freedom of conscience

Adfi Nord’s President, Charline Delporte, continues her crusade against new religious movements. Indeed, on 18 March, in an article in La Voix du Nord, she denounces a lecture that was to be held by the Graam movement, in a venue in Boulogne sur Mer.

In this article, Adfi Nord’s President says: « we are facing a movement categorized sectarian  in 1995 and decried times and again in several reports of the Miviludes. »

Once again the « 1995 black list » is the origin of discrimination of a movement and of lobby  « anti-sects », which uses this list in order to get a mayor to forbid the association activity such as the Graal movement (1).

Moreover, Ms. Delporte states that the Graal movement would be disparaged by the book of Mr. Guélaud : « the book is crystal clear. It shows what is the Graal movement in France. »

Adfi Nord’s President voluntarily omits to say that this book is only fiction not based upon reality. Actually the case she brings up has been tried by the Appeal Court of Douai, on 17 February, and, despite the complete juridical discharge of Dr. Guéniot, Adfi Nord keeps its defamation campaign going against it.

While since this « black list » has been published, many authorities have stated the list has no legal value :

1) Excerpt of the letter of Mr. Chevènement : « the list has no legal value. »

Letter of the Ministry of the Interior (Jean-Pierre Chevènement at the time) dated 10 March 1998 : « The parliamentary report of Mr. Alain Gest and Guyard has no juridical effect upon the State’s administrative action concerning what common language calls « sects »; these being, like all other religions, merely subjected to common law. » And this circular letter specifies : « No group has therefore ever been classified as « sect » by the Republic. »

2) Circular letter Raffarin

On 27 May 2005, Mr. Raffarin, then Prime Minister, published a circular letter « regarding the struggle against sectarian drifts. »

In this circular letter, Mr. Raffarin called into question the relevance of the list of the parliamentary report of 1995 and requested that the use of lists of groups be avoided so as to utilize instead bodies of criteria and that the references to organisms such as the Sects Observatory and the Inter-ministry Mission of Struggle against Sects (Mils) shall be replaced with references to the decree instituting the Miviludes.

3) Legal decision : the list has no legal value

The 1995 « black list » has been subjected to legal decision and, such as the one of the administrative court of Caen who ruled, on 18 September 2007, in a case regarding the complaint of M. François D. and the local association for the cult of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

The facts are, in March 2005, the Director of the Hospital X denied any visit to Jehovah’s Witnesses to Mr. Michel, due to their religious beliefs. The Director had justified his decision with the classification of Jehovah’s Witnesses by a parliamentary commission on movements with sectarian character. ******In its ruling, the administrative court of Caen reminds: « that in this regard, the director of the hospital cannot, in any case, take advantage of a report of the inquiry commission of the National Assembly listing Jehovah’s Witnesses among « sects », such a report having no legal  value ».*****4) Officials statements on the 1995 list.

In July 2006, during the third parliamentary commission, M. Leschi stated in particular that this kind of parliamentary commissions jeopardizes entire categories of citizens, and that the trouble to law and order stems from the side of associations and « anti-sects » members of parliament. Using precise investigations on national territory, and using instances of Jehovah’s Witnesses and Hasidic Lubavitch Jews, Mr. Leschi stated several times that the so-called problems presented by anti-sects activists could not been actually seen on the ground.

Mr. Leschi statements parallel the report of the Special Rapporteur of Human Rights of the UN, Mrs. Asma Jahangir, who stated in her report of March 2006, following an inspection of the French scene : « A number of improvements nevertheless remain to be carried out in order to ensure that the right to freedom of religion or belief of all individuals is guaranteed, and to avoid the stigmatization of members of certain religious groups or communities of belief, including those whose members have never committed any criminal offence under French law » and that the « future actions of Miviludes will be in line with the right to freedom of religion or belief and avoid past mistakes ». To end off, Mrs. Asma Jahangir writes that « she will continue to closely monitor the various efforts that are carried out by Miviludes. »

It is true that between the statements of Mr. Leschi, during this hearing, who stated: « new religiosities, at least in our country, and unconventional social practices appear, confronted with such a diversified spiritual and philosophical landscape, it is essential for us to not mix « unconventionality » and « jeopardy », and therefore distinguish original social practices from dangerous practices. » and the definition of « sectarian drifts » as Mr. Fenech wrote it in his report, Justice faces with Sectarian Drifts: « any « sectarian drift » is a deviance from classic recognized beliefs including a mental destabilization and requires a standardization through legal repression and psychologic care for the rehabilitation of adepts. »

Note that Mr. Fenech, with this statement, puts himself on a dangerous spot regarding his role as State representative because the State is supposed not to recognize any belief (classic or not) according to the law of 1905.

6) Use by the Adfi and Unadfi of the 1995 list and parliamentary reports

Adfi kept capitalizing on this list to denounce movements herein mentioned.

- August 2008, the Association of defense of families and the individual (Adfi) says it intends to bring to court the case of two children from the city of Lille attending school in India in a school managed by a movement considered as sectarian by the parliamentary report of 1995.

- February 2009, Adfi Nord was civil party in the case of Dr. Guéniot. The Dr. was prosecuted by Adfi because he would have been a member of the Graal movement (1995 list). The Appeal Court of Douai discharged Dr. Guéniot from all charges and nonsuited Adfi Nord of its constitution of civil party.

- November 2009, Adfi Nord’s President, Charline Delporte, attempted to forbid a meeting of the Rose Cross. In an article published in La Voix du Nord, Adfi’s Presisent states: « ma criterium, it is the parliamentary report of 1999 ».******- November 2009, Info Sects of the Aquitaine region gives a warning. Info Sects denounces a march for peace because one of the organisers is the Humanist Party, classified as « sect » in one of the parliamentary reports.

To conclude, Adfi Nord, financed by tax payers, does not heed laws of the Republic and continues campaigning against new spiritual movements.

(1) The Graal movement is present in 15 countries including some, like Canada or Germany, have recognized this movement as having a public utility. While the Graal movement is recognized by many countries, in France and in China it is discriminated, such as when it was denied access to a venue in Boulogne sur Mer.

The originator of the Message of the Graal was born on 18 April 1875 in Bischofswerda, near Dresde. He was named Oskar Ernst Bernhardt. At the beginning of the 20th century, as a writer, he got some success for his plays and travel accounts. He published his Message of the Graal under the name of Abd-ru-shin.

*It is worth mentioning that Abd-ru-shin was, like many researchers, philosophers and spiritual minorities of the early 20th century, arrested by national-socialist party authorities.

Abd-ru-shin was put under house arrest in Kipsdorf (Erzgebirge), where he remained under permanent Gestapo control. He died on 6 December 1941 in consequence of these measures.