious community. There has been one instance of divorce. Some of the faculty noted, “They are causing divisions in our nation, weakening the levers of State governance and bringing about internal conflicts. All that is dangerous for us since our external enemies can take advantage of the occasion.” Some respondents labeled members of religious communities as “traitors of the nation.”

The educational institutions under study have members of religious communities, primarily among students. The participants of the survey noted instances of some students preaching in educational institutions. The faculty members said that when they see a preaching student,

- I would grab them by the hand and throw out of the lecture room, - I asked them to do preaching outside the educational institution, - I advised them to revise their views.

There are institutions of higher learning, where the attitude is somewhat less intolerant and where the faculty engaged students “in talks on moral issues stressing the importance of a single denomination and of not bringing pressure to bear on others” (SUG instructor).

Faculty members observe that the students who are members of religious communities are somewhat isolated. As regards this phenomenon, the following answer was given, “I encourage such students more. I do not want them to be isolated and pitiable. They are very modest. They do not even venture to raise an issue in class. Therefore, I try to make them more involved in class” (SUG President).

In one institution of higher learning an intolerant attitude was displayed towards isolation:

- I have insulted [them] properly.

- It is impossible to do something since they cling to their beliefs.

Some respondents voiced an opinion that an uncompromising attitude should be assumed towards religious communities, “I think that if there were cases of discrimination, those sects would not have been able to drag so many people in.”

9

Surveys conducted in health care facilities. Surveyed were Head of the laboratory department, Head of Gynecology & Antenatal department, surgeons of three different branches in the Surgery department of Yolian Clinic (CJSC) as well as a Chief medical officer and two nurses at the Center for Hygiene and for Epidemics Prevention in Goris, eight employees at the Medical Center in Kapan and eight employees in the hospital in Sissian (24 employees all in all) (See Annex 4).

The majority took a negative attitude to religious communities, “They are a factor in disorienting the society. They are based primarily on material resources and we lose our national religious mentality because of their existence.”

13 members of the surveyed medical personnel think that religious communities make use of medical services (such as blood transfusion or vaccination, etc.), while the remaining 12 believe that they do not. Medical staff confirms the view that some religious communities rule out blood transfusion and vaccination. Chief medical officer at Sanitary and epidemiological station in Goris said that, for instance, members of a religious community in Shinuhayr refuse from getting main vaccinations. She visits the village with a nurse and tries to explain the importance of vaccination to them. As a result, those individuals who are persuaded of the importance of vaccinations get them.

The Head of Antenatal department in Yolian Clinic was the only one of the surveyed medical staff who did not have any problem with members of religious communities. On the contrary, she contended that it is easier to work with them, since their every pregnancy ends in childbirth because they are against abortion.

There were no members of religious communities among the staff in health care facilities.

Local governments. 10 persons were surveyed in local governments in Goris/Shinuhayr, Sissian and Kapan communities (See Annex 5). All the respondents were knowledgeable about the activities of the religious organizations operating in their communities.

Generalizing, one of the LG representatives dubbed all religious communities “sectarians.”

4 LG representatives have a positive attitude, 6 negative and one neutral attitude towards religious communities. Even though the greater part of the respondents were intolerant, some of them were of the opinion that everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion and is, therefore, free to espouse their ideas.

10

The negative attitude is accounted for by the fact that “they are undermining the national unity and leading to strife.” Several respondents think that religious communities’ ideas conflict with some laws; hence, “so many privileges should not be given to them.” Also voiced was the following opinion, “As a private person, I have a negative attitude; however, in my capacity of a State official I do not confuse my personal feelings with official business. In other words, for me they are equal to other citizens.”

The majority (7) held that local governments ensure equal conditions for all religious communities. Some respondents noted that religious communities do not turn to them.

In some cases local governments put limitations on the operation of religious communities. LGs posed an obstacle to their preaching in public places since “[those communities] impede the civil society formation.” The LG officials contended that members of a religious community offered to provide assistance to kindergartens expecting to obtain permission to preach; however, the offer was rejected.

Armenian Apostolic Church. 7 clergymen from the Armenian Apostolic Church were surveyed (See Annex 6). With the exception of Goris/Shinuhayr communities, in all other communities the Armenian Apostolic Church took a negative attitude towards religious communities, even though the majority, including those with negative attitudes, are inclined to cooperate. The priest from the Armenian Apostolic Church in Goris took part many times in the various meetings of religious communities. He listened to them and tried to understand them.

Even though he was received without discontent, he still finds it far from easy to convince them and to do some thing together. According to the priest, in any case the Armenian Church tries to cooperate with them. He said, “During the meetings I often speak of the fact that they have gone astray and that they are on the wrong path; in any case, something is being done indeed…”

The representatives of the Armenian Apostolic Church pointed out the following as an attempt at cooperation in other communities, “We have invited them to give them right knowledge,” “We have invited them so as to find the lowest common denominator,” and “We have invited them to the church so that they would accept the Holy Trinity and give up their delusions but they do not accept our Church.”

The representatives of the Armenian Apostolic Church expressed the following opinions in the communities where negative attitudes prevail.

- How could one have a positive attitude to the destructive organizations that lead people stray from true faith?

- They have selected the wrong path and they are still growing in numbers, one cannot understand how….

- Probably it would more correct, if such sectarian organizations did not exist at all.

11

Some clergymen from the Armenian Apostolic Church noted that they did not cooperate with religious communities. Moreover, several times they foiled the efforts of members of those communities to preach in streets, interfered with and impeded the dissemination of information materials.

Religious communities. Questionnaire-based surveys and interviews were conducted in religious communities of the True Way (in Goris), Christians of the Evangelical Faith (in Shinuhayr), Jehovah’s Witnesses (in Sissian and Kapan) and Sabbatarians of the 7th Week (in Akhlatian). All in all, 60 individuals took part in the questionnaire-based survey (See Annex 7).

Only interview was conducted with the community of the Church of the 7th-Day Adventists (SDA).

Members of the True Way religious community in Goris (with the exception of 4 individuals) and Jehovah’s Witnesses in Sissian refused to take part in the surveys.

According to the majority (81.6%) of the respondents, they practice their religion and preach in an uninhibited fashion. The leader of the SDA community mentioned that mass media do not give them airtime. 11.67% of the respondents indicated that there were instances of discrimination against their children in comprehensive schools. Furthermore, there were also cases of schoolteachers beating children of members of religious communities.

26.67% of members of religious communities take a positive attitude towards the Armenian Apostolic Church, 36.67% negative and 21.67% neutral. As a rule, members of some religious communities do not attend the Armenian Apostolic Church. According to them,

the [Armenian] Apostolic Church is a device for supporting the powers that be, while top-ranking clergy wish to become influential through the Church; the priests are doing business their for personal gain; hence, if you believe in God, you need not go to Church; the Lord will listen to you even without it..

According to the respondents, no cooperation measures have been taken by the Armenian Apostolic Church and other religious communities. The SDA members pointed out “in the past our elders took steps to secure cooperation with the Armenian Apostolic Church. However, those proved futile since the Armenian Apostolic Church deals with us (the SDA) with reservations seeking to get the upper hand.”

58.33% of those surveyed (20 from Goris/Shinuhayr, 8 from Sissian/Akhlatian community and 7 from Kapan) do not have steady jobs. The majority pointed at the lack of jobs and absence of qualification as reasons for not having employment. One of the SDA community members said, “I went to a comprehensive school to get a job there but I was rejected despite the fact that the school had a vacancy for a specialist like me.” It was found out in a more detailed 12

conversation that the SDA community members do not work on Saturdays since Saturday is a day off for them that cannot be replaced with any other day2. That individual contended that the school allegedly did not draw up the timetable in such a way so that Saturday will be a day off for this particular teacher, even though “concessions were made for other teachers of the school and there were many teachers who took one weekday off (besides Sunday).” “…Within the past few years eight teachers lost their jobs” because of their religious beliefs. The employed respondents did not point out instances of religion-related discrimination in the workplace.

31.67% of those respondents thought that the society at large has a positive attitude towards them, 23.33% negative and 30.00% neutral. Here are some quotes.

- They treat us with contempt; they constantly gossip about us.

- They pin a label of sectarians on us.

28.33% regarded the LG attitude to religious communities as positive, 33.33% as negative and the rest as neutral or they refused to answer. The positive attitudes of local governments are reflected predominantly in the responses of members of religious communities in Goris/Shinuhayr, while negative attitudes in those in Kapan. The religious communities in Sissian/Akhlatian noted that

- [The LG attitudes] “are rude and intolerant.”

- “We are afraid to meet the LG representatives.”

The majority (85%) of the surveyed members of religious communities avail themselves of health care services. Only Jehovah’s Witnesses make use of medical services with certain reservations as they refuse to receive a blood transfusion.

All religious communities, with the exception of Jehovah’s Witnesses, do not refuse to go into an obligatory military service. Nevertheless, the following opinions were expressed:

- I think the alternative [military] service is more appropriate.

- I do not accept an obligatory military service.

- I do not have a problem with military service, with the exception of the issue of Saturday since because of it the military servicemen from our religious community are subjected to tortures.

Conclusions The monitoring of religious tolerance and discrimination in Syunik region of the Republic of Armenia has revealed that:

2

Saturday for the 7th-Day Adventists is a mandatory day off; this requirement goes back to the Bible.

13

- The Armenian legislation has not been fully brought in line with the international legal instruments endorsed by the country. Therefore, Armenia does not fully discharge its obligations.

The Armenian legislation grants freedom of operation to religious organization. At the same time, it assigns a privileged role to the Armenian Apostolic Church, thus giving rise to discrimination against other religious communities, thereby bringing forth the possibility of limitations on their operation.

- The obligations assumed by Armenia to create equal conditions for all religious communities and to secure freedom of conscience and religion are not fulfilled in the communities studied during the monitoring. Instances of intolerance to and discrimination against religious communities exist in the country’s communities and those find their manifestations both among general public and in the Armenian Apostolic Church. Hostile acts are committed in public places, institutions of higher learning and secondary schools against religious communities. Members of religious communities are stigmatized. In secondary schools and institutions of higher learning, they are sometimes subjected to insults and beating and dismissed from their jobs. Some LGs restrict opportunities for religious communities to preach.

Taking advantage of its monopolistic status granted by the State, the Armenian Apostolic Church interferes with and obstructs the dissemination of ideas and information by religious communities.

- One of the underlying causes of manifestations of intolerant and discriminatory attitudes to religious communities on the part of the society at large is the absence of impartial information about them. All religious communities are seen as identical by general public. For example, it is ascribed to all religious communities that they refuse to serve in the armed forces.

However, it is only Jehovah’s Witnesses who refuse to do so. Members from some religious communities are forced into military service since the institution of an alternative serviced is virtually non-existent. “Tolerance,” which is rarely displayed by various social groups, does not go beyond wishes to “reeducate them” and “to get them on the true way” and does not translate into respect for their choice of religion and beliefs. Clergymen from the Armenian Apostolic Church, too, see members of religious communities as “lost sheep” that need to be brought back to the Church.

Recommendations

In order to eliminate religious intolerance and discrimination in Syunik region it is recommended: 14

1. to organize a dialogue between a) religious communities and the Armenian Apostolic Church b) religious communities and general public c) religious communities and mass media; 2. to hold seminars for representatives of local governments, mass media and NGOs to raise their awareness of the religious communities-related obligations to the international organizations assumed by the Republic of Armenia;

3. to propose an amendment to the RoA Law on obligatory military service that would introduce certain reservations concerning beliefs; the existing law on alternative service for religious communities is virtually nonfunctional;

4. to propose an amendment to the Armenian legislation that would secure real equality for all religious communities, including the Armenian Apostolic Church.

15

Annex 1

Results of the questionnaire-based population surveys conducted in Syunik region of the Republic of Armenia

Question

Goris & Shinuhayr (25) Neutral/ Yes/ No/ Don't Other pos. neg. know

ave members of religious ties in your neighborhood?

11

14

l your behavior be like, if you find our closest neighbor has religious

5

9

5

, what is your attitude towards communities?

6

14

5

re been occasions, when religious ties tried to convince you to join

13

12

3

19

10

12

be a problem for you, if your ve spouse were a member of a community? u take up a job, if there were of religious communities in the e?

Survey results Sissian & Akhlatian (25) Kapan (25) Neutral/ Neutral/ Yes/ No/ Yes/ No/ Don't Don't Other pos. neg. pos. neg. know know 15

12

12

10

Yes/ pos.

13

12

1

6

13

15

3

12

10

16

9

1

24

30

3

4

21

0

25

7

3

13

10

10

14

6

10

Other

1

2

34 5

18 19

1

33

16