Paul
Goble
Staunton, August 27 – Russia’s law
on countering “religious extremism,” because it does not define that term with
precision, has become the basis for increasing repression against a wide range
of activities, many of which have nothing to do with religion at all, according
to SOVA Center head Aleksandr Verkhovsky.
In a 6500-word article in “State,
Religion and the Center in Russia and Abroad,” the Moscow expert says this law
has “formed an amorphous legal field in which no one can be sure what is legal
and what is not” and that both groups in society and the state itself have
exploited that indefiniteness for their own ends (sova-center.ru/misuse/publications/2013/08/d27775/).
Leaders of one or another religious
or social organization routinely use the law against their opponents, but the
more serious “misuse” of such legislation is by Russian law enforcement bodies
which can use it in conjunction with “their conspiracy theories” to justify
attacks on a wide range of civil liberties.
In the 1990s, Verkhovsky points out,
Russian laws frequently lacked clear definitions of the terms they employed,
but it is striking that discussions about extremism rarely linked religion to
that. For example, the first war in
Chechnya was rarely viewed by anyone as a religious war, but the second when
Vladimir Putin came to power was defined increasingly in that way.
As a result, extremism which had
generally been treated in Russian law as being about politics as extend to
include a religious dimension as well, even though earlier people had talked
about “totalitarian sects” among what Russian researchers have come to call “new
religious movements.”
Russian legislation in the early 2000s and
subsequently has tended to define religious extremism not conceptually but by a
list of various actions rnaging “from attempts at revolution to the drawing of
swastikas.” These lists not only are not
comprehensive but they have been changed regularly, introducing confusion about
what is extremist and what is not.
These Russian lists which serve as
the basis for legal action in this area, Verkhovsky says, are “unique within
the Council of Europe” and have “not so many analogues elsewhere.” It isn’t that other democracies do not ban
books. Rather it is that such lists “cannot be used in countries in which the
legal system is taken seriously.”
The very extent of such lists “inevitably
provokes decision which to put it mildly are not well thought out.” Some
analysts say the problem lies with the experts Russian courts invariably use,
but they ignore the fact that law is not supposed to be created by experts but
by elected officials and court decisions
But there are other problems in this
sector as well, Verkhovsky continues. On
the one hand, Russia’s anti-extremism law is about more than religion and
consequently there often is a bleeding together of politics and religion in its
application. And on the other, routine
calls by the country’s leaders for intensifying the struggle with extremism
allow various groups to invoke the law in ways it was never intended.
Members of secular groups upset by
the rise of religiosity around them and members of religious groups upset by
the actions of others routinely talk about violations of the anti-extremism
legislation. And the police are only to
happy to improve their statistics by bringing charges of extremism in the most
problematic of areas.
The case of “political Islam” is the
most obvious, the SOVA expert continues.
There really are Islamist extremist groups, but there are many others
routinely characterized as such that a close examination demonstrates are
not And the radicalization of Islam in
Russia was promoted from abroad, but no one has figured out how to stop such “’religious
imports.’”
In the name of national security,
Verkhovsky concludes, many in the Russian government and Russian society are “prepared
for any manipulation” of the country’s religious space, an approach that means
many engaged in genuinely extremist actions are ignored and many who are not
extremist in any real sense are charged with doing so.
No comments:
Post a Comment